GOP failing to learn race lessons

[AUUSN 823]

"If our party is not welcoming and inclusive, young people and increasingly other voters will continue to tune us out."

That was the Republican Party's own take on the 2012 election as it acknowledged in an autopsy report (otherwise known as the Growth & Opportunity Project) that it was failing to appeal to minority voters.

Unfortunately, too many Republicans have already forgotten this lesson, a reality made all the clearer by the response to recent revelations that House Majority Whip Steve Scalise spoke to a white supremacist group 12 years ago.

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich was just one of those who seemed more interested in making excuses than holding Republicans to the standard they had supposedly set for themselves.

Appearing on CBS' "Face the Nation," Gingrich brushed off the accusations, suggesting it was a "stupidly" scheduled meeting, while noting that President Barack Obama attended the church of the racially divisive Rev. Jeremiah Wright for 20 years. Gingrich also attempted to pivot to the media's treatment of Democrats with racist records.

"You have (Sen. Robert) Byrd who was the majority leader and a Klan leader. You have Hugo Black, who was a justice, who was a Klan leader. But they were Democrats and being in the Klan was OK," Gingrich lectured.

Actually, none of that was OK. But this isn't about Democrats -- it's about the racist undercurrent that has been corrupting the GOP for decades, and the fact that the party's establishment has too often looked the other way. Unfortunately, it feels like every time a Republican is caught behaving like a racist in the 21st century, prominent members of the GOP try to change the subject to Democrats behaving badly instead of denouncing what is going on.

What exactly did Scalise do to deserve the opprobrium that critics have justifiably heaped on him? Well, in 2002, as a Louisiana state representative, Scalise spoke to the European-American Unity and Rights Organization, founded by former Ku Klux Klan grand wizard David Duke.

Scalise alleges a staffer scheduled the appearance and that he wasn't aware of the group's, uh, "divisive racial and religious views," as he wrote in a statement. Yet Scalise's claims of plausible deniability just don't add up.

For a start, The Washington Post reported that Kenny Knight, his neighbor at the time and a longtime Duke adviser, requested Scalise speak to the group and said Scalise "knew who I was, but I don't think he held it against me."

But we don't even need to look to someone else's take to get a feel for Scalise's past. In 1999, Scalise reportedly told Roll Call he shared Duke's "conservative" views but said that "the novelty of David Duke has worn off."

More recently, in 2004, Scalise voted against declaring a state holiday honoring civil rights leader the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.

Collectively, these actions don't look like those of an elected official who rejects "that kind of hateful bigotry," as Scalise noted in his statement, but instead suggest a man trying to play politics in a state where only 13% of his congressional district's residents are black.

Gingrich also told "Face the Nation" host Bob Schieffer that Mia B. Love, the first black Republican woman elected to Congress, had said Scalise has been "helpful" to her, as if this somehow negates what Scalise has done. But isn't helping out a fellow member of the GOP a pretty basic requirement of the job for someone in a leadership position?

I admire Love, but the truth is that as a black woman myself, I have no idea how she could say on ABC's "This Week" that she believes Scalise "should remain in leadership," particularly since Love doesn't appear to have had experience working directly with him. Perhaps Love was trying to show the GOP she's a team player, but she didn't do herself or the party any favors by standing by a colleague who spoke to a group whose membership would no doubt be happy if segregation had never ended.

House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy said Scalise made a "mistake." Speaker John Boehner, for his part, called it an "error of judgment" and added that Scalise has his "full confidence."

Nonsense.

As a black Republican, I'm tired of my party continuing to provide safe harbor to people like Scalise. Gingrich complained the media's coverage of Scalise's speech was "a one-sided view of reality." Actually, that sounds more like a description of the GOP today.

The face of the party looks as intolerant as ever as 2015 begins. Unless it starts showing "representatives" like Scalise the door, it will find itself writing another autopsy report in 2016. http://www.cnn.com/2015/01/08/opinion/wright-racism-gop/index.html

[autigeremt 6,569]

Well....having Robert Byrd around for all those years shouldn't give Democrats a pass. This isn't a single party issue...as much as some would love it to be.

The GOP is as diverse as it has ever been. I'm not defending them....just looking at the facts.

http://www.nbra.info/

[AUUSN 823]

That's not the point of her article. He should have been immediately removed from his leadership position; rather we have GOP congressional leadership covering for this guy at the expense of their now void statements from 2012.

[autigeremt 6,569]

That's not the point of her article. He should have been immediately removed from his leadership position; rather we have GOP congressional leadership covering for this guy at the expense of their now void statements from 2012.

