For the GOP to not condemn Kern is to condone her actions.
Commentary Sen. Andrew Rice
Being the Democratic nominee for United States Senate in 2008, when then-candidate Barack Obama was the nominee for president, was an eye-opening experience.
Fighting back tears amid allegations of racism and sexism, State Rep.
Sally Kern, R-Oklahoma City, gave an emotional explanation Friday at the
High Noon Club of her April 27 controversial statements regarding women
and people of color.
Letters to the Editor Tom Kovach
Being an elected official, I have a responsibility to represent all my constituents, and to be mindful of how I speak affects them.
Letters to the Editor Lee Agnew
Regarding Clifton Adcock’s “Kern: ‘I am not a racist,’” April 29,
okgazette.com: I am convinced that state Rep. Sally Kern, R-Oklahoma
City, meant what she said the first time, and that she still believes it
in her heart.
In Sally Kern’s forthcoming tome, the Republican lawmaker describes bloggers, activists and media casting verbal stones.
News Clifton Adcock
Few people in Oklahoma politics are as polarizing as state Rep. Sally
Kern. Beloved by some, reviled by others, the preacher’s wife,
schoolteacher, grandmother and state representative has made national
headlines more than once.
Commentary Scott Jones
My first experience of Rep. Sally Kern was in 2005 when she was leading the effort to get books she perceived as having a gay theme banned from public libraries in Oklahoma.
CFN Gazette staff
While state Rep. Sally Kern, R-Oklahoma City, recently called on
embattled U.S. Rep. Anthony Weiner to step down, a local group called
for her own resignation the same day.
Letters to the Editor Nathaniel Batchelder
The Rev. Steve Kern’s Commentary (“Counterpoint: Soul concern,” June 22, Oklahoma Gazette) restates
the belief shared by his wife, Rep. Sally Kern, that homosexuality is
