by Frank James
Rep. Steve King, an Iowa Republican, has a vision of what the world will look like if Sen. Barack Obama wins the White House. There will be a lot of dancing and celebrating in the streets.
But the streets he's talking about aren't in Illinois, South Carolina or California. No, the streets he's talking about are on the other side of the globe. Check out these comments he made during an interview in at KICD radio in Spencer, Iowa as reported by the Spencer Daily Reporter.
It was during a stop at the KICD studios in north Spencer that he also talked about the presidential campaign and his decision not to run for the U.S. Senate seat held by Tom Harkin. King said he would support presumptive GOP nominee John McCain in part because of alternatives coming from the Democratic Party.
"I don't want to disparage anyone because of their race, their ethnicity, their name - whatever their religion their father might have been," he said. "I'll just say this: When you think about the option of a Barack Obama potentially getting elected President of the United States -- I mean, what does this look like to the rest of the world? What does it look like to the world of Islam?"
He continued: "I will tell you that, if he is elected president, then the radical Islamists, the al-Qaida, the radical Islamists and their supporters, will be dancing in the streets in greater numbers than they did on September 11 because they will declare victory in this War on Terror."
King thinks radical Islamists will say the United States has capitulated because the Obama administration would be pulling troops out of any conflict associated with al-Qaida.
"Additionally, his middle name (Hussein) does matter," King said. "It matters because they read a meaning into that in the rest of the world. That has a special meaning to them. They will be dancing in the streets because of his middle name. They will be dancing in the streets because of who his father was and because of his posture that says: Pull out of the Middle East and pull out of this conflict."
He continued: "There are implications that have to do with who he is and the position that he's taken. If he were strong on national defense and said 'I'm going to go over there and we're going to fight and we're going to win, we'll come home with a victory,' that's different. But that's not what he said. They will be dancing in the streets if he's elected president. That has a chilling aspect on how difficult it will be to ever win this Global War on Terror."
King made his remarks after describing how the presidential campaign played a factor in his decision to run for a fourth term in Congress instead of the U.S. Senate seat held by Harkin.
The Obama campaign, according to CNN, has denounced King's comments and demanded that Sen. John McCain, winner of the Republican presidential nomination, do likewise.
While King's comments can be considered another waystation in the discussion over what Obama's critics are trying to stir up when they use his middle name, it's actually more than that.
As much as many opponents of the Iraq War don't often discuss it, King raises the legitimate issue of what the reaction of al Qaeda and other terrorist groups, as well as U.S.'s nation-state antagonists, like the Iranian government, would be to a deliberately fast withdrawal by the U.S. from Iraq.
We know, from his own words, how Osama bin Laden interpreted the U.S.'s rapid exit from Beirut following the 1983 Marine barracks bombing and the U.S. pull out from Somalia following "Black Hawk Down."
They were read by bin Laden as signs of U.S. weakness that encouraged bin Ladin's thinking in the planning for the 9/11 attacks.
So King raises a concern that has been echoed by some national-security experts, that is, that the commencement of a significant withdrawal following the election of the next president could once again signal weakness to al Qaeda.
While some of King's comments will be viewed by many as intolerant, it remains for the Obama campaign, since its candidate has said U.S. troops in the main would be withdrawn within 16 months of his taking office, and to a lesser extent, the campaign of Sen. Hillary Clinton, to make an effective counterargument to the part of King's verbiage having to do with the message a decampment by U.S. troops from Iraq would send to the nation's sworn enemies.
If Obama and Clinton think withdrawal wouldn't send such a signal, why do they think that? And if they think it could, how would they deal with the emboldened al Qaeda that would result?
• 
• 
• 
• 
Comments
Looks like this guy REALLY wants an Obama win in November with comments like this.
Posted by: lochnessmonster | March 8, 2008 4:35 PM
Ain't that America...for you & me? The GOP playbook of selling Fear continues. Any high-school aged congressional pages to hit on? No?
