Wait wait...this is the GOP right?

Are you sure they weren't bragging about the white-only thing? I believe that's generally a check in the "pro" column on that side of the aisle.

From my understanding, it is pretty common for these things to be segregated, though in fairness, that is because of the exlusive history of the white's only clubs.

Yeah I am with APEACH here as I grew up in the South as well. The cotillion (man I had never even seen that word spelled before) I went to was for the Daughters of the Confederacy. I was asked to go by one of the Debutantes friends ans a buddy a mine was also asked to go. My friend and I decided if something should be done then it should be done right (he was a drama guy), so we went to the local costume shop and rented full confederate uniforms including a sword. It was a ball and I have to say the older men realy appreciated young guys like us in full uniform. We talk to a couple of the older guys, and they had fantastic uniforms which made ours seem distinctly "costumey". There's of course were made by their wives of themsleves. All in all it was a grand old time for all who were there. My experience was one in which this event was coming of age eveneing for the Daughters. It was a event which celebrated heritage and ancestors, along with some booze. Not to say that it wasn't there but there did not seem to be any left-over nostalgia for what the civil war stood for or meant. This ofcourse is just my take, if you see it different feel free to comment.

This is entirely too much fun.

Just add that on top of the fact that CooCoo is moving to neighborhood that until 2000 was restricted to Whites Only (which I'm pretty sure is unconstitutional, unless things have changed since I took Land Use) and we have the makings of more popcorn moments to enjoy.

The problem is not "southern culture" but rather the racist or anti-semitic or just generally bigoted nature of restricted access clubs -- and neighborhoods.

Now, although those who belong to such organizations will be among the first to remind you that they are "private" clubs, with membership established by a "Gentlemen's Agreement," and therefore exempt from any form of government oversight -- city, county, state or federal -- it is the means by which this restriction is imposed that most of us find objectionable.

And, we can be certain that there will be those who will be equally quick to remind us that there are all black or all Jewish organizations that restrict membership as well. However, the detail that will be left out is that many, if not all, of these organizations were created to fill a need for those who wanted to belong to an organization similar to the restrictive one. So yes, there are clubs and organizations that cater to high-society minded blacks, Asians, Jews and others.

The problem for the Republican party is rooted in its embrace of the "southern strategy" -- not really about the south, but about maintaining those aspects of racist and anti-semitic culture (neither of which is relegated to just the south) that seek to exclude persons who are not part of the white, Anglo-Saxon Protestant community.

Merely resigning one's membership in a restrictive club is not interchangeable for transforming a political party into one that is far more inclusive to the society we live in as a whole.

I'm from SC and this is not uncommon. In fact I think one man on the list is the son of a former Democratic Lt. Governor.

Lorne, your argument was widely used during the days of segregation to allow so-called "private" groups, clubs, etc. to refuse admittance to blacks. The problem with it now as it was then is that such organizations receive water, electricity (among other services) from cities to which blacks, among others, pay taxes. So you're arguing that persons who help fund these groups can be legally barred by them. Doesn't make much sense, does it?