This came in today:
Columbia, SC – Today Senator Joel Lourie and House Democratic Leader Rep. Todd Rutherford called on Governor Haley today to immediately remove and condemn Roan Garcia Quintana, a white supremacist, from her campaign committee. The letter below was sent to Governor Haley via email earlier this afternoon.
———————————————
Dear Governor Haley,
South Carolina is a place that has faced serious challenges and come together in the past to create a stronger society. But when our leaders embrace those who use the most hurtful and divisive rhetoric, it takes us ten steps backwards and unnecessarily divides the state.
Garcia-Quintana
This week, the public has become aware of the statements, affiliations and belief in white nationalism that one of your top supporters has engaged in throughout his life. You chose Mr. Roan Garcia Quintana as one of your top supporters and placed him on your reelection grassroots steering committee – which is extremely concerning for all who want South Carolina to attract businesses, grow and move forward.
Mr. Quintana is currently the executive director of the anti-immigration organization Americans Have Had Enough. More disturbingly, he has been identified in numerous reports as a current board member and former director of the Council of Conservative Citizens (CCC), which both the Southern Poverty Law Center and the Anti-Defamation League have labeled as a hate group.
Additionally, as we are sure you are aware Governor, in 1999 CCC distributed mock advertisements encouraging people to visit our state because, “South Carolina Now Has Whiter Beaches.” The CCC’s newsletter, Citizens Informer has also been used to advocate against “race-mixing,” the superiority of the white race, and the dangers of immigration to America.
This type of leadership is the opposite of what South Carolina needs. We urge you to strongly rebuke his statements and explain why you thought it appropriate to align yourself with him and his extreme beliefs.
South Carolina has one of the highest unemployment rates in the country, and this kind of divisive outlook will only deter businesses and start ups from coming to our state.
South Carolina is losing the majority of our educated young people to other states in the region, and this kind of backwards thinking will only drive them and their talent further away.
We have a lot of work to do in South Carolina and we cannot move forward if you continue to support the hateful, divisive rhetoric and work of people like Mr. Quintana.
The people and businesses of South Carolina deserve an explanation for why this individual was placed on your grassroots steering committee. We strongly request that you remove this individual from the position of leadership you have bestowed upon him, renounce and condemn his views and the views of the organizations he associates with, and apologize for elevating him to a position of note within your re-election campaign.
The people of South Carolina look forward to your response.
Sincerely,
Rep. Todd Rutherford
Sen. Joel Lourie
#####
Here’s some background on what they’re talking about:
One of South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley’s (R) picks for her reelection committee in February has now been accused of being a white supremacist, Raw Story reported Wednesday.
Haley, who is actively preparing for her2014 reelection campaign, named tea party activist Roan Garcia-Quintana as one of the 164 co-chairs of her campaign’s steering committee in February.
According to a report titled “SC Governor Names White Nationalist To Reelection Committee” and published on Wednesday by the Southern Poverty Law Center, Garcia-Quintana serves on the board of the Council of Conservative Citizens, which is listed by the SPLC as a white nationalist hate group. The group is, according to the SPLC, a linear descendant of White Citizens Councils, which was founded in the 1950s to combat school desegregation….
Related Posts
wow
A little odd, though, that he would be supporting her, since she’s not “white”!
But she’s not “black”….I guess that’s good enough for him!
“Alleged” and “accused” by familiar elements of the Democratich machine, including another elected lawyer. Wonder if our Governor recalls the scurrilous, marital infidelity allegations her political enemies circulated before her election. Shams, shame for circulating such obvious garbage!
I will only believe the charges when U.S. Senator Tim Scott says he does — and he has not.
Believe the opposite of whatever Dick Harpootlian says about Republicans and you have a better shot at the truth most of the time.
Did you read the post? Neither the word “alleged” or “accused” appear in it. One would think from your comment that this was solely a case of unsubstantiated partisan name calling. Instead the letter documents the man’s known associations to certain organizations, the known actions of those organizations, and reputable outside groups’ take on those organizations and their actions. Those things are all facts. You don’t have to agree with the opinions of Southern Poverty Law Center or the Anti-Defamation League, but it still is a fact that they have made this assessment of the groups Quintano is associated with – not Dick Harpootlian or Joel Lourie or Todd Rutherford. Did Dick Harpootlian sign the letter, anyway?