Just to play the other side of this moronic argument, wouldn't they attack and be even more upset if a Woman were in charge of America and not covered in head-to-toe robes? This is classic straw-man. This man should be tossed out on the streets - Iowans should be embarrased that this man speaks for them.
Posted by: karl | March 8, 2008 4:49 PM
Obama the Messiah is connected to the Mid East through REZKO,AUCHI and Aiham Alsamarrae. All have ties to Saddam all did not want a war in IRAQ and ALL BACKED OBAMA. Don't take my word look it up yourself. He is as corrupt as they come. John McCain will connect the dots for you come October.
Posted by: Rick B | March 8, 2008 5:02 PM
Typical GOP racism and bigotry. You guys get more repulsive by the second.
Posted by: Mrs. Jesus | March 8, 2008 5:04 PM
Excuse me, but I believe, in all fairness, that Obama has answered the question, saving for himself the option, as Commander in Chief, of leaving troops and/or waging war if necessary. He has also spoken of returning troops (after a hypothetical withdrawal) should the security of the U.S. warrant it. I would suggest that he will surround himself with intelligent people, as his intelligence and judgment dictates. Hillary will surround herself with poltical campaign obligees. She's racked up quite a few debts in that regard
Posted by: lori | March 8, 2008 5:14 PM
It sounds like Rep. King is describing, dare I say it, well, "peace in our time."
So, if you want "peace in our time," go ahead. Vote for Barack Hussein Obama. But if you want to fight for another 100 years, vote for the Republican party.
Posted by: Bud McFarlin | March 8, 2008 5:18 PM
Cmon' Frank, what's with all the GOP censorship?
Remember when Republicans feared truly scary things, like death? and now they fear dancing?!?!
You could hardly understand them sometimes, through their chattering teeth and over the embarrassing odors emanating from their pants, but they used to at least insist that the specter of death be the chit they'd trade things like American ValuesTM like civil liberties for.
PERRspectives reminds us of the sad Republican history of pantsbrowning:
http://www.perrspectives.com/blog/archives/000519.htm
King really raises the wuss factor to the Nth degree here, doesn't he? Now Americans can't elect our own president, for fear someone might... dance.
To be fair, though, this would be Radical Islamo"dancism". So there's that.
That's the new test, I guess. A Republican presidency is a success if terrorists don't kill Americans on their watch. But a Democratic presidency fails if anyone dances.
Let 'em dance. Let 'em declare anything they want. I thought if you weren't actually dead, that was a victory for us.
Apparently not enough, though. Gotta have a worldwide war on jubilation before King will be ready to commit to a clean pair of Jockeys.
The kicker is, they think Americans will think this stuff makes them sound like leaders.
Posted by: John E | March 8, 2008 5:30 PM
Obama would refocus from our Iraqi detour back ONTO Al Qaeda--you know, the ones who attacked us and still plan to.
Posted by: Deborah | March 8, 2008 5:32 PM
This is the kind of IDIOT that represents Ohio? If that's the best you can do for your own state, no wonder you guys voted for Hillary...
Posted by: stz | March 8, 2008 5:56 PM
Rick B:
Like Steve King, you are an ill-informed racist.
Your comment is precisely why Obama thinks improving our educational system is so important.
Go Obama!
Posted by: Prantha | March 8, 2008 5:58 PM
Don't take my word look it up yourself. He is as corrupt as they come. John McCain will connect the dots for you come October.
Posted by: Rick B | March 8, 2008 5:02 PM
Duck and Cover, little Ricky...and don't forget to be REALLY, REALLY SCARED because the Republic Party is depending on it.
This knuckledragging Wingnuttery entertains me to no end, how the same party (Republican) who trips all over itself to disenfranchise American voters of color is always quick to speculate and demonstrate earnest concern about how al Qaeda would vote, if only we were lucky enough to count them among our native people.
These are just ignorant fools. They are the same suckers that fall for scams of all sorts. They do not know the ground. They do not think and consider rationally. They act from ignorance, fear and greed.