I'd like to see more evidence than some conference before I condemn the man for racism or white power beliefs. We have a Commander in Chief who spent years with some very questionable people and yet we are to just slide that on by to the wayside? Get real.

[AUUSN 823]

That's not the point of her article. He should have been immediately removed from his leadership position; rather we have GOP congressional leadership covering for this guy at the expense of their now void statements from 2012.

I'd like to see more evidence than some conference before I condemn the man for racism or white power beliefs. We have a Commander in Chief who spent years with some very questionable people and yet we are to just slide that on by to the wayside? Get real.

What more do you need? Based on the actions listed in the above article is enough to remove him from his leadership position and save the face of the GOP going forward. Isn't politics all about the 'optics?'

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

Isn't the POTUS a bigger leadership position than a Congressman? Shouldn't the same logic apply as autigeremt says?

[AUUSN 823]

Isn't the POTUS a bigger leadership position than a Congressman? Shouldn't the same logic apply as autigeremt says?

Hey, news flash! The President is a Democrat. I'm for saving the face of the Republican party.

[homersapien 11,352]

......More recently, in 2004, Scalise voted against declaring a state holiday honoring civil rights leader the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.

Collectively, these actions don't look like those of an elected official who rejects "that kind of hateful bigotry," as Scalise noted in his statement, but instead suggest a man trying to play politics in a state where only 13% of his congressional district's residents are black.

I think I see the problem here.

Gerrymandering is one of the systemic things harming our country.

[autigeremt 6,569]

......More recently, in 2004, Scalise voted against declaring a state holiday honoring civil rights leader the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.

Collectively, these actions don't look like those of an elected official who rejects "that kind of hateful bigotry," as Scalise noted in his statement, but instead suggest a man trying to play politics in a state where only 13% of his congressional district's residents are black.

I think I see the problem here.

Gerrymandering is one of the systemic things harming our country.

I agree with the gerrymandering argument! I hate it when either party uses it. It should be against the law.

[autigeremt 6,569]

That's not the point of her article. He should have been immediately removed from his leadership position; rather we have GOP congressional leadership covering for this guy at the expense of their now void statements from 2012.

I'd like to see more evidence than some conference before I condemn the man for racism or white power beliefs. We have a Commander in Chief who spent years with some very questionable people and yet we are to just slide that on by to the wayside? Get real.

What more do you need? Based on the actions listed in the above article is enough to remove him from his leadership position and save the face of the GOP going forward. Isn't politics all about the 'optics?'

If the GOP decided to keep him in his post that's on them. Once again...association doesn't always mean assimilation. Many times it means posturing and trying to manipulate your way into political power. It happens on both sides way too often, but it does and one person shouldn't be "assumed" anything unless you have the "goods" to show that their actions mirror their associations.

I wish it weren't the case....but it is.

[AUUSN 823]

That's not the point of her article. He should have been immediately removed from his leadership position; rather we have GOP congressional leadership covering for this guy at the expense of their now void statements from 2012.

I'd like to see more evidence than some conference before I condemn the man for racism or white power beliefs. We have a Commander in Chief who spent years with some very questionable people and yet we are to just slide that on by to the wayside? Get real.

What more do you need? Based on the actions listed in the above article is enough to remove him from his leadership position and save the face of the GOP going forward. Isn't politics all about the 'optics?'

If the GOP decided to keep him in his post that's on them. Once again...association doesn't always mean assimilation. Many times it means posturing and trying to manipulate your way into political power. It happens on both sides way too often, but it does and one person shouldn't be "assumed" anything unless you have the "goods" to show that their actions mirror their associations.

I wish it weren't the case....but it is.

Then if they do, as a Republican, I have a problem with it. So does the author of this article, Mark Levin and Sarah Palin. So I'm not some cook out on a limb, I care that when the GOP makes a statement in 2012, they live up to it in 2015. Now that seemed to be straight lip service. The party of the old white guy lives on!

[autigeremt 6,569]

That's not the point of her article. He should have been immediately removed from his leadership position; rather we have GOP congressional leadership covering for this guy at the expense of their now void statements from 2012.

I'd like to see more evidence than some conference before I condemn the man for racism or white power beliefs. We have a Commander in Chief who spent years with some very questionable people and yet we are to just slide that on by to the wayside? Get real.

What more do you need? Based on the actions listed in the above article is enough to remove him from his leadership position and save the face of the GOP going forward. Isn't politics all about the 'optics?'