Why do you have such animosity towards lawyers and anything they associate with? It seems to have compromised your objectivity.
“Did you read the post? Neither the word “accused” or “alleged” appear in it.” – Scout
Linked within the very post was an article from RawStory.com. Apparently, you neglected to read it:
“The Southern Poverty Law Center on Wednesday accused South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley of appointing a white supremacist to her steering committee.”
The word “accused” appears prominent, in my opinion.
She meant the use of those words to hedge the allegations, in the same way you used it above. Using weasel words.
The use of “accused” as an active voice verb is the opposite of what you were alleging.
meh?
I followed many links in the article (there were a good many of them), but not that specific one. The information seemed pretty clear by then.
you said, ““Alleged” and “accused” by familiar elements of the Democratich machine, including another elected lawyer.”
From your response to me, I now conclude that you mean the SPLC to be one of the “familiar elements of the Democratich machine” since you point out they are the ones that did the accusing. On first read, I assumed you were referring to Lourie and Rutherford, since one of them is an elected lawyer. Neither of them used the words “alleged” or “accused” in their letter.
With that clarified, back to your original post – what exactly are you waiting for Tim Scott to settle?
Do you doubt that the man holds white supremacist views, or that he is on the board of the CCC, or that the CCC is a rascist group?
You compare this to rumors circulated about Haley before her election and insinuate that this is made up “garbage” and “shams”. But unlike rumors, most of this seems verifiable. The only thing that seems to open to question is whether or not you personally agree with the assessment of the CCC as a racist group. Reading their views on their own website satisfies that question for me, whether or not they characterize themselves that way or not.
Is there any particular reason Tim Scott would have to weigh in on this?
“Is there any particular reason Tim Scott would have to weigh in on this?” -Scout
You asked on Sunday without mentioning if you knew Roan Garcia- Quintana had just resigned. Had he not, Sen. Tim Scott, an interim appointee with an upcoming election would certainly have had to address the issue, but no longer.
Why? We know Gov. Haley, an ethnic minority female, appointed Scott, so her administration she cannot be cast as racist with any intellectual honesty. Roan Garcia-Q’, however, emerges as quite a strange bird, but one who has fallen on the sword of future political aspirations.
“I will only believe the charges when U.S. Senator Tim Scott says he does — and he has not.”
Do you often allow others to think for yourself? Or do you just lack free will and therefore the ability to analyze situations for yourself? And why Tim Scott?
Oh could be that you just believe Tim Scott is the second coming of Christ and therefore whatever he says you must obey? He is the shepherd and you’re a sheep?
“And why Tim Scott?” – die FluBgab’
Analysis:
Joel Lourie and Todd Rutherford are minor, partisan (lifelong Dems) in a part-time state house. Lourie is one of 1,922 members of state upper houses, and Rutherford one of 5,482 members of state lower houses in the U.S.
Tim Scott (not a life-long Republican) is one of only 100 full-time U.S. Senators. U.S. Senators have at their disposal briefings by full-time research staffs and considerably more resources than part-time, state legislators.
Again, die FluBgab’ you shoot from your hip, attacking my open-minded preference for two-sided, fact-based arguments versus obviously slanted, partisan opinions.
As a sanity check, you may bother to ask yourself the question you just aimed at me: “Do you often allow others to think for yourself?”
You give some of us cause to doubt.
Tim Scott has no reason to weigh in on this – so waiting for him to do it is akin to waiting on Bobby Cox to weigh in on the Braves struggle in Toronto tonight.
“Tim Scott has no reason to weigh in on this – ” Barry (May 27, 2013 at 841 pm)
Barry, surely you are capable of following discussion threads better than your comment above indicates. Obviously you ignored or did not grasp what I conveyed to Scout more than an hour earlier. There was certainly a reason (read comment @ May 27, 2013 at 720 pm).
Two of Sheehen’s mouthpieces doing his dirty work for him. Get used to it.
How about Haley “removing and condemning” Garcia-Quintana as soon as Lourie does the same with Lillian McBride? He has more responsibility for the latter than Haley does for the former.
Seeing as Lourie is only one member of the Richland legislative delegation, while Haley is the only person in charge of her campaign, your argument is sort of weak.
Lourie’s brother-in-law , Garry Baum, was McBride’s deputy director. I’m quite sure Lourie was aware of what was going on there.
The State: “McBride hired Baum in July 2011 for $66,500. Baum now earns $68,630. When he left the State Election Commission, where he had worked some 18 years, Baum earned $55,287.”
20% raises are pretty nice to get, especially for such an easy job.
So being aware of incompetence because you are related to an employee who (theoretically) tells you about it somehow gives you more ‘responsibility’ to remove the incompetent person than a candidate has to sever ties with an objectionable person associated with her campaign? Awareness is one thing. Responsibility is another. I am aware of many things wrong with this world that it is not my place to correct. Perhaps Lourie should have been more motivated to try and have an effect on the situation if he truly had a heightened awareness through a family connection as you hypothesize, but it does not change his level of ‘responsibility’ – which was still that of being one member of a delegation. Haley is solely responsible for her campaign. period.
And besides the comparison is irrelevant. Even if your assertion of Lourie’s behavior had merit, it would not invalidate his asking the Governor to correct a wrong that she is directly responsible for and that reflects badly on the state. The two are unrelated.
He was also on the board that hired her. So let’s not pretend he was just some innocent citizen with no power to do anything. He did little during the hearings to rectify the situation.
I wasn’t pretending anything. I didn’t say he was blameless. I was responding to your assertion that he was more responsible for McBride than Haley is for Garcia-Quintana. That is absurd. Yes, Lourie had some responsibility as one member of a public delegation – but definately not more responsibility than a candidate who has sole control over who works on her own campaign.
Are you really defending Haley’s appointment of this man to her campaign?
Seeing as Mr. Rutherford and Mr. Lourie belong to two groups of people (African-Americans and Jews) not exactly well liked by the CoCC they have every right to complain when the Haley appoints, a man who sits on the board of a group with very strong racist and anti-Semitic beliefs, to her re-election campaign.
Are you sure their actions are not part of a coordinated effort by the Democratic Party to help Sheheen?
I think Haley should ask the guy to resign. Haley is a lousy governor. But I’m not naive enough to assume that this is not part of an organized political campaign.
Doug, seriously? so what if they are?
I don’t think their actions are ‘part of a coordinated effort by the Democratic Party to help Sheheen’, but even if they were, it is completely irrelevant, as long as their actions are valid and necessary in their own right. It’s not too much of a stretch to think that members of the same party would have similar views and motives and might independently work toward the same end without it being a conspiracy. But again – who cares if it is, as long as, the end is worthwhile.
If you honestly think that Rutherford and Lourie’s motivation for taking this action was to discredit Haley and thus give Sheheen a greater chance rather than out of a genuine concern for how this reflects on our state – I disagree.
I heart scout!
“So what if they are”
If they are part of a coordinated effort then their motivation is worth knowing.
We can all pretend that these politicians are fine upstanding citizens who work and think independently. Or we can deal with reality.
And it’s much ado about nothing.. some idiot with a warped view of the world is a low, low, low level volunteer on a campaign and that’s worthy of two state senators making public statements about it? Really? Will the Democrats release the name of every volunteer on the Sheheen campaign so we can scan every statement they have made?
This is all a dog and pony show. Par for the course for a political campaign based on smearing the other candidate. When you’ve got nothing positive to run on, your only shot is to talk about how bad the other guy is. This is Sheheen 2.0.
Kathryn, it’s no secret that you “heart” anyone who’s a card carrying liberal.
So you’re saying because Lourie and Rutherford belong to a different party from Haley they have no right to call out the governor when she does something so incredibly stupid?
For someone who says he doesn’t support Haley you sure do defend her actions a lot.
And who cares if it is coordinated? She (or some campaign staffer) made a really dumb decision in appointing this man. She deserves to be called out in a coordinated manner.
Yes, it was dumb. Is it as big a deal as Democrats want to play it up to be? No. But when you have nothing else to run your campaign on, you gotta go for the smear.
I hope someone runs against Haley in the primary. I hope she loses. If she makes it out of a primary, I won’t vote for her. She’s awful.
But at least I can understand that this is just a dog-and-pony show for the Democrats as well. It’s all games. And meanwhile the Democrats allow the Lillian McBrides to remain in a position with far more power than the racist unknown volunteer will ever have.
The basic question to ask yourself is this: “Did these two senators go directly to Governor Haley privately to address their concerns about this racist volunteer or did they go directly to a coordinated press release?” If they did the former first I would be very surprised. That tells you what this is about.
When you disagree with Haley do you go “directly to Governor Haley privately to address [your] concerns” before you post them on this public blog? Because Lourie and Rutherford have probably just as much of a chance of getting a meeting with the governor to discuss her campaign staffing as you do.
Really? Can you prove that baseless statement? Do you have any evidence to suggest that Haley’s staff would ignore requests for a meeting?
It was a publicity stunt. It’s politics. That’s all it is.
Doug points to a lamentable phenomenon.
There was a time when two legislators, a senator and a representative, would have sought a quiet word with the governor, and the governor quite likely would have sought the man’s removal from the committee very quietly.
Those days are largely gone. Thanks to a process starting in the late 80s, picking up speed in the early 90s and continuing through the early ’00s, empty partisanship of the inside-the-Beltway variety has greatly undermined the collegiality that once existed.
Add to that the alienation that has arisen, on personal grounds, between the governor and the Legislature over the last two administrations, and it becomes even more unlikely.
Back when Beasley and Hodges were governor, there still would have been a sense on the part of senior lawmakers that the governor, of whichever party, was approachable — particularly as they were both men of the House.
Sanford largely destroyed that. It could have been restored by his successor, had his successor not been someone who so greatly owes her position to the empty, angry populism of the Tea Party, which expects, if not demands, hostility toward lawmakers of both parties, but especially Democrats (or, to use the curse words of that faction, “the Obama party”).
Nikki Haley started out in a hole in that regard, since she had accomplished little more in her time in the House than earn the enmity of the leadership of her own party. But by running a campaign that was all about ideological rhetoric and free national media coverage, she set herself further apart.
There just is no deep, personal, collegial respect that would allow relationships between lawmakers and herself to cut through that rhetoric.
Have they tried? That’s all I want to know. I would rather hear Lourie and Rutherford say “We attempted to go to the governor to address this privately but since she was unwilling to speak with us, we are left with the last resort of producing a joint press release”.
It’s a two way street. I’m not naive enough to think the Democrats would do anything to take away a chance to hit Haley.
As someone who use to work at the state house (Senate side mainly) – I’d be shocked if a Governor (or staff) agreed to meet with a senator on such an issue.
It’s like Clemson’s football coach agreeing to meet with a South Carolina assistant coach about South Carolina’s concerns with another Clemson coach. Just isn’t plausible.
I don’t know what is weirder: that Garcia-Quintana maybe doesn’t realize that Haley’s very existence and rise to high office is contrary to the principles of the Council of Conservative Citizens (and that the existence of her children would be an outright abomination according to the Statement of Principles of the CCC ), or that Haley herself isn’t so offended by those “principles” of the CCC that she renounces this guy’s support. My guess is that she had no idea, but that once Sheheen and Lourie brought it up, she’s now refusing to ditch Garcia-Quintana just out of pure stubbornness, one of her most salient personality traits.
Haley is Caucasian.
Yes, but they speak specifically of “European” heritage being the key ingredient of American society, as they see it. Nowhere in their statement of principles do they refer to “Caucasian,” only to “European, ” and elsewhere, “white” and “non-white.”
Indo-European doesn’t cut it, eh?
Will Joel Lourie ask Lilllian McBride’s replacement to step down now that so many inconsistencies have been found in his background? This guy is just as shaky…
http://www.thestate.com/2013/05/25/2787034/exclusive-richlands-new-elections.html
Totally different issue- unless you are for resume screening of everyone volunteer in a campaign.
Just face it- the guy was a problem and shouldn’t have been picked. Justifying it by pointing out other behavior isn’t productive- and really misses the point. It’s sort of what kids do – “but mommy, he hit me harder”
According to The State website this morning, Haley has now asked Quintana to step down from her campaign. She says she was unaware of his beliefs and racial divisiveness is inconsistent with what she stands for. Good for her.
Our long national nightmare is over. Racism has been defeated thanks to the heroism of Senators Lourie and Rutherford.
Onto the next fabricated crisis.
Doug, you win the cynicism award for the day.
Hey, Lourie and Rutherford gave a lowly racist far more press than he ever deserved. The racist’s organization will now be able to attract more people of his ilk thanks to this publicity stunt. Were you really concerned that he was going to bring about ethnic purity initiatives?
This was about Haley-Sheheen and nothing else.
I could be wrong but I think people who have those beliefs and feel militantly enough about it to want to belong to such organizations seek them out on their own without the need of publicity such as this to help. I think there are far more people who are unaware that these organizations exist and are truly shocked and appalled when they find out. In which case, this sort of publicity is a public service that makes the people who want to guard against this sort of thing more aware and more able to do so.
There is no question that racism and incompetence are both problems that need to be addressed. I’m not sure why you insist on linking the two in some sort of competition. Can we not evaluate each independently and agree that Richland county legislators did a good thing in battling encroaching racism and could do better dealing with incompetence. Why must their performance in one area invalidate their performance in the other? I find it disturbing that you seemingly would be willing to overlook this encroaching racism because you can’t see beyond what you perceive as impure motives on the part of the legislators involved.
People can do the right thing for the wrong reasons. It is still possible to be happy that a right thing was done, no matter how.
But what you see as the wrong reason doesn’t bother me near as much as it does you. I see it as totally consistent. You were concerned that if it was a coordinated effort by the democrats that people had a right to know their motives. You see the motive as only getting a democratic candidate elected, which you clearly judge as an impure and base objective, perhaps because you think it is solely a political end. But there is a larger organizing principle behind all these actions that you refuse to acknowledge or maybe just can’t see. Consider that the reason you want to get a democratic candidate elected may be that you honestly believe that the policies, decisions, judgement, etc. of the current administration are bad for the State of the South Carolina. If your motive is to make things better for the people of South Carolina because you believe the current administration’s policies are detrimental- then these two actions – getting Sheheen elected and challenging each instance of what you see as Haley’s bad judgement – are two different battles in the same war. Sure they are related, but they are both valid in their own right towards the larger end.
Maybe I get the idealism award for the day, but that is how I see it. I like to think of my view as pragmatic idealism, if there is such a thing.
Excellent response.
I think you are on target.
It’s obvious Rutherford and Lourie think Haley is bad for South Carolina and I’d assume they believe their friend Vincent Sheheen would be good for South Carolina.
It only makes sense that when the see a problem that causes them concern for the entire state- they point it out as best they can- and in this case- it worked well.
In related phony-outrage, did anyone else see the NY Times piece yesterday about how it is “deplorable” that some military bases are named after Confederate Generals?
Good grief, Charlie Brown.
OK, Bryan, I’ll bite on that one. First off, it was an op-ed anyway, one person’s opinion. However, Mr. Malinowski’s piece did raise some interesting points, things I certainly had never thought about much as one who grew up taking the name “Ft. Bragg” (for example) completely for granted.
As he points out, most of these installations were created during the buildups of the two world wars, a time of different views on race and of a segregated Army. Now a fifth of the military is African-American and one must at least acknowledge some irony in asking some of these to serve at an installation that honors military leaders who a) killed US Army forces and b) did so in defense of the institution of slavery.
Also learned that Robert E. Lee was responsible for more US Army deaths than either Hitler or Tojo. Perhaps it’s too soon still and it’s certainly not one of the most pressing issues of the day, but maybe the time will come when we can consider re-naming these fundamental American institutions (the military bases in question) after Americans whose legacy is more admirable than say, Benning or Gordon.
Well, you also have to consider that Lee was perhaps the finest commander that West Point ever produced.
Your point that he was responsible for so many soldiers’ deaths reminds me of what I consider one of the great ironies of our history.
Whether or not Lee was our greatest general, I consider Lincoln to be our greatest president. I also think he and Lee may have been the finest, most high-minded men our nation has produced.
And yet those years of unparalleled bloodshed can be blamed on the two of them to a great extent.
Had Lee, who opposed both slavery and secession, not made the bizarre (to my modern mind, as I can never put myself completely into the shoes of a man formed by the first half of the 19th century) choice of putting his state ahead of the nation to which he had sworn fealty as an officer, the South could not have kept up its end of the fight so ably or for so long. And hundreds of thousands might have lived.
Had Lincoln not so skilfully and so bull-headedly kept the North fighting despite considerable political sentiment not to do so, even making sure no peace was accomplished before slavery was eliminated by constitutional amendment, those same hundreds of thousands might have lived.
Lincoln was such a finely balanced political creature, always taking care to bring the whole country along with him but also determined to eliminate slavery if he got the chance (despite what the Radicals would have said about him). If he had been a little more this way or that way in some regard, history could have taken a wildly different course.
And if Lee hadn’t been so able (except at Gettysburg), pulling victory from defeat time and again and defying all the odds, perhaps even that ass McClellan could have put down the rebellion. OK, maybe not McClellan, but one of those between him and Grant.
Lincoln and Lee were both such remarkable men, good men, high-minded and extraordinarily able. And yet without them, the war might never have been the bloodbath it was.
Of course, I should add that Lee’s gentlemanly surrender helped greatly in bringing the war to a clear end. And Lincoln’s holding out for the 13th Amendment made sure that the source of the conflict was put behind us forever, so that no further wars would have to be fought over it.
By the way, I’m glad this Garcia Quintana mess came to the conclusion it did.
When I saw over the weekend that Vincent Sheheen (or “Vince,” as the governor’s minions, in their ill-bred efforts to diminish him, keep calling the Democrat) had also called for the governor to get rid of this man, I thought that would prevent any resolution, causing the governor’s camp to dig their heels in permanently.
I suspect maybe the national coverage this was getting had something to do with the departure of the self-described “Confederate Cuban.” The governor cherishes what national reputation she has, I believe, and this was tarnishing it.
Whatever the reason, I’m glad he’s gone now.
The botched hiring of Lillian McBride’s replacement has far more significance. I await the same level of outrage from Joel Lourie.
I don’t, and here’s why…
While you are perfectly correct to point to the lamentable role that the delegation played in at least the initial scenes of this farce, that is not what I look to state senators for.
The fact that state legislators are at all involved in such local matters is an abomination, one of the symptoms of our dysfunctional system of governance in SC, a remnant of the days when local plantation owners ran both the state and their local communities.
The ONLY thing I want lawmakers to do with regard to the elections mess is undo what they did when they created this monstrosity — and then bow out of the matter, permanently.
That said, issuing statements about what governors should or shouldn’t do with their election committees isn’t what I look to state lawmakers for, either. What I expect them to do is take seriously the business of studying, debating and voting upon the matters of state policy that come before them as legislators. Which, watching him over the years, I find Joel Lourie certainly does. But such everyday diligence seldom makes headlines.
In this case, I found it useful to use Joel and Todd’s release as a way of getting into the topic. I saw it before I saw news coverage of the matter. And yes, I think we should stop and consider what some people mean by “conservative” sometimes. This shone a light on that…
But it’s not the sort of thing I mainly look for senators to do.
Until he leaves the board he has a responsibility to do that job to the best of his abilities. If the replacement for Lilllian McBride is not qualified or has serious background issues, Lourie should do everything he can to stop the hiring.
There is nothing he can do on his own to stop the hiring.
It’s not a one man show- and if it is – the only person that would fill those shoes is Senator Jackson.
Doug should despise Jackson as much as he does Leatherman.
But Barry, you are wrong; the majority should rule; not the most corrupt (though I admit that they can be one and the same). Jackson is just a bad egg; plain and simple. But the Democrats are (mostly) afraid to say that, and the Republicans see no benefit in pointing it out.
Same as it ever was when there are not two healthy parties facing one another.
Jackson is a local hack… Leathrman is state wide. We have much to thank Mr. Leatherman for what South Carolina is today. He is more responsible than all the Governors during his long (too long) tenure.
@Barry –
Could he say SOMETHING? You know as a representative of the citizens of the county? as a member of the board?
Or is he too busy scanning the resumes of Haley supporters?