In this case the Republic Party reacted in exactly the way terrorists have counted on since history began. It is judo. Use the weight of a stronger opponent to throw them. In the terrorist's case it is provoke that opponent into self inflicted damage far beyond what you can hope to do directly.
Bush--and, to be fair, the nation--fell for it with results we see now. Except in pure military terms we are far weaker now than before 9/11 and even our military has been eroded terribly.
Posted by: John E | March 8, 2008 6:04 PM
I think it would have been better for Rep. King simply not to have said some of this stuff, regardless of how much he believes it. We should never even think about altering our government or political practices because of the way foreigners might read (and/or misinterpret) an outcome. If we do, they have won because they have influenced our behavior. War consists of imposing one’s will on another country by force; and a change of behavior as a result of war is symptomatic of defeat.
The same is true with civil rights. If we give up too many of our rights to accommodate the fight against terrorism, we may soon find that we live under a government that is no longer worth fighting for. Our life under the state and federal governments is good, and those governments are worthy of our support, only because they guarantee our ability to think and act as free men and women. They would not deserve our support if they became destructive of the ends of liberty. And, lest anyone think these are (pseudo-) liberal ideas, go read the Declaration of Independence (if your teacher and school officials will let you). They’re in there. The editor of the Declaration of Independence also had this to say:
“Those who would give up essential Liberty to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.”
- B. Franklin (Reply to the Governor of Pennsylvania, Tue, Nov 11, 1755.)
It’s time for Representative King to go to work to make our country freer and safer instead of worrying the emotional impact on Islamists.
Posted by: John W. | March 8, 2008 6:17 PM
* * * * *
Posted by: stz | March 8, 2008 5:56 PM
Nope, he represents the Fifth District of Iowa. Obama and Huckabee won in Iowa.
Posted by: John W. | March 8, 2008 6:37 PM
John E, Give the frightened GOP guy a break. If the preview Bush gave us was any indication, watching fanatical idiots with guns dancing in the streets several thousand miles away could be just about as scary as watching a corrupt liar dancing on the steps of our our White House.
Posted by: Tom O | March 8, 2008 6:47 PM
What about the name BARACK?
BARACK is in the TORAH. The Old Testament.
LOOK HIM UP!!! HE IS IN THERE!!!
THE BIBLE SAYS, "BARACK SAVED ISRAEL." AND BARACK WILL SAVE ISRAEL AGAIN. TODAY. IN THIS AGE. IN THIS TIME.
I'm not worried about Hussein.
I'm worried about BARACK and what he's going to do to those ARABS FOR SCREWING WITH ISRAEL.
I AM
DADDY WEST
Posted by: daddy west | March 8, 2008 6:51 PM
Wow! it is amazing how little intelligence it takes to be a US State representative or a Republican President.
I guess the terrorist were also dancing when Mohammad Ali was the greatest.
Posted by: Rick - Toronto | March 8, 2008 7:06 PM
What do you expect from intellectual light weights. The Republican party has more than their share of such people. This country has engaged in overly simplistic cowboy logic for the past 7 years, which has been bleeding this country. The right wing wants to continue this bleeding.
Posted by: GW | March 8, 2008 7:38 PM
Steve King is right. Obama supporters are so dumb. Obama is running as a politician who will overcome the divisive issues of war and peace that have plagued mankind since the begining of time. He will step into office and there will be no more war, no more democrat and republican vision, there will be a politics of hope. That is a stupid premise, it has never happened in the history of any where, it will never happen any where. We are facing ecnomic depression, war, and Democrats fall in love with a guy who has no experience. Obama supporters are the exact kind of person who sums up the stupidity of this country.
Posted by: Ben M | March 8, 2008 8:01 PM
Stz: Iowa.
Posted by: Deborah | March 8, 2008 8:05 PM
Obama has said he'd start an immediate drawdown of U.S. troops. If you don't think that would be music to the Jihadists ears then you're only kidding yourself.
Obama's plan would be nothing more than Chamberlainian "peace in our time."
