House GOP Leader Admits To Being Keynote Speaker At White Supremacist Conference
Options
MrCrookedLetter
Members Posts: 22,376 ✭✭✭✭✭
House Majority Whip Steve Scalise(R-La.) confirms he was a featured speaker at an international conference for European/White only group in 2002
According to a recent report from HuffPost, House GOP leader Steve Scalise admitted that he was not only in attendance at the European-American Unity and Rights Organization, but that he was a keynote speaker at the event.
There is no audio or video recording of Congressman Scalise addressing the organization headed by former KKK leader and former political front runner David Duke, but the Washington Post brought the issue to light just before the Republicans take over Congress in the new year.
“Rep. Steve Scalise (R-La.), the House majority whip, acknowledged Monday that he spoke at a gathering hosted by white nationalist leaders while serving as a state representative in 2002, thrusting a racial controversy into House Republican ranks days before the party assumes control of both congressional chambers.
The 48-year-old Scalise, who ascended to the House GOP’s third-ranking post earlier this year, confirmed through an adviser that he once appeared at a convention of the European-American Unity and Rights Organization.”
The Luoisiana Republican’s spokeperson offered up a statement meant to clear the air about his attendance to this obviously racist event, which has done little to help his case. Here’s a part of that statement:
“He has never been affiliated with the abhorrent group in question. The hate-fueled ignorance and intolerance that group projects is in stark contradiction to what Mr. Scalise believes and practices as a father, a husband, and a devoted Catholic.”
Ironically, Scaliser was one of only a few Louisiana legislators that voted against MLK day in his home state two years ago. One may only wonder since there isn’t any concrete evidence; was this something that was discussed at the international conference of bigotry? With this sort of leadership taking control in this country;s legislative house, 2015 is definitely going to be a year for the history books.
-Sha Be Allah(@KingPenStatus)
http://thesource.com/2015/01/01/house-gop-leader-admits-to-being-keynote-speaker-at-white-supremacist-conference/
Comments
-
Been reading about this clown for the last week or so, what can I say that hasn't been said already? I just wonder who the hell he ? off cause he's obviously not the only white supremacist in power in politics.
-
He claims he didnt know..How do you accidentally speak at a white supremacist meeting?
also the GOP in LA was claiming it was a made up story before he came out and admitted it the same day...the media should point out to the public how quick and willingly they were ready to lie to the public.
and voted against MLK day twice in his state...what more evidence is needed to call a duck a duck...the black democrat in his state is defending him though -
Yeah and he knew the aide of David Duke on a personal level there's a lot of white supremacists in powerful positions that are hiding that need to be brought out in light.
-
That Navarro chick on CNN steadfastly defended him.
I hate when people do stupid ? like that.. hes this.. shes that..I am too i will defend them no matter whats its ? stupid -
it was also said that he stayed and listened to other speeches after his and still didnt know he was at a white nationalist meeting
and the GOP house leader is defending him yet Obama and Deblasio are divisive about race -
He know he meant 2012 lol.
Punk-ass ? . -
-
playmaker88 wrote: »That Navarro chick on CNN steadfastly defended him.
I hate when people do stupid ? like that.. hes this.. shes that..I am too i will defend them no matter whats its ? stupid
Yeah that ? only makes sense to the sheep, team elephant vs team donkey ? . At the end of day they always tend to vote the same way....for a bigger government. -
playmaker88 wrote: »That Navarro chick on CNN steadfastly defended him.
I hate when people do stupid ? like that.. hes this.. shes that..I am too i will defend them no matter whats its ? stupid
Man I hate Ana Navarro, she'll defend any and everything republican even if the facts are damning and glaringly obvious. She's a boot lickin puerto rican uncle Tom. -
never underestimate the power of human stupidityHe claims he didnt know..How do you accidentally speak at a white supremacist meeting?
-
playmaker88 wrote: »That Navarro chick on CNN steadfastly defended him.
I hate when people do stupid ? like that.. hes this.. shes that..I am too i will defend them no matter whats its ? stupid
Exactly, but in the end, Republicans are desperate to hold on to power. And since closet racism is making a comeback in America, the last thing Republicans will do is disown this clown. They know what they're doing, although it's still stupid because Blacks and minorities are definitely gonna show less love to Republicans now. -
kingblaze84 wrote: »playmaker88 wrote: »That Navarro chick on CNN steadfastly defended him.
I hate when people do stupid ? like that.. hes this.. shes that..I am too i will defend them no matter whats its ? stupid
Exactly, but in the end, Republicans are desperate to hold on to power. And since closet racism is making a comeback in America, the last thing Republicans will do is disown this clown. They know what they're doing, although it's still stupid because Blacks and minorities are definitely gonna show less love to Republicans now.
