From comparing Capitol Hill janitors to Stasi troops to defending a white nationalist, Steve King’s wild day at CPAC didn’t leave anything for Iowa to be proud of. If his outrageous comments weren’t enough on their own, he made them while the rest of Iowa’s Congressional delegation met with the Air Force, attempting to save 500 Iowa jobs at the 132^nd Fighter Wing.

Not a fan of CFLs, efficient showerheads, or healthy kids

King’s day started off with a bang when he chose to use his time in front of CPAC to rail against the menace of efficient, compact fluorescent lighting. His main example of “leftists that are deconstructing America on a daily basis.”

The congressman went as far as comparing Capitol Hill janitors to “Stasi troops” sent by Nancy Pelosi to install the new lights and told the story of interns breaking down in tears when they failed to locate a traditional Edison bulb in the Capitol. The problem is so bad, that King now brings his own “black market” bulbs that he stores in a reusable tote bag in his office.

If CFLs weren’t bad enough, King went on to site water-saving showerheads and restrictions on marketing junk food to children as examples of an America headed in the wrong direction. In usual Steve King fashion, he failed to mention any plans for creating jobs, growing Iowa communities, or supporting education.

Apparently proud of this display, King’s office has posted the entire speech on his YouTube channel:

• Des Moines Register: Steve King bashed lightbulb-policing “Stasi troops’ in speech rallying conservatives
• Huffington Post: Rep. says Democrat ‘Stasi troops’ want to end freedom with lightbulb regulations
• The Hill: Rep. King: Pelosi’s “Stasi troops’ force use of efficient lightbulbs
• TPM: Rep. Steve King goes for the easy San Fran laughs at CPAC

King follows up outrageous speech by defending a white nationalist

Immediately following his speech, King participated in a panel titled “The Failure of Multiculturalism.” King defended co-panelist and white nationalist Peter Brimelow from criticism, even telling Brimelow that, “I’ve read all your books.” Those books advance his thesis that “Race is destiny in American politics,” and Brimelow is the president of the VDARE Foundation, a nonprofit that warns against the polluting of America by non-whites, Catholics, and Spanish-speaking immigrants.

King defended Brimelow from the label of “white nationalist” by the Southern Poverty Law Center, saying “I wouldn’t take them seriously,” he said. “No, not at all.” King went on to defend him, saying “I’ve taken so much criticism on my life that has just been completely unjustified, you know, a fabrication of the hardcore left, I’d want to see whatever evidence that is before I comment on it.”

Read more:

•  BuzzFeed: Rep. King Defends White Nationalist on Conservative Panel

Meanwhile, the rest of Iowa’s members of Congress were trying to save Iowa jobs

While King was busy at CPAC, the remaining Congressmen and Senators from Iowa were meeting with the Air Force in an effort to save 500 Iowa jobs. Congressmen Bruce Braley, Dave Loebsack, Leonard Boswell, and Tom Latham joined Iowa Senators Tom Harkin and Chuck Grassley for today’s meeting, where they urged the Air Force not to cut jobs here in Iowa.

King had other priorities in mind.

Read more about the meeting that King decided to skip:

• Des Moines Register: Iowa lawmakers grill Air Force leaders about plan to cut 500 D.M. jobs
• AP: Iowa lawmakers grill Air Force leaders over proposals for Air Guard

Once again showing his level of commitment to good government and a focus on the issues that matter to Iowans, Congressman Steve King has hired a Heritage Foundation Lobbyist to direct his legislative agenda in Washington.

Legistorm.com reports:

Maggie Lyons has made a second trip through the revolving door, this time back to Capitol Hill to become legislative director for Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa).

The former aide to Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.) has spent the last year-and-a-half at the Heritage Foundation’s sister organization, Heritage Action for America.

Once again Congressman King is standing by an extreme agenda that doesn’t benefit Iowans. Unfortunately, he’s still not willing to get to work.

Here’s the transcript of Steve King’s appearance on Face the Nation yesterday. You’ll notice something missing: Iowa.

In full-pundit mode, Congressman King only has one fleeting mention of the state. He doesn’t discuss what his constituents are looking for in a presidential candidate, he doesn’t discuss the work he’s doing to help families in the 4th Congressional District, and he fails to mention the work he’s doing in Washington on their behalf.

Face the Nation, 12/11/11

SCHIEFFER: You know you may think you’ve been seeing a lot of Republican candidates but not as many as the Iowa Republican congressman Steve King. He has been campaigning with about all of them as they seek his support in next month’s caucus. Congressman King is also joining us this morning from Des Moines.

Well, congressman you were there last night. Who do you think won that debate?

KING: I could not pick a winner, Bob. I walked in there and I looked at all the candidates on the stage and I kind of checked them mentally and I decided I liked them all. When the debate was over, I liked them all more.

I did expect that it would be a political king of the hill type of a debate with Newt Gingrich on top of the hill and Romney fairly high up in the polls. And I thought the shots would come from the wings on them. Some of that happened. And we’ll see how much that resonates as this discussion goes through Iowans.

SCHIEFFER: Well, you know, you had said at kind of the beginning of all of this that you did plan to give an endorsement to someone. But this week you told The Washington Post, and I think these are your words, “no full spectrum conservative has emerged in the field.” Does that mean you may not endorse?

KING: Well, it doesn’t mean they’re not out there. It’s the emergence definition is the question. And I’ll just be, you know, straight honest with you on what’s going on inside of me. And that is I have to come to a conviction. Just like these candidates come to a conviction to run for president, I need to come to a conviction to get fully behind a single candidate.