Posted by: Jeff | March 8, 2008 8:46 PM
How predictable. How 'regression to mean'.
How Republican. How regrettably pointless and stupid.
Posted by: C.Morris | March 8, 2008 9:28 PM
To:
Prantha and Mrs.Jesus
So now now the debate theme is calling a poster an ill-informed racist?
Ummm..look it up..Rick B. is right!
Paulo
Posted by: Paulo | March 8, 2008 10:25 PM
The dancing has started - by the Ku Klux Klan to Rep. Steve's xenophobia.
Posted by: Blogian | March 8, 2008 10:44 PM
I thought republicans convinced us we're winning the war on terror? Are they saying there's still all these radical Islamists, the al-Qaida, the radical Islamists and their supporters, will be dancing in the streets in greater numbers than they did on September 11 because they will declare victory in this War on Terror?
You mean they won't be killed before the year's out? Their numbers are only bigger since 9/11?
Hmm... does make you wonder.
Posted by: RomanB | March 8, 2008 11:12 PM
Ahh, the ol' Muslim routine.
This seems to be the fear-monger's favorite tune to play on Obama. I guess after Hillary's "turban photo" and "not as far as I know" comments, the rest of the Slime Balls are gonna climb in bed with her. Thanks for opening the door wider, Hillary 'ol girl. If you weren't so devoted to women and children, I might actually start to believe you were a racist piece of crap like this guy.
This is what I LOVE to see in my leadership here in the good 'ol USA. Good 'ol fashioned HATE. I think it's becoming clear what kind of change Obama's been talking about.
Posted by: tastytone | March 8, 2008 11:41 PM
King should be ashamed of himself for telling the truth about Obama and how the Muslim world is rooting for him to win.
And the best evidence that King is telling the truth is that the usual suspects are doing what Liberals always do when they're losing an argument--cry "racism!"
Nice try, Lefties. But these tired old canned replies just don't cut it any more. You'll have to do better than that.
Posted by: Gene Debs | March 8, 2008 11:50 PM
'Canned replies', Gene?
PUHHHLEEEZZZE!
A vote for Obama, is like a vote for Al Queda...
A vote for Obama means we want to lose this war...
Same old crap from the Repukelicans...
Posted by: Baked | March 9, 2008 1:26 AM
I think King is right about what he has said but it not politically correct to say these things. Having been in an Arab country, I know the Muslims will be happy to see a Hussein Obama even if it's just the name. They will read more into it. I think the real issues about Obama are more daunting and horrific, like Rezko, NAFTA-gate lies, racist Pastor Wrght and the unpatriotic Michelle Obama. Obama is more a dirty Chicago style poltician than he is a Muslim.
Posted by: Will Walter | March 9, 2008 7:26 AM
Posted by: Rick B | March 8, 2008 5:02 PM
So, I guess you never saw the famous pictures of Bush I and Rumsfeld snuggling up with Sadaam.
Not to mention, the Bush family is in Bin Laden's back pocket. That's why they let his family escape the U.S. after 9-11. That's why Bin Laden is still at large.
Oil is thicker than "American" blood for the Bush family.
Posted by: syj | March 9, 2008 7:36 AM
Obama says nothing but gaseous Sesame Street platitudes and his kool-aide drinkers gulp it down undiluted.
Posted by: Pepsiholic | March 9, 2008 9:24 AM
I do not think Steve King is a racist. What do we really know about Obama.
1. Rezko
2.http://www.houstonpress.com/2008-02-28/news/barack-obama-screamed-at-me/
3.http://kennethelamb.blogspot.com/2008/02/barak-obama-questions-about-ethnic.html
4. Larry Sinclair
Posted by: Betty | March 9, 2008 9:25 AM
King nails it. Call the R's bigots all you want, however, this should give everyone pause for thought. Obama has called upon McCain to denounce King's statement. I will certainly be disappointed if he does. It is not a stretch to visualize the people dancing in the streets on 9-11. Increment by increment the savages are taking over the planet. PC is going to get us all killed.