As well they should.. any attempts to get minorities vote and support is pr .. ? them -
playmaker88 wrote: »kingblaze84 wrote: »playmaker88 wrote: »That Navarro chick on CNN steadfastly defended him.
I hate when people do stupid ? like that.. hes this.. shes that..I am too i will defend them no matter whats its ? stupid
Exactly, but in the end, Republicans are desperate to hold on to power. And since closet racism is making a comeback in America, the last thing Republicans will do is disown this clown. They know what they're doing, although it's still stupid because Blacks and minorities are definitely gonna show less love to Republicans now.
As well they should.. any attempts to get minorities vote and support is pr .. ? them
It's a shame too because I thought the GOP was really ready to make some moves to seriously get Blacks and others to vote for them. Rand Paul sounded sensible when it comes to the justice system, and Republicans even elected a Haitian chick to represent a district in Utah of all places. But as you said, it's all PR.....last time I'll be fooled like that -
He claims he didnt know..How do you accidentally speak at a white supremacist meeting?
also the GOP in LA was claiming it was a made up story before he came out and admitted it the same day...the media should point out to the public how quick and willingly they were ready to lie to the public.
and voted against MLK day twice in his state...what more evidence is needed to call a duck a duck...the black democrat in his state is defending him though
oh that ? knew,alright
David Duke: I've Met With Steve Scalise Several Times, So What?
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/david-duke-steve-scalise-speech
Former Ku Klux ? leader David Duke said in an interview with Fusion on Monday that not only did House Majority Whip Steve Scalise (R-LA) speak at a 2002 meeting of a group he led, but that the two of them also met on several occasions.
Duke's comments came as Scalise is dealing with the fallout of revelations that he spoke to the white nationalist group and that, in 1999, he reportedly said he agreed with Duke on "conservative" issues but questioned the ex-KKK leader's electability to Congress.
"Why is Scalise being singled out? I don't know," Duke told Fusion about the 2002 meeting. "He was just going there, obviously, to tell voters about some of his initiatives on some tax matters. That’s what it's all about. And I think it's insane, this whole process."
Duke's comments came with a warning to Republicans who might be quick to distance themselves from Scalise.
"If Scalise is going to be crucified — if Republicans want to throw Steve Scalise to the woods, then a lot of them better be looking over their shoulders," Duke told Fusion. He added that he wasn't afraid to release a list of names of politicians he has connections to. -
He claims he didnt know..How do you accidentally speak at a white supremacist meeting?
also the GOP in LA was claiming it was a made up story before he came out and admitted it the same day...the media should point out to the public how quick and willingly they were ready to lie to the public.
and voted against MLK day twice in his state...what more evidence is needed to call a duck a duck...the black democrat in his state is defending him though
oh that ? knew,alright
David Duke: I've Met With Steve Scalise Several Times, So What?
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/david-duke-steve-scalise-speech
Former Ku Klux ? leader David Duke said in an interview with Fusion on Monday that not only did House Majority Whip Steve Scalise (R-LA) speak at a 2002 meeting of a group he led, but that the two of them also met on several occasions.
Duke's comments came as Scalise is dealing with the fallout of revelations that he spoke to the white nationalist group and that, in 1999, he reportedly said he agreed with Duke on "conservative" issues but questioned the ex-KKK leader's electability to Congress.
"Why is Scalise being singled out? I don't know," Duke told Fusion about the 2002 meeting. "He was just going there, obviously, to tell voters about some of his initiatives on some tax matters. That’s what it's all about. And I think it's insane, this whole process."
Duke's comments came with a warning to Republicans who might be quick to distance themselves from Scalise.
"If Scalise is going to be crucified — if Republicans want to throw Steve Scalise to the woods, then a lot of them better be looking over their shoulders," Duke told Fusion. He added that he wasn't afraid to release a list of names of politicians he has connections to.
I hope to ? David Duke releases that list of politicians he's close to.....I'm willing to bet most will be Republicans (and I'm sure a few southern Democrats too) -
CNN going to invite Charles Barkley to give his opinion?
Don Lemon going to tell black people that only if we submit and not scare white people?
? -
uh... why don't you vote for the local politician, be they GOP or Dem, depending on who they are, instead of saying "someone somewhere is racist?"kingblaze84 wrote: »It's a shame too because I thought the GOP was really ready to make some moves to seriously get Blacks and others to vote for them. Rand Paul sounded sensible when it comes to the justice system, and Republicans even elected a Haitian chick to represent a district in Utah of all places. But as you said, it's all PR.....last time I'll be fooled like that
it's not like the argument "the Democrats have a high-ranking senator who was a former KKK member" was an argument for people to NEVER vote for Democrats, right?