If the GOP decided to keep him in his post that's on them. Once again...association doesn't always mean assimilation. Many times it means posturing and trying to manipulate your way into political power. It happens on both sides way too often, but it does and one person shouldn't be "assumed" anything unless you have the "goods" to show that their actions mirror their associations.

I wish it weren't the case....but it is.

Then if they do, as a Republican, I have a problem with it. So does the author of this article, Mark Levin and Sarah Palin. So I'm not some cook out on a limb, I care that when the GOP makes a statement in 2012, they live up to it in 2015. Now that seemed to be straight lip service. The party of the old white guy lives on!

It might.....I have a lot of problems with the GOP. I'm just citing the fact that the current GOP has to deal with its own fodder. One person doesn't make an entirety.....but I get your point. Personally I'd boot him but its not my cross.....

[AUFAN78 3,889]

I think we should have a Congressional Hearing led by democrats!

[DKW 86 7,410]

That's not the point of her article. He should have been immediately removed from his leadership position; rather we have GOP congressional leadership covering for this guy at the expense of their now void statements from 2012.

Did not buy for a moment that the speech in front of David Duke's group was a mistake.

OTOH, I dont buy for a minute that a hooded and robed bastard ever had any good in his heart. He may have learned to hide it better, but he was still the same old bastich the day he died that he was in real life. Leopards do not chnge their spots. Byrd condoned violence against black folks. NEVER forget that.

[DKW 86 7,410]

That's not the point of her article. He should have been immediately removed from his leadership position; rather we have GOP congressional leadership covering for this guy at the expense of their now void statements from 2012.

I'd like to see more evidence than some conference before I condemn the man for racism or white power beliefs. We have a Commander in Chief who spent years with some very questionable people and yet we are to just slide that on by to the wayside? Get real.

What more do you need? Based on the actions listed in the above article is enough to remove him from his leadership position and save the face of the GOP going forward. Isn't politics all about the 'optics?'

If the GOP decided to keep him in his post that's on them. Once again...association doesn't always mean assimilation. Many times it means posturing and trying to manipulate your way into political power. It happens on both sides way too often, but it does and one person shouldn't be "assumed" anything unless you have the "goods" to show that their actions mirror their associations.

I wish it weren't the case....but it is.

Then if they do, as a Republican, I have a problem with it. So does the author of this article, Mark Levin and Sarah Palin. So I'm not some cook out on a limb, I care that when the GOP makes a statement in 2012, they live up to it in 2015. Now that seemed to be straight lip service. The party of the old white guy lives on!

Ok, here is where we offer you a chance to spell check that statement...lol

[AUUSN 823]

That's not the point of her article. He should have been immediately removed from his leadership position; rather we have GOP congressional leadership covering for this guy at the expense of their now void statements from 2012.

I'd like to see more evidence than some conference before I condemn the man for racism or white power beliefs. We have a Commander in Chief who spent years with some very questionable people and yet we are to just slide that on by to the wayside? Get real.

What more do you need? Based on the actions listed in the above article is enough to remove him from his leadership position and save the face of the GOP going forward. Isn't politics all about the 'optics?'

If the GOP decided to keep him in his post that's on them. Once again...association doesn't always mean assimilation. Many times it means posturing and trying to manipulate your way into political power. It happens on both sides way too often, but it does and one person shouldn't be "assumed" anything unless you have the "goods" to show that their actions mirror their associations.

I wish it weren't the case....but it is.

Then if they do, as a Republican, I have a problem with it. So does the author of this article, Mark Levin and Sarah Palin. So I'm not some cook out on a limb, I care that when the GOP makes a statement in 2012, they live up to it in 2015. Now that seemed to be straight lip service. The party of the old white guy lives on!

Ok, here is where we offer you a chance to spell check that statement...lol

Ha! Kook

[WarTim 3,456]

No lessons to be learned. Racism is in the heart not the head.

[AURaptor 1,121]

The Scalise issue has more to do w/ the Dems just having gotten the floor wiped with them than any actual concern that the GOP aren't " reaching out " to blacks or minorities.

It really is a nothing story, trumped up by Left to pander , yet once again, to minorities and slime the GOP.

There really is no there there.

Post a picture of a politician in a white hood and robe, then you've got a case.

But a 1 time speech, while running for STATE office ? 12 years ago ?

Less than nothing.

[Mikey 16,545]

I'm not going to be concerned about this minor detail. We have, in the whitehouse, the most bigoted, racist administration we've had since before the Civil War. If I'm going to join in some action against bigots it will start at the top.

[AURaptor 1,121]

Funny, no one made a fuss over the $ which Cynthia McKinney received , most of it from outside her district, which came from Muslim groups. Not only did she GLADLY accept their money, her dad openly blamed a certain group for her loss...