Posted by: JT | March 9, 2008 9:48 AM
A future so bleak if that Whistler One-Note Johnny and the Monster
2-Fer demonizers. Obama won't be their 3-Fer BOY.
American's Catching on
Obama the wave of the future
Competitor McCain being endorsed by sadist chap
++++++++++++++++++
"This president had the chance to end the torture debate for good, yet he chose instead to leave the door open to use torture in the future," said Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California, a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee.
She said Bush ignored the advice of 43 retired generals and admirals and 18 national security experts, including former secretaries of state and national security advisers, who supported the bill.
------------------------------ -
That PA political mouther King got things twisted ( racist rant will
benefit President Obama) such a lack of understanding of cause and effect
as to the joy that will be triggered by the landslide vote of our next President,
Barak Obama. Anti-Bush (most unloved prez) haters will equally be jumping with joy when Bush3 (McCain) gets dumped Big Time.
An enemy whose hated of America was enhanced by the stutterer Bush (and his Repug ilk/go along fellows) will be rendered impotent with a passion
so profound. We'll be seeing a world calmed after a "Common Sense" leader like Mr. Obama is positioned " the leader of a free rational world."
Bring it on Hillary/Repugs. Barak being the diplomat would not
subscribe to my remarks I'm sure. Think on what is possible and
the logic will pop up and make one to evolve to what I've written..
Through President Obama's political reasoning
and execution on the diplomatic front we'll
be experiencing a world without fear once again.
With such a leader we won't be terrorized as we are currently
- kept in line to serve our undemocratic ME friend(s)
with terror threats fake or otherwise..
Billions will be saved and will be spent on useful projects
that are going begging - used to make the USA a Shining City On A Hill.
Go Obama - Our prayers are with you. Imagine the Billary-2Fer team
- the same old politics of demonizing others. What a Uniter Couple
Zeros as like Bush2/Bush3 McCain.
Posted by: Aware Ness | March 9, 2008 11:00 AM
King nails it. Call the R's bigots all you want, however, this should give everyone pause for thought.
Posted by: JT | March 9, 2008 9:48 AM
Yes it will, everyone who can't think for themselves. What a bag of horse manure these people are.
Posted by: bill "Hussein" r. | March 9, 2008 11:02 AM
Who exactly is the racist again?
Obama campaigned for Presidential candidate Raila Odinga in 2006 in Kenya. Odinga is responsible for the recent killings and ethnic cleansings in the formerly peaceful and democratic Kenya that claimed thousands of lives.
One incident where his Radical Islamic henchmen surrounded and burned to the ground a Christian church with 60 people still inside. Reports are that those who tried to flee were gunned down in a barrage of machine gun fire.
And this is the man that Barack Hussein Obama passionately campaigned for in 2006.
And he's no "racist." Nah. Just a pleasant guy with a great smile who gives a great speech.
Posted by: Eric Dondero | March 9, 2008 11:40 AM
After reading these posts from the right defending Kings statement, it would seem we must have elected someone named Rectum and were invaded by.........
Posted by: bill "Hussein" r. | March 9, 2008 11:58 AM
What a fool Steve King is.
Posted by: mike | March 9, 2008 12:19 PM
If King nails it, and we're calling it the way we see it....then there should be no women in the GOP, and lots of little boys prancing around to prey upon. mmmmmm delicious! No stalls in the bathrooms either- they just get in the way! Ohhh..Sinner
Posted by: karl | March 9, 2008 12:47 PM
Both partys are made-up of mental midgets in equal proportions.But all this talk of republican cowardice just doesn't jibe with my real world experience. Here in Florida we got to see the warriors of both sides during the 2000 election fiasco, and it wasn't pretty. My wife and I were Christmas shopping at a mall on Faulkenberg Rd in Tampa on Nov 17th 2000. When we parked two groups of demonstrators were squaring off in front of the mall. On one side there were about 1,000 people carrying signs that said, Gore Won, Get Over It. The other side , about 600 strong, also carried signs, but the message was Bush/Cheney 2000. Facinated by the battle I talked my wife into lunch at a Chili's that gave us a great view of the action. We didn't have long to wait, 5 minutes after we were seated a melee broke out between the two sides. I didn't get to see how it started, but the rightwing guys were winning hands down. They seemed to hold the advantage in very large and aggressive rednecks.The Chili's began to fill up with Gore supporters seeking refuge from the battle. About five minutes later police showed up and dispersed the crowd. I remarked to my wife that the republicans were going to take Florida one way or another, and I was right.
