This morning, the Iowa Supreme Court unanimously struck down a state law defining marriage as solely between a man and a woman. The Court ruled that the state legislature had improperly “excluded a historically disfavored class of persons from a supremely important civil institution without a constitutionally sufficient justification,” and stated unequivocally that gay marriage bans “denies gay and lesbian people the equal protection of the law.”

Rep. Steve King (R-IA) reacted with fury to the Court’s decision, calling the ruling “unconstitutional” and denigrating the “activist judges” who decided it. He called for an constitutional amendment banning gay marriage, and pressed for immediate action to prevent Iowa from becoming a “Mecca” for gay couples:

Now it is the Iowa legislature’s responsibility to pass the Marriage Amendment to the Iowa Constitution, clarifying that marriage is between one man and one woman, to give the power that the Supreme Court has arrogated to itself back to the people of Iowa. Along with a constitutional amendment, the legislature must also enact marriage license residency requirements so that Iowa does not become the gay marriage Mecca due to the Supreme Court’s latest experiment in social engineering.

King is so upset that he’s using rhetoric that combines what may be his two worst fears: gay people and Muslims. A sample of King’s long record of bigotry:

– King compared gay people to unicorns and leprechauns. “Unicorns, leprechauns, gay marriages in Iowa — these are all things you will never find because they just don’t exist.”

– King said Abu Ghraib abuse was just “hazing.” King said in a statement, referring to the abuse, “What amounts to hazing is not even in the same ballpark as mass murder.”

– King sought to uphold anti-gay employment discrimination. “The Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) would force employers to hire homosexual employees.”

– King refused to say ‘Happy Ramadan.’ In 2007, King refused to vote for a harmless resolution recognizing the Muslim holy month of Ramadan.

– King insisted homosexuality was just a “behavior.” Declaring that “homosexual marriage is not a civil right,” King said sexual orientation “is a self-identified behavior, not an immutable characteristic.”

Despite the broad economic benefits predicted to flow to a state that allows gay marriage, it seems that the specter of gay couples immigrating to his state is too much for King to handle.

This week, the Wonk Room and ThinkProgress have noted that many congressional Republicans (at least 19) have been repeating a false claim that a cap-and-trade proposal currently before Congress is a “light switch tax” which would cost American families over $3,000 extra per year. They base their claim on a 2007 MIT study that actually says any tax burden would be about one-fortieth of what the Republicans claim. Yesterday, Republicans for Environmental Protection disparaged their colleagues, saying that “conservatives, of all people, should not ignore basic principles of economics”:

Such tactics, which are designed to score political points and gain headlines, are a disservice to American citizens, who urgently need Congress to debate the climate issue constructively. Voters are counting on their elected representatives to work together across party lines to develop balanced legislation to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, lower Americas dangerous dependence on oil, and help us move more quickly to a more diversified, robust energy economy. [...]

Few except special interests and politicians who do their bidding would argue that limiting emissions that put human health and the environment at risk puts a burdensome “tax” on American families and businesses.

Yet congressional Republicans don’t seem to care. Today, House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) issued a “Leader Alert” saying they won’t be backing down from their false claim.

Earlier this week, Rep. Joseph Cao (R-LA) suggested to The Hill that he might “buck his party” and vote in favor of President Obama’s budget. The suggestion appeared eerily similar to his earlier suggestion that he might break with his party and support Obama’s economic recovery package. But then — as now — Cao couldn’t find the political courage to follow through when it came time to vote. Last night, along with the rest of the House Republican Conference and a handful of “moderate” Democratic members, Cao voted no on Obama’s budget. When he was first elected, Cao claimed he would be an independent voice on Capitol Hill. Now we know better.

In an interview with CNN’s Don Lemon last month, RNC Chairman Michael Steele explained his embarrassing spat with Rush Limbaugh by claiming that it was a “strategic” move so that he could “see what the landscape looks like.” The Washington Times reports today that members of the Republican National Committee — Oklahoma RNC member Carolyn McLarty and Texas RNC member Cathy Adams — don’t buy Steele’s explanation:

But Mrs. McLarty said, “I don’t really buy that. I think he just said things in his gut that didn’t come out right for conservatives.”

Some RNC members say they no longer know when Mr. Steele means what he says and when his words are meant to be strategically misleading.

“So what is true? Are you really apologetic? We need to know,” Mrs. Adams said.

It shouldn’t be surprising for Steele to hear that people are questioning the veracity of what he says. In February, he told Glenn Beck that he had “absolutely no reason, none, to trust our word or our actions at this point.”