-
These people need to be in shackles. There is no question in my mind about whats really going on.
-
uh... why don't you vote for the local politician, be they GOP or Dem, depending on who they are, instead of saying "someone somewhere is racist?"kingblaze84 wrote: »It's a shame too because I thought the GOP was really ready to make some moves to seriously get Blacks and others to vote for them. Rand Paul sounded sensible when it comes to the justice system, and Republicans even elected a Haitian chick to represent a district in Utah of all places. But as you said, it's all PR.....last time I'll be fooled like that
it's not like the argument "the Democrats have a high-ranking senator who was a former KKK member" was an argument for people to NEVER vote for Democrats, right?
Good point....generally, I vote on an independent basis anyway, but Republicans will have to work a little harder for my vote after this controversy -
but wouldn't you be basing your vote on the election where you actually live?kingblaze84 wrote: »Good point....generally, I vote on an independent basis anyway, but Republicans will have to work a little harder for my vote after this controversy
-
but wouldn't you be basing your vote on the election where you actually live?kingblaze84 wrote: »Good point....generally, I vote on an independent basis anyway, but Republicans will have to work a little harder for my vote after this controversy
Yeah why do you ask? My main point is that Republicans defending this keynote speaker is tainting the Republican brand even more for Blacks such as myself. -
my point is, and i hate to cite Byrd, but Byrd's actual membership in the KKK was NEVER considered a reason for voters to say, across the nation, "whoa, Democrats are tainting the brand by keeping this former ? member around."kingblaze84 wrote: »Yeah why do you ask? My main point is that Republicans defending this keynote speaker is tainting the Republican brand even more for Blacks such as myself.
Scalise is at best an idiot for this and it IS a bad look. but i just never get the argument about rejecting individual candidates in state A because a candidate in state B sucks. goes for any party, office, whatever.
-
my point is, and i hate to cite Byrd, but Byrd's actual membership in the KKK was NEVER considered a reason for voters to say, across the nation, "whoa, Democrats are tainting the brand by keeping this former ? member around."kingblaze84 wrote: »Yeah why do you ask? My main point is that Republicans defending this keynote speaker is tainting the Republican brand even more for Blacks such as myself.
Scalise is at best an idiot for this and it IS a bad look. but i just never get the argument about rejecting individual candidates in state A because a candidate in state B sucks. goes for any party, office, whatever.
The problem with the Byrd (false)equivalent conservatives are pushing
is the fact Bryd not only admitted to being in the ? was wrong,he apologized for it
and spent the rest of his life and career advocating for Civil Rights and equal justice for blacks in the country.
His voting record on policy and legislation that benefit speaks for this.
Of course those that are defending Scalise will omitted this in their narrative......
much like they will not point out the fact the BIG difference when they try to compare Scalise
with Revs Sharpton and Wright....these men ARE NOT elected officials getting paid on the tax payers dollar -
my point is, and i hate to cite Byrd, but Byrd's actual membership in the KKK was NEVER considered a reason for voters to say, across the nation, "whoa, Democrats are tainting the brand by keeping this former ? member around."kingblaze84 wrote: »Yeah why do you ask? My main point is that Republicans defending this keynote speaker is tainting the Republican brand even more for Blacks such as myself.
Scalise is at best an idiot for this and it IS a bad look. but i just never get the argument about rejecting individual candidates in state A because a candidate in state B sucks. goes for any party, office, whatever.
The problem with the Byrd (false)equivalent conservatives are pushing
is the fact Bryd not only admitted to being in the ? was wrong,he apologized for it
and spent the rest of his life and career advocating for Civil Rights and equal justice for blacks in the country.
His voting record on policy and legislation that benefit speaks for this.
Of course those that are defending Scalise will omitted this in their narrative......
much like they will not point out the fact the BIG difference when they try to compare Scalise
with Revs Sharpton and Wright....these men ARE NOT elected officials getting paid on the tax payers dollar
You took the words right out of my mouth -
bear in mind that we're talking about a statement of "this is how all Republicans are," not specifically Scalise, in this thread. also... are we saying Scalise should apologize and atone or are we saying "GOP TAINTED FOREVER?" because it sounds like the latter, and if THAT'S the case, then it doesn't really matter if Byrd later apologized or not.The problem with the Byrd (false)equivalent conservatives are pushing
is the fact Bryd not only admitted to being in the ? was wrong,he apologized for it
also, i think this was the larger point: "but i just never get the argument about rejecting individual candidates in state A because a candidate in state B sucks. goes for any party, office, whatever."
