Statistikhengst
Diamond Member
- Nov 21, 2013
- 45,564
- 11,757
Meanwhile, THREE Democratic candidates were there:
Three Democratic POTUS contenders address La Raza s KC conventio - KCTV5
(video at the link)
Some on the extreme Right even go as far as to classify La Raza a "hate group", but it is not.
Reince Priebus said in his 2012 election "autopsy" that the GOP must reach out to minorities. I don't think this is what he meant.
Even if a Republican were to hate La Raza for some weird, inexplicable reason, he could have made some impressive points by having been there to lay out his arguments.
From the link:
NCLR leaders say they extended the Kansas City event invitation to all presidential candidates, but no Republican contenders will be in attendance.
"We're the fastest growing community in this country and our voice matters and we do vote," La Raza convention goer Isabel Rubio said. "Not to be here is a gross oversight."
So, why did not even one GOPer appear? Fear of backlash from "the base"? Didn't read his mail? Had to get his pedicure done? Kissing the Koch Bros rings takes time, you know!
The point is, by not showing at all, GOPers confirm the image of them being Latino haters, even if they are not.
At least Mitt Romney had the balls to go and speech mano a mano to the NAACP. I really respected that move of his. At least he tried. These yahoos are not even trying, and by completely ignoring the invitation, they allowed the Democrats to dominate the field during this 4 day conference, which means that they cannot claim scheduling problems as a lame excuse. The thing ran for four days, right in the heartland of America, in Kansas City, Missouri.
Instead, the memories of this event will be this:
I mean, there is blind, there is BLIND and then there is the GOP.
Discuss. Should GOPers have appeared at this event?
Last edited: