Republican Would Ban Minority Caucuses

[Nbadan]

Tancredo: Ban minority caucuses
By Anne C. Mulkern


Washington - Colorado's Tom Tancredo wants to abolish the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, Black Caucus and Asian Pacific American Caucus.

Tancredo, a Republican congressman from Littleton, repeated his call today for the elimination of all special interest factions within Congress that are pegged to ethnic groups. He first asked for a rule change to ban the groups in 2003.

"It is utterly hypocritical for Congress to extol the virtues of a color-blind society while officially sanctioning caucuses that are based solely on race - and restrict their membership based on race," Tancredo wrote in a letter to Rep. Juanita Millender-McDonald, D-Calif, who is in charge of the House's numerous caucuses.

When Tancredo previously said the caucuses should be eliminated, a member of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus called that statement "more race-baiting" by Tancredo. The black, Hispanic and Asian-American caucuses exist because few members of Congress come from those racial groups and they need a unified voice, said Rep. Raul M. Grijalva, D-Ariz.

Denver Post (http://www.denverpost.com/ci_5086122)

This is the same guy who favors building a 3,000 miles fence along the whole U.S. and Mexico border. Tancredo is also a vocal supporter of vigilante groups along the Arizona and Texas Mexican border.

[ChumpDumper]

He should try to start a white male caucus.

[Extra Stout]

I hear Tancracker is mulling a presidential bid.

[Yonivore]

He should try to start a white male caucus.
That's precisely the reason the others should be banned. Racial caucuses are racially discriminatory and, in federal institution like Congress, that should be -- if it's not -- a violation of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

[ChumpDumper]

If it's a violation, Tancredo should sue.

Otherwise, I don't see why it's such a big deal. It's a caucus.

[boutons_]

"racially discriminatory"

the Repug and Dem members in Congress make up "groups" just like ethnic caucuses, nobody is calling the Repug and Dem parties discriminatory. People are free to assemble into whatever the fuck groups they want to assemble into. But I'm not surprised a right-winger racist nutter is against ethnic caucuses.

[BradLohaus]

"It is utterly hypocritical for Congress to extol the virtues of a color-blind society while officially sanctioning caucuses that are based solely on race - and restrict their membership based on race,"

It's pretty hard to argue with that statement.

[2centsworth]

"It is utterly hypocritical for Congress to extol the virtues of a color-blind society while officially sanctioning caucuses that are based solely on race - and restrict their membership based on race,"

It's pretty hard to argue with that statement.

that's too logical for the libs. It just doesn't "feel" right to them.

[clambake]

These are the kinds of groups that banded together after a certain races oppression.

[Yonivore]

"racially discriminatory"

the Repug and Dem members in Congress make up "groups" just like ethnic caucuses, nobody is calling the Repug and Dem parties discriminatory. People are free to assemble into whatever the fuck groups they want to assemble into. But I'm not surprised a right-winger racist nutter is against ethnic caucuses.
So, you'd be okay with a Congressional White Caucus?

[Yonivore]

These are the kinds of groups that banded together after a certain races oppression.
And, not a one among 'em is suffering oppression now. Why? Because the Civil Rights Act of 1964 forbids discrimination on the grounds of race.

You'd think a race that fought so hard to realize that simple principle would also realize how stupid it is to form a exclusive race-based caucus.

[clambake]

Yeah, that civil rights act has left the country without even a hint of racism.

[Yonivore]

Yeah, that civil rights act has left the country without even a hint of racism.
Obviously not, we have the racist Congressional Black Caucus.

[ChumpDumper]

So, you'd be okay with a Congressional White Caucus?Sure, which of your buddies would be in it?

[boutons_]

"you'd be okay with a Congressional White Caucus?"

sure, why not? The Southern Repugs are already a de facto White Supremacy Caucus.

[exstatic]

"It is utterly hypocritical for Congress to extol the virtues of a color-blind society while officially sanctioning caucuses that are based solely on race - and restrict their membership based on race,"

It's pretty hard to argue with that statement.
Except that we don't actually live in a color blind society. Extol away, but it doesn't exist.

Typical GOP stunt, though. I'm betting that the members who "wanted" to join would have beat feet, quicktime, had they actually been offered membership. They don't really want to spend time around minorities, just pandering to their racist base.

[gtownspur]

Sure, which of your buddies would be in it?


why pick a fight?

[Yonivore]

why pick a fight?
Because it's all he knows how to do.

[Mr. Peabody]

So, you'd be okay with a Congressional White Caucus?

I thought they had one. It's called the GOP.

[exstatic]

I thought they had one. It's called the GOP.
:lmao

[gtownspur]

I thought they had one. It's called the GOP.


I didn't know discriminating against moonbats was a crime.

[FromWayDowntown]

That's precisely the reason the others should be banned. Racial caucuses are racially discriminatory and, in federal institution like Congress, that should be -- if it's not -- a violation of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Why are they racially discriminatory? They don't possess any meaningful power; they're largely social clubs of similarly-situated individuals who can do little more than discuss particular problems and desired solutions.

If you're claiming that they're discriminatory because they disinclude those who aren't similarly-situated, do you have proof that a group like the Congressional Black Caucus affirmatively excludes those who aren't black, or is that just your assumption?

[ChumpDumper]

They do. I believe a white Democrat from a black-majority district tried to join and was turned down.

I agree that it's not a big deal. Just something else Republicans are playing up out of Obamaphobia.

[Spurminator]

It's going to take more than a white Republican to eliminate these groups, and I don't think it will ever be successful if it's attempted by force.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

"you'd be okay with a Congressional White Caucus?"

sure, why not? The Southern Repugs are already a de facto White Supremacy Caucus.

White Supremacy Caucus? That's pretty fucking ignorant, considering most of those 'southern' Repugs come from populations that have a lot of minorities.

328,382,103rd time you've talked out of your ass, so I guess what's new?

[gtownspur]

They do. I believe a white Democrat from a black-majority district tried to join and was turned down.

I agree that it's not a big deal. Just something else Republicans are playing up out of Obamaphobia.



Except black majority groups aren't supporting Barrack and are expressing reservations.

Seriously do you talk out of your ass?




Obama May Not Be Big Favorite Among Blacks

By MICHAEL A. FLETCHER
The Washington Post


CHICAGO - Looking around at the overwhelmingly white audience enthusiastically applauding Sen. Barack Obama's recent luncheon speech on Iraq at a downtown hotel, the Rev. Herbert Martin expressed both satisfaction and concern.

Martin, who said he was the only black person in the crowd, was thrilled that Obama, the only black person in the Senate, could engender such enthusiasm from a white audience because it offered further proof that the Illinois Democrat would be a formidable presidential candidate. But Martin also worried that in order to run successfully, Obama would have to become a different kind of politician than the one who earned the trust of voters on Chicago's mostly black South Side as a state legislator before he was elected to the Senate in 2004.

"How does he identify himself?" asked Martin, who was pastor to the late Harold Washington, Chicago's first black mayor. "Will he continue to be an African American or will he become some kind of new creation?"

The question of how Obama chooses to define and approach race looms large as he moves closer to formally launching his campaign next month. Although he rides a wave of enthusiasm among Democrats who like his vision of a different kind of politics and see him as an alternative to Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, N.Y., it is unclear that his multiracial message can also excite black voters hungry for affirmation of the issues most important to them.

"You can be elected president as a black person only if you signal at some level that you are independent from black people, which is guaranteed to" make black people angry, said Melissa Harris-Lacewell, a Princeton University professor who has followed Obama's political ascent. "He is going to have to figure out whether there is a way not to alienate and anger a black base that almost by definition is going to be disappointed."

Strains showing

Already, that balancing act is causing some strains. Some of Obama's longtime black supporters in Illinois are grumbling about the largely white crowd of advisers who now surround Obama as he gears up his national campaign. "Who does he represent? That is what people are worried about," said Lorenzo Martin, publisher of the Chicago Standard newspapers, a chain of black-oriented weeklies in the southern suburbs. "When you look and see who is surrounding him, you are not going to see too many brothers. What you see is the liberal left."

Complicating matters is that Obama appears certain to encounter fierce competition for the black vote from the other leading Democratic presidential contenders. Black Democrats prefer Clinton 3 to 1 over Obama, and four out of five of black Democrats view her favorably, much higher than the 54 percent who have a favorable view of Obama, according to combined findings from two Washington Post-ABC polls taken in December and January. Clinton also enjoys close ties to top black elected officials, and her husband, former President Bill Clinton, remains extremely popular among blacks.

Former Sen. John Edwards, D-N.C., who launched his presidential campaign from the devastation of New Orleans' Lower Ninth Ward to highlight his commitment to attacking poverty, is also expected to make a strong appeal to black voters. Waiting in the wings is another black man, Al Sharpton, a 2004 candidate who is considering running again.

"If we're talking about the urban agenda," Sharpton asked earlier this month, "can you tell me anybody else in the field who's representing that right now?" And, in remarks that were widely interpreted as referring to Obama, he added: "Right now we're hearing a lot of media razzle dazzle. I'm not hearing a lot of meat, or a lot of content. "

Jesse Jackson, whose presidential campaigns in 1984 and 1988 created a sensation across black America, said there is no guarantee that Obama could expect the same kind of support. He faces some real challenges," Jackson said. "First, there will be intense competition for black votes. The other reason is that most black people met him two years ago on television from Boston."

Jackson was referring to the speech at the 2004 Democratic convention that propelled Obama onto the national stage when he was still an Illinois state senator. The contrast with Jackson's own background as a nationally known civil rights leader years before he ever thought of running for president was implicit. But Jackson said he has encouraged Obama to run, adding last week that his "inclinations are really to Barack."

Born to a white mother and a black Kenyan father, reared in Hawaii by his white grandparents and for a few years in Indonesia with his Indonesian stepfather, Obama in many ways embodies the one America he often talks about: He calls himself African American, but his experiences are at once those of blacks, whites, Asian-Americans and immigrants.

"I've never had the option of restricting my loyalties on the basis of race, or measuring my worth on the basis of tribe," Obama wrote in his latest book, "The Audacity of Hope," in which he also observed that he has "blood relatives who resemble Margaret Thatcher and others who could pass for Bernie Mac."

Rooted in black community

Still, Obama chose to build his political career by rooting himself in the black community. In 1983, soon after resigning from a high-powered financial consultant's post in Manhattan, he moved to Chicago as a $10,000-a-year organizer for the Calumet Community Religious Conference. Dressed casually, he would visit barber shops and cruise the main thoroughfares in his used car to get a feel for the South Side.

He left Chicago to attend Harvard Law School, then returned to head a statewide voter-registration effort before joining a small, civil rights law firm. In 1996, he was elected to the Illinois state Senate from a mostly black South Side district.

Obama and his wife, Michelle, another black lawyer, were married at the predominantly black Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago. "He had built himself a base among black voters on the South Side," said Timuel Black, professor emeritus at City Colleges of Chicago.

Despite his record of grass-roots work, questions about Obama's racial credentials formed a critical subplot for his ill-fated primary challenge of Rep. Bobby Rush, D-Ill., in 2000. Rush, a former Black Panther, appeared politically wounded after failing badly in his campaign to unseat Chicago Mayor Richard Daley the year before. But Rush trounced Obama 2 to 1, and the congressman was joined on primary night by Jackson, who had endorsed him.

Rush won in part by depicting Obama as a Harvard elitist who was out of touch with the concerns of workaday blacks. More suspect for some voters was that Obama lived in racially mixed, upscale Hyde Park and was teaching law part time at the University of Chicago, which is widely viewed as being disconnected from the poor South Side communities nearby.

http://www.theledger.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070126/NEWS/701260390/1039 (http://)

[ChumpDumper]

:lol What does that rant have to do with Republicans?

[gtownspur]

:lol What does that rant have to do with Republicans?


Read your own quote,


I was responding to your own quote fucktard.

[ChumpDumper]

I know what I said. Your little freakout had nothing to do with Republicans.

[gtownspur]

I know what I said. Your little freakout had nothing to do with Republicans.


GAWD! you're the biggest moron.

[gtownspur]

They do. I believe a white Democrat from a black-majority district tried to join and was turned down.

I agree that it's not a big deal. Just something else Republicans are playing up out of Obamaphobia.


Let's see, you referenced Obama scaring the bejeezus out of Republicans, and thus the reason for attacking black majorities.

I discounted that with the article in which it states that black majority groups aren't backing OBama.


THus, your point is moot.

[ChumpDumper]

:lmao

It's minority-only caucuses the Republicans are attacking, not black majorities.

Come back when you understand what the issue is.

Your freakout is moot.

[gtownspur]

They do. I believe a white Democrat from a black-majority district tried to join and was turned down.

I agree that it's not a big deal. Just something else Republicans are playing up out of Obamaphobia.



later,...


:lmao

It's minority-only caucuses the Republicans are attacking, not black majorities.

Come back when you understand what the issue is.

Your freakout is moot.


It seems you can't stay on topic with yourself.


And since minority caucuses aren't gonna propel Obama, (which i don't know why you referenced Obamaphobia with minority caucuses), then you are neither on subject or with the facts.

[ChumpDumper]

Gee, gtown, who do you think might be a member of the Congressional Black Caucus?

Are all the groups you described in that article you vomited up official Congressional Caucuses?

[gtownspur]

(D) william jefferson clinton of Louisianna

one,

why does this matter?

[ChumpDumper]

:lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao

I'll give you more time to figure this out. You need it.

[gtownspur]

of Rep. Bobby Rush, D-Ill.,

and way to add a sentence to your qoute after my response, what a cheap tactic.

[ChumpDumper]

:lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao

[gtownspur]

I added a rep of the Black Caucus from the article, Bobby Rush.

I guess it's hilarious too.

[ChumpDumper]

It is hilarious. Take your time. You might figure it out eventually.

[gtownspur]

It is hilarious. Take your time. You might figure it out eventually.


There's no point,

The point is that Black support for Obama is anemic, and not one CBC member has supported Obama yet.

And your qoute has nothing to do with Minority caucuses, and more to do with Obama.


I'll give you time to figure yourself out.


And here's my token :rofl point of the day. :rofl

[ChumpDumper]

and not one CBC member has supported Obama yet.:lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao

I can think of one.

[gtownspur]

:lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao

I can think of one.


no problem, let google tell you the awnser.


I can wait.

[gtownspur]

I found one.


Oh wait, its Obama.

THe only senate CBC member. and none in the house have made public their support for obama.

[ChumpDumper]

This is a riot.

Not only have you have proven you don't know who is in the Congressional Black Caucus, you have proven you don't even know what a congressional caucus is.

Congratulations, you've reached a new low.

[gtownspur]

Cmon,

Chump.

A name and link?

I won't hold my breath.

[gtownspur]

I do know what i'm talking about.

OBama is CBC.

[ChumpDumper]

Alright, it's taken you a good 40 minutes to figure out Barak Obama is a member of the Congressional Black Caucus. Now how long will it take you to figure out how the Republicans might try to use his membership therein to discredit Obama politically?

A day?

A week?

[gtownspur]

Alright, it's taken you a good 40 minutes to figure out Barak Obama is a member of the Congressional Black Caucus. Now how long will it take you to figure out how the Republicans might try to use his membership therein to discredit Obama politically?

A day?

A week?


To who are they gonna use this to, Democrats?


:lol

Like'd it matter.


SR.

[ChumpDumper]

Two weeks?

A month?

[gtownspur]

Alright, it's taken you a good 40 minutes to figure out Barak Obama is a member of the Congressional Black Caucus. Now how long will it take you to figure out how the Republicans might try to use his membership therein to discredit Obama politically?

A day?

A week?


SO you're point is that TOm Tancredo is only using attacking the groups like the CBC who have not supported Barrack and have his opponent, to attack Obama?


What a load of shit.

Why did you bring in Obama and such a half ass conspiracy.


Maybe you were laughing at your own delusion this whole time.

[ChumpDumper]

Two months?

Six months?

[gtownspur]

Two weeks and a month before you figure out Obama's presidential race had nothing to do with Tancredo's wanting to abolish Minority caucuses.

[ChumpDumper]

A year?

Before the presidential election?

We should probably make a vBookie wager.

[gtownspur]

500

[gtownspur]

with 500 dollars you could be virtually e-rich and able to earn respect among all your peers.


Knock yourself out.

[ChumpDumper]

We could have another bet for how long it takes you to figure out what the vBookie bet would be about. I really didn't think you were this dense. You continue to amaze.

[gtownspur]

500 dollars,

THe bet is about wether the repugs will use Obama's CBC membership to attack him.

There i win 500 dollars,

i feel cooler now.

[gtownspur]

Chumpdumper adhominem attack w/ vbookie wager in 3... 2....1....


place your bets everybody.

[ChumpDumper]

Alright, an hour and fifteen minutes to figure out the point I originally made.

Excellent work!

[gtownspur]

Alright, an hour and fifteen minutes to figure out the off topic point I originally made.

Excellent work!


I agree.

[ChumpDumper]

:lol It had everything to do with the topic of Republicans speaking out against minority-only caucuses.

[ponky]

GOI silly conservatives, it's a freaking caucus. Wanna know how many congressional member organizations there are in Congress? I just checked on lexisnexis.

Here's a sampling:

bike caucus
boating caucus
caucus on global road safety
caucus on hellenic issues
caucus on the netherlands
children's caucus
dairy farmer caucus
entertainment industries caucus
friends of animals caucus
friends of spain caucus
horse caucus
israel allies caucus
native american caucus
congressional PRAYER caucus
shipbuilding caucus
ski and snowboard caucus
songwriters caucus
friends of norway, paraguay, switzerland caucuses
house beef caucus

way to be selective about your examples dumbass tancredo...and the bad thing is, dumb people fall for it without doing more research

[gtownspur]

GOI silly conservatives, it's a freaking caucus. Wanna know how many congressional member organizations there are in Congress? I just checked on lexisnexis.

Here's a sampling:

bike caucus
boating caucus
caucus on global road safety
caucus on hellenic issues
caucus on the netherlands
children's caucus
dairy farmer caucus
entertainment industries caucus
friends of animals caucus
friends of spain caucus
horse caucus
israel allies caucus
native american caucus
congressional PRAYER caucus
shipbuilding caucus
ski and snowboard caucus
songwriters caucus
friends of norway, paraguay, switzerland caucuses
house beef caucus

way to be selective about your examples dumbass tancredo...and the bad thing is, dumb people fall for it without doing more research


You're totally right if he said caucuses by essence are bad. But he didn't slam caucuses or membership groups as a whole, becuase those groups don't discriminate on race.

Racial Caucuses do.

[ponky]

You're totally right if he said caucuses by essence are bad. But he didn't slam caucuses or membership groups as a whole, becuase those groups don't discriminate on race.

Racial Caucuses do.

except that the ehtnic and race-based caucuses don't restrict membership to members outside of that race/ethnicity. the congressional handbook has no restrictions as to who can and who can't join. also, he didn't target the religious "prayer" caucus, what's up with that? not everyone is into that kind of stuff and religious boundaries have no place in government...BUT, that doesn't irk me because it's a caucus and nothing more.

[Mr. Peabody]

except that the ehtnic and race-based caucuses don't restrict membership to members outside of that race/ethnicity. the congressional handbook has no restrictions as to who can and who can't join. also, he didn't target the religious "prayer" caucus, what's up with that? not everyone is into that kind of stuff and religious boundaries have no place in government...BUT, that doesn't irk me because it's a caucus and nothing more.

Evidently there is an unwritten rule...




Why Did a Major Capitol Hill Group Reject a Freshman Congressman?

Tuesday, January 23, 2007

By Brit Hume

A Matter of Color

When Tennessee Democratic Congressman Stephen Cohen replaced Harold Ford — who quit to run for senate — he wanted to establish a firm connection in the black community — since his district in Memphis is majority African-American.

Cohen said he would be honored to join the Congressional Black Caucus — although he never actually applied. Still — he's been rejected anyway — because he is white. Cohen tells politico.com, "I think they're real happy I'm not going to join."

A House aide says the bylaws of the caucus do not make race a prerequisite for membership. But Congressman William Clay, Jr. says, "It's an unwritten rule."

However, I think this unwritten rule is not found in every racial/ethnic caucus. The Hispanic caucus has non-Hispanic members from majority-Hispanic districts.

[gtownspur]

:lol It had everything to do with the topic of Republicans speaking out against minority-only caucuses, and Obamaphobia.


no, that's not what i read.

[clambake]

Why don't we make the KKK accept black members, then we can all stop this bickering.

[Spurminator]

Wow, that's a totally valid comparison.

[clambake]

I think it's valid. Republicans have a strange sense of what topics should be address. They claim their party to be based on values, but fail to practice them. A group is a group, all with agenda's. The groups that don't agree with each other go on the attack. It's one area that all can agree.

[Spurminator]

:wtf

I'm not sure what you're saying. All that I have is you think the Black and Hispanic Caucuses are comparable to the KKK. I'm confused, are you arguing FOR or AGAINST their existence in Congress?

[PixelPusher]

Why don't we make the KKK accept black members, then we can all stop this bickering.
"Whaaayyyyte Paaawwur!"
http://dvdmedia.ign.com/dvd/image/chappelle_041504_002_1082050726.jpg

[clambake]

whether they exist in or out of congress means nothing of conseqeunce(sp). They lack law making power. Why the uproar?

[ChumpDumper]

no, that's not what i read.:lmao Sorry, you've proven yourself to be extremely slow on the uptake. You aren't very smart, so no one can expect you to understand anything written here.

Ever.

[RobinsontoDuncan]

i agree with yoni on this one, i think the very premise that the african american community and the hispanic community need to present a unified voice is a flawed concept, that marginalizes these groups and is an essentialist argument. I mean the word hispanic for instince, doesn't even represent a single ethnic group, it's a broad term applied to almost all heritages from nations with spanish as a primary language.

[RobinsontoDuncan]

im not debating semantics here, im just saying that the guy who was lambasting a very logical argument with the "unified" voice thing is an idiot

[gtownspur]

:lmao Sorry, you've proven yourself to be extremely slow on the uptake. You aren't very smart, so no one can expect you to understand anything written here.

Ever.



Um, ok.

I guess everyone read Obamaphobia out of that article.


Seriously you're a dumbass.

Keep hanging yourself.

Literaly.

[gtownspur]

Cmon chump.

Don't be a little cake.

Where in the article did you draw Obamaphobia from?

[ChumpDumper]

You figured it out 40 minutes later, why are you asking me?

[gtownspur]

You figured it out 40 minutes later, why are you asking me?


I'm sorry, you're the only one here that thinks this is an Obama hit job concocted by the VRW conspiracy.

Be looney with yourself. :elephant

[ChumpDumper]

I'm sorry, you're the only one here that thinks this is an Obama hit job concocted by the VRW conspiracy.Not at all. It's no coincidence it's been dredged up again since Obama declared his candidacy.

You've proven to be pretty slow in this thread, so just wait. Someday you just might get it.

[xrayzebra]

The election is still two years away. Give it a rest, please!

[ChumpDumper]

We're just getting started.

[Nbadan]

Obama officially declared? Has Guiliani declared?

[ChumpDumper]

Obama announced an exploratory committee over a week ago.

[Extra Stout]

Having a minority caucus in and of itself should not be a problem. There are certain political issues that are important to a large majority within certain ethnic groups.

However, that is not the same thing as having a caucus that excludes members of Congress who are not of a certain race. That says, in effect, that unless a member of Congress is black, they have no stake in issues that affect black people.

Besides being exclusionary and possibly racist, that is rather self-defeating for a minority group.

[Nbadan]

Obama announced an exploratory committee over a week ago.

...but he hasn't officially announced..

Looks like the hispanic caucuse is trying to extinct itself with machismo...

Sanchez Accuses Democrat of Calling Her a 'Whore,' Resigns from Hispanic Group
By: Josephine Hearn
January 31, 2007 06:00 PM EST



Rep. Loretta Sanchez has quit the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, accusing the chairman, Rep. Joe Baca, of telling people she's a "whore."

Baca denied the charge.

In an interview with The Politico Wednesday, Sanchez, a California Democrat as is Baca, also cited concerns about whether Baca was properly elected Hispanic Caucus chairman in November and about his general attitude toward female lawmakers. The caucus represents 21 Hispanic Democrats in Congress.

"I'm not going to be a part of the CHC as long as Mr. Baca illegally holds the chair … I told them no. There's a big rift here," Sanchez said. "You treat the women like shit. I have no use for him."

In a statement to The Politico, Baca said Sanchez "has decided to resign from the Congressional Hispanic Caucus (CHC), and has chosen to air baseless statements. Let me be clear; her comments are categorically untrue."

The last time lawmakers withdrew from the Hispanic caucus was in the late 1990s when the group's Republican members left over partisan differences.

Politico (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0107/2572.html)

[ChumpDumper]

...but he hasn't officially announced..GMAFB.

[Nbadan]

Exploratory committee = 'lets see how much money I get'

[1369]

*Update to Dan's post*

Link (http://www.rawstory.com/showarticle.php?src=http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0107/2572.html)

A day after Rep. Loretta Sanchez resigned from the Hispanic Caucus charging its chairman had called her a “whore,’’ a pair of Democratic congresswomen from California spoke out in support of Sanchez’s sweeping complaints that chairman Joe Baca did not respect the women in the caucus.

In an increasingly bitter spat dividing the 21-member caucus, Sanchez also had charged that her follow California Democrat, Baca, had treated the women in the group “like shit.”

On Thursday, the two other California congresswomen bolstered Sanchez’s remarks.

Rep. Hilda L. Solis said she shared “Sanchez's sentiment about the lack of respect afforded to women members of the Hispanic Caucus.’’ And Loretta Sanchez’s sister, Rep. Linda Sanchez, said she supported her sibling’s decision to resign in protest of Baca’s alleged remark, which he has “categorically’’ denied.

On Thursday, Baca repeated his denial to Fox News, saying there was no rift within the caucus.

“There is none, absolutely none,’’ Baca said. “Everybody is working together."

In her statement Thursday, Linda Sanchez said she was “waiting to see if the Hispanic Caucus leadership will make good on its promise to be more fair and inclusive of its Latina members.’’

“Latinas are the fastest growing segment of the minority population,’’ she added, “and their perspective deserves to be represented, not denigrated."

If the Hispanic Caucus "is to be truly representative of the Latino community," Solis said, “it must give equal treatment to all its members, regardless of gender or seniority.”

Solis also reiterated concerns about the political arm of the caucus, BOLDPAC, which came under fire last year after Baca and his allies authorized political contributions to their relatives. Solis, the Sanchez sisters and three other lawmakers then withdrew from BOLDPAC.

“At a time when the public is crying out for a more ethical government,’’ Solis said, “we should be taking every step to avoid any appearance of preferential treatment for relatives.”

In an interview with The Politico Wednesday, Loretta Sanchez also cited concerns about whether Baca was properly elected Hispanic Caucus chairman in November and about his general attitude toward female lawmakers.

“I'm not going to be a part of the CHC as long as Mr. Baca illegally holds the chair … I told them no. There's a big rift here," Sanchez said. "You treat the women like shit. I have no use for him."

In a statement Wednesday, Baca said Sanchez "has decided to resign from the Congressional Hispanic Caucus…and has chosen to air baseless statements.’’

“Let me be clear,’’ he declared, “her comments are categorically untrue."

The last time lawmakers withdrew from the Hispanic caucus was in the late 1990s when its Republican members left over partisan differences.

Sanchez said she had rebuffed an approach earlier this year to contribute funds from her office budget to support the caucus’ shared staff, a requirement for all its members.

"I told them to take me off the list, take me off the Web site, take me off everything," Sanchez said.

She said she was surprised and insulted when she learned that Baca had made the disparaging personal comment about her to California Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez and other legislators last year.

Nunez "is a friend of mine. Did he think he wouldn't tell me?" Sanchez asked.

On Thursday, a spokesman for Nunez said the state speaker would have no comment on the flap. But Nunez said at a news conference in California that he did not recall the comment.

"I'm not going to confirm that," he said, according to a posting on the Los Angeles Times blog, Political Muscle. "I have no recollection of being at" a meeting where "anything disrespectful" was said of a Hispanic caucus member.

"Somebody is going to have to refresh my memory,’’ Nunez said. “I have no recollection."

Sanchez voted against Baca in the Hispanic Caucus election for chairman in November. Four other female lawmakers abstained from the vote, raising concerns about whether the election followed proper procedures.

The Sanchez withdrawal is another blow to Baca and his allies who have been trying to bring the caucus back together after a series of internal spats last year. Many of the more junior members and the women have butted heads with him and senior lawmakers.

In recent weeks, Rep. Xavier Becerra, Calif., a caucus member who serves in House leadership as assistant to Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., had been trying to persuade the six members to rejoin the political action committee, which is known as the Committee for Hispanic Causes/Building Our Leadership Diversity.

Four female lawmakers have written Baca asking that the caucus repeat his election as chairman because the earlier vote failed to use secret ballots, as required in the group's bylaws.

Sanchez and other female CHC members have repeatedly complained that Baca and some of his male colleagues do not accord them a high level of respect.

"There is a big rift. Hello? Do they not get this?" Sanchez said.