Posted by: Mike | March 9, 2008 1:27 PM
Why doesn't Iowa recall this nut?
Posted by: jvii | March 9, 2008 2:11 PM
Congressman King is right Obama's positon on the Irag War saying we have no business invading a Muslim nation is what the AlQuaeda Islamic Jihadists wanted to hear.
Whenever an AlQuaeda spokesman gives a TV message it sounds as though it came out of the DNC playbook. The current Democrat Party hates America and they have since the 60's. Even Michelle is coming around because she thinks all the people are for change and that makes her happy. She and Barack have lived a privileged life at Ivy League schools and universities and yet she was not proud of America.
If Obama is elected the Jihadist terrorists will dance with joy realizing America's defeat. What is surprising about this it is all debating the issues and listening to what Obama preaches night and day. Of course it would bring joy to the terrorists.Jerry White, Springfield, IL
Posted by: Jerry White | March 9, 2008 3:49 PM
I am surprised at all the kool aid drinkers responding to this article. King is correct.
Posted by: sam | March 9, 2008 4:00 PM
Why doesn't Iowa recall this nut?
Posted by: jvii | March 9, 2008 2:11 PM
Good question. There are three answers.
First, there is no constitutional basis to recall a member of the House of Representatives. The Constitution says Representatives serve for two years, and only requires that he or she be 25 years old, a citizen for 7 years, and a resident of the State in which he/she is chosen. (U.S. Const., Art. I., Sec. 2.) The House of Representatives is also designated to be the judge for elections, returns and qualifications for its members; as well as the body designated to determine whether punishment or expulsion of a Representative is warranted. (Id., Sec. 5.) The fact the Constitution gives the power to remove a member to the House of Representatives means that States do not have that power. This is because a Representative is a federal officer notwithstanding the fact that a State elected him or her to office. The same reasoning led the U.S. Supreme Court to determine that members of Congress are not subject to State imposed term limits.
Second, even if there was some means to recall him, a Representative’s term of office is only for two years. His term would probably run out before anything could be done to recall him – assuming they would want to.
Third, they (probably) don’t want to. They like him. The Fifth District of Iowa (which is the western edge of the State bordering on Nebraska), has the greatest concentration of Republicans in the State of Iowa. Even if they thought his remarks were a little off-color, they would forgive him.
Posted by: John W. | March 9, 2008 4:27 PM
Kool Aid drinker - Sam?
Who's constantly peddling 'the next great fear'? Have we been attacked since 9/11? No. Not could we have been? or Were efforts thwarted?, Have we been attacked?
The answer is no, so why does the GOP constantly go to the little-boy-crying wolf game when it comes to jihadi cells? B/C it works for them, and cletus christian buys it hook/line/sinker. He don't care that his job is being shipped overseas, and his healthcare don't cover nuttin, but the Repubs will put a Supreme Court justis in that will make abortion stay illegal cause God says that's how it shud be. Gotta love it!!! 1/2 of the moronic 'kool-aid' followers of this nonsense can't find Iraq or Afghanistan on a map.
Posted by: karl | March 9, 2008 4:33 PM
Mike...welcome to the mental midget club.
Posted by: bill "hussein" r. | March 9, 2008 5:09 PM
Geo Bush has been Al Qaida's wetdream. What a recruiting booster for them . And so will be Bush-lite McClain.
Posted by: chimpy"hussein"mcflightsuit'snavigator | March 9, 2008 9:03 PM