And so that’s what’s holding me back. I hope to get there. And I will tell you that there’s another breadth of this that I think needs to be addressed. And that is the big picture of America’s economic situation. The size and the scope of our debt. What we’re going to do about that.

Can one of these candidates actually sell the tough medicine that we’re going to have to take to get this country fixed before we go off the cliff? And then will they be able to sell that to the American people so that that mandate can actually get this done? I hope that we can get to that point before this is over, Bob.

SCHIEFFER: Could you see yourself endorsing Michele Bachmann? I mean, I would guess she’s conservative enough for you.

KING: Michele and I fit right down the same issue after issue. We’ve worked together on repealing “Obama-care.” I’m one of the first to sign on her repeal Dodd-Frank legislation. There are many things we’ve done together. And the answer to that is, yes, yes, but I haven’t come to the conviction. And so that’s what holds me back, Bob.

SCHIEFFER: Let me ask you the question that I just asked Ms. Bachmann. And that is, why is Romney having such a hard time? He has a great resume as a businessman and all of that. He’s obviously a good, strong person of good character.

And yet there just seems to be a large segment of the Republican Party that, for want of a better phrase, just doesn’t like him. Why do you think that is?

KING: You know, that’s a hard thing to measure. I just — I’ve watched Mitt Romney in the state now for about five years. He built a good organization in this state four years ago and a good media organization. That hasn’t happened to the extent this year.

But I think Mitt Romney was unjustly marked down for his religion last time. I hope that’s not happening this time. He’s a better candidate this time than he was four years ago.

And but sometimes you can measure all the pieces, where they are on issues and how they are on debate. And the list of those things goes on. But sometimes it’s just an intangible. And I don’t know that Iowans have warmed up to him in the fashion that one would think given his positions on the issues.

SCHIEFFER: And what about the…

KING: He has a great family too, Bob.

SCHIEFFER: Yes. And, well, what about Newt Gingrich? He does carry some baggage. Even Newt Gingrich would concede that. Could it drag down the party if he got the nomination?

KING: Well, there is that risk. But Newt has shown himself to be very, very strong in these debates. And I think that’s the foundation of the strength that he has in the polls. And then you’ll see some things come out that are just unpredictable.

His statement on the Palestinian question, which I generally agree with, by the way, was a surprise. It was unpredictable and it was probably unnecessary in the scope of this campaign. Same with immigration.

So you wonder what kind of discipline he might have, and — but he has clearly hands down the one who has got the most breadth, the most depth, and the most understanding of policy, and the most solutions to put forward.

But it’s risky to go forward in the fashion that he has. And when you’re blazing a trail when you’re on top of the polls that tends to be a high liability.

SCHIEFFER: Do you think that somebody else might get into the race? And in fact, would you want anyone else to get into the race at this point.

KING: You know, if I knew who that was, I could answer that question a little better. But I just don’t know at this point. If there’s someone who emerges that could actually sweep this field and unify Republicans and is a constitutional conservative, I think that could be a good thing.

Chris Christie, for example, is one of those people. But he has made it clear he’s not running. So if there’s another name out there, I might be able to answer that question a little more, with a little better information.

SCHIEFFER: All right. Well, Congressman, thank you so much for joining us. I hope we’ll talk to you again before we get to the Iowa Caucuses. And we will be…

KING: Thank you, Bob.

SCHIEFFER: … back in one minute with a little analysis of all of this.

[Source]

Full-time Republican commentator and part-time Congressman Steve King is standing by his support of a tax increase for middle class Iowans.

Unless Republicans like Steve King join Democrats in supporting an extension of the cut, the average family will see their taxes soar by $1,000 a year. Unfortunately, King shows no signs of supporting the tax cut and continues to mislead Iowans by saying the cut will impact the solvency of Social Security.

In reality, an extension and increase of the payroll tax cut for 2012 would save a collective $1.8 billion for 1.8 million Iowans. That’s an average savings of $1,500 for a working family. And, counter to what Steve King would have Iowans believe, neither the current cut or the proposed 2012 cut would have an impact on Social Security funding.

For more information, check out the Des Moines Register’s article on the Treasury Department’s state-by-state analysis.

Unfortunately, Steve King doesn’t think Iowa families should have an extra $1,500 in their pockets. His priorities don’t match with those of families across the state who would benefit from this extension.

Proving that there is literally no issue that cannot be politicized by him, Congressman King voted to stymie disaster relief for communities in western Iowa devastated by flooding along the Missouri River.

Even as, to this day, parts of I-29 remain completely closed and both truckers and travelers are required to make a detour all the way through Des Moines, Congressman King was dead set on bogging down recovery efforts for families and businesses who have been devastated by recent natural disasters just to push an extreme, ideological agenda.

“As Iowa families struggle to overcome natural disaster, Congressman Steve King continues to play political games with federal relief efforts,” said Iowa Democratic Party Chairwoman Sue Dvorsky. “Congressman King’s repeated refusal to help Iowans recover and rebuild flies in the face of the values that make our communities strong. Iowans deserve better than Congressman King’s sweet talk in Iowa, but stonewalling efforts in Washington.”

No one else in Iowa’s Congressional delegation voted this way. Not even fellow Republicans Chuck Grassley and Tom Latham. Congressman King is dead wrong on this issue and needs to explain himself to those families and businesses in his district.