Now this is a story that fits perfectly in our bizarre category. Rep. Steve King (R-IA) previously said that al Qaida would “be dancing in the streets” if Barack Obama were elected president “because of his middle name.” Now, he is again drawing criticism after reportedly calling it “bizarre” that Obama will use his middle name — Hussein — in his taking of the oath. He has asked whether the name has become a “double-standard” on who and when it can be used.
In an interview with Politico, King took back his prior statement about Obama and said “he was wrong about the whole terrorist street dancing routine.” However, he reportedly said that it is “bizarre” that he would use it during the inauguration.
The reason appears to be that King has been refraining from using the middle name after his controversy during the election. If he and others have refrained, he found it “bizarre” and “a double-standard” for Obama to use his own middle name: “Is that reserved just for him, not his critics?” King was presumably referring to the fact that Republicans who use the middle name have been criticized as playing to the “Obama is a Muslim” attacks and trying to paint Obama as a non-American. Speakers who have used the middle name on the campaign trial were generally highlighted in the media. This led Time Magazine to run a story entitled Why Is Obama’s Middle Name Taboo?”
It is a tradition for the full name of a president to be used in the taking of the oath.
Now before people jump on King again, he could insist that he was referring to the original meaning of bizarre, which is derived from the Spanish adjective bizarro: “the Spanish adjective bizarro comes from the Italian bizzarro (meaning singular). It’s mainly used in Spanish with the meanings of brave, chivalrous, generous, and splendid.”
There, he was calling Obama “brave, chivalrous, generous, and splendid.” What is the problem with that?
For the story, click here.Steve king