His words?

" It was the Jews. J-E-W-S " - Billy McKinney

[icanthearyou 4,462]

Funny, no one made a fuss over the $ which Cynthia McKinney received , most of it from outside her district, which came from Muslim groups. Not only did she GLADLY accept their money, her dad openly blamed a certain group for her loss...

His words?

" It was the Jews. J-E-W-S " - Billy McKinney

You do realize, she was forced out (or resigned) from the Democratic Party. It's not like she was given the third most powerful position in Congress.

[AURaptor 1,121]

Funny, no one made a fuss over the $ which Cynthia McKinney received , most of it from outside her district, which came from Muslim groups. Not only did she GLADLY accept their money, her dad openly blamed a certain group for her loss...

His words?

" It was the Jews. J-E-W-S " - Billy McKinney

You do realize, she was forced out (or resigned) from the Democratic Party. It's not like she was given the third most powerful position in Congress.

She was voted out, twice, after being elected in 2x's .

So, you're main beef isn't what a US Congresswoman did or said, but what a STATE legislator in LA did, 12 years ago ?

Really?

And yes, it bears repeating that a former KKK wizard served as a Democrat for how many decades ? Damn near the whole state of WVA is named after Robert KKK Byrd, and yet it's only a 'grave concern' when a Republican makes ONE speech to a group ?

The more the Left inflates the significance of this non issue, the greater they hope to trash him and the GOP. This is 100% pure concentrated muck raking politics, and nothing else.

There is less than any substance to this, what so ever.

[homersapien 11,352]

The Scalise issue has more to do w/ the Dems just having gotten the floor wiped with them than any actual concern that the GOP aren't " reaching out " to blacks or minorities.

It really is a nothing story, trumped up by Left to pander , yet once again, to minorities and slime the GOP.

There really is no there there.

Post a picture of a politician in a white hood and robe, then you've got a case.

But a 1 time speech, while running for STATE office ? 12 years ago ?

Less than nothing.

So I take it if the organization had been associated with Issis or Al Qaeda you wouldn't have a problem with it?

[homersapien 11,352]

Funny, no one made a fuss over the $ which Cynthia McKinney received , most of it from outside her district, which came from Muslim groups. Not only did she GLADLY accept their money, her dad openly blamed a certain group for her loss...

His words?

" It was the Jews. J-E-W-S " - Billy McKinney

You do realize, she was forced out (or resigned) from the Democratic Party. It's not like she was given the third most powerful position in Congress.

She was voted out, twice, after being elected in 2x's .

So, you're main beef isn't what a US Congresswoman did or said, but what a STATE legislator in LA did, 12 years ago ?

Really?

And yes, it bears repeating that a former KKK wizard served as a Democrat for how many decades ? Damn near the whole state of WVA is named after Robert KKK Byrd, and yet it's only a 'grave concern' when a Republican makes ONE speech to a group ?

The more the Left inflates the significance of this non issue, the greater they hope to trash him and the GOP. This is 100% pure concentrated muck raking politics, and nothing else.

There is less than any substance to this, what so ever.

How long do you guys plan on throwing up a long dead Democrat to excuse the actions of current Republicans?

It's a pathetic defense.

[icanthearyou 4,462]

Funny, no one made a fuss over the $ which Cynthia McKinney received , most of it from outside her district, which came from Muslim groups. Not only did she GLADLY accept their money, her dad openly blamed a certain group for her loss...

His words?

" It was the Jews. J-E-W-S " - Billy McKinney

You do realize, she was forced out (or resigned) from the Democratic Party. It's not like she was given the third most powerful position in Congress.

She was voted out, twice, after being elected in 2x's .

So, you're main beef isn't what a US Congresswoman did or said, but what a STATE legislator in LA did, 12 years ago ?

Really?

And yes, it bears repeating that a former KKK wizard served as a Democrat for how many decades ? Damn near the whole state of WVA is named after Robert KKK Byrd, and yet it's only a 'grave concern' when a Republican makes ONE speech to a group ?

The more the Left inflates the significance of this non issue, the greater they hope to trash him and the GOP. This is 100% pure concentrated muck raking politics, and nothing else.

There is less than any substance to this, what so ever.

No "beef". Just did not know if you were, or were not, aware of her no longer being in the Democratic Party. Do you admire the Democrats for pushing someone like her, out?

Robert Byrd again? LOL. Keep beating your drum!

"There is less than any substance to this, what so ever." I am not sure what this "sentence" means. Are you suggesting it never happened?