Did New House Majority Whip Speak at White Supremacist Conference?

Lamar White, Jr. did some research on Stormfront, the notorious website for white supremacists and neo-Nazis, and has uncovered evidence that Rep. Steve Scalise, the new Republican House Majority Whip (the #3 position) spoke at a white supremacist conference in 2002. Specifically, multiple forum posts from attendees praising him for the talk he gave there.

But on that weekend in May, Scalise was reportedly armed with a microphone at the Landmark Best Western in Metairie and talking about tax policy to an international convention… of white supremacists and neo-Nazis. According to a commenter who used the name “Alsace Hebert,” Steve Scalise was a highlight of the convention. Quoting:

EURO’s recent national convention held in the greater New Orleans area was a convergence of ideas represented by Americans from diverse geographical regions like California, Texas, New Jersey and the Carolina’s. This indicates that concerns held are pervasive in every sovereign state and Republic alike, within an increasingly diminishing view of where America stands on individual liberty for whites.

In addition to plans to implement tactical strategies that were discussed, the meeting was productive locally as State Representative, Steve Scalise, discussed ways to oversee gross mismanagement of tax revenue or “slush funds” that have little or no accountability.

Representative Scalise brought into sharp focus the dire circumstances pervasive in many important, under-funded needs of the community at the expense of graft within the Housing and Urban Development Fund, an apparent give-away to a selective group based on race.

EURO is the European-American Unity and Rights Organization, a group that was headed by former KKK grand wizard David Duke. Another post from Hebert in the Stormfront forums:

It was just announced that Rep. Steve Scalise, R-Jefferson will enter the race in the 1st Congressional District. Those that attended the EURO conference in New Orleans will recall that Scalise was a speaker, offering his support for issues that are of concern to us.

I suppose if Duke does not make the election for whatever reason, this gentleman would be a good alternative.

I wonder if the major media will even bother asking Scalise about this.

"They're still trying to stop all their male employees from harassing and molesting female employees ..."

Fox News Allows Judge Jeanine to ..."
"I think her title would be "constantly constipated-looking hack.""

Fox News Allows Judge Jeanine to ..."
"It's as if millions of ethics regulations all cried out at once."

Looks Like Flynn Has Flipped on ..."
"King David got his Hittite buddy's wife pregnant and then sent him out to be ..."

Pastor: Moore Liked Young Girls Because ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • Alverant

    I remember during the 08 presidential campaign a big deal was made about Obama’s former pastor. I wonder if those same people will be as critical of Lemar Whtie Jr.

  • themadtapper

    Actually he’s confirmed that he did in fact speak there, but says he was just drumming up support for his own policies rather than supporting theirs. Basically he’s claiming he was pandering to racists rather than supporting racists, as if that’s somehow better.

    In a written statement issued by the Republican leader’s office, the congressman’s spokesperson said, “Throughout his career in public service, Mr. Scalise has spoken to hundreds of different groups with a broad range of viewpoints,” said Moira Bagley, Scalise’s spokesperson. “In every case, he was building support for his policies, not the other way around. In 2002, he made himself available to anyone who wanted to hear his proposal to eliminate slush funds that wasted millions of taxpayer dollars as well as his opposition to a proposed tax increase on middle-class families.”

    The statement added, “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.”

  • blf

    I wonder if the major media will even bother asking Scalise about this.

    They have, If you’re a politician and your chummy past with neo-Nazis resurfaces, don’t worry. Ask Ron Paul (The Grauniad). When discusssing the stooopidity of Scalise’s excuses (see @2), points out:

    Second of all, it’s pretty hard to miss the cultural significance of David Duke, who confirmed that two of his infamous “longtime associates” personally invited Scalise. There weren’t a lot of out-and-proud KKK Grand Wizards who ran for governor of Louisiana, president of the United States and US Senator (twice!) in the 1990s. Jokes about him abounded on late night comedy shows well into the following decade — Letterman, Leno and even on Saturday Night Live. And Scalise was a Republican in Louisiana [emphasis in original]. Duke’s significance wasn’t even lost on the basketball courts at my southern high school — hardly the most political of places — where a redneck spotted out of his usual camouflage pants and in khakis on class picture day might get called “David Duke”.

  • Alverant

    If your policies are supported by white supremacists maybe you should reconsider your policies.

  • http://en.uncyclopedia.co/wiki/User:Modusoperandi Modusoperandi

    Look, these things happen. I think we can all agree that at one time or another we’ve all given a speech at white supremacist conference.

  • celcus

    His constituents could care less. This is virtually the same district that elected David Duke to the State Legislature, and supported his bid for Governor in the 90’s.

    Essentially you have the unseemly White Supremacists believing minorities are racially inferior and need to be put in their place (hate group), and the real Merkin “tea party” type believing minorities are morally inferior and deserve to be put in their place (morally upright). Can’t see much daylight there other than one openly uses the N word the other calls them “democrats”.

  • hunter

    Yeah, story’s in WaPo.

    And of course, he didn’t know anything about the group when he spoke to them.

  • anubisprime

    So a ‘devoted Catholic’ then…Explains it all…

    It apparently helps sooth the ethical morality of quite a few politicians…as well as the odd pope here and there!

  • dan4

    @1: Uh, Lamar White, Jr. is not the focus of the story, but the guy who BROKE it. Why should people be “critical” of him?

  • Nick Gotts

    I would suggest that we forgive the past, and let the man start with a clean sheet – but he’d probably just cut eyeholes in it.

  • dan4

    @4: “Guilt by association,” and now, thanks to Alverant, “guilt by support (as in “support” of policies).”

  • http://en.uncyclopedia.co/wiki/User:Modusoperandi Modusoperandi

    dan4, obviously. Just because the Neo-Nazies support policies that hurt the poor, black and immigrants doesn’t mean that the GOP’s policies of hurting the poor, black and immigrants are wrong.

  • matty1

    dan4, obviously. Just because the Neo-Nazies support policies that hurt the poor, black and immigrants doesn’t mean that the GOP’s policies of hurting the poor, black and immigrants are wrong.

    You mean it’s just a coincidence?

  • busterggi

    Modus @5. – I have never spoken in front of a group of Republicans or Libertarians in my life.

  • Michael Heath

    I am not comfortable condemning anyone merely for speaking to an anti-humanist group. If one is truly a free-speech advocate, I think there needs to be some context that justifies such criticisms, such as the speaker’s content promoting the repellant group’s objectives, or a benign speech that provides advances the group’s objectives.

    Reactionary condemnations comes across as disgustingly authoritarian, especially conservative Christians who I think predominately do it here in the U.S.; e.g., tying Barack Obama to a couple of singular [defensible] diatribes from Jeremiah Wright in a way that suppresses criticism of abhorrent U.S. behavior. However, from my narrow perspective, this effort to suppress speech is increasingly coming from a left wing who is increasingly eager to do so.

    From my perspective we still suffer from far too little speech, especially the type of speech that credibly challenges our preconceptions. Couple that with my perception that it’s far more heroic to work on reforming repellant groups associated with one’s tribe than it is to merely disassociate with such groups – if there’s confidence such groups will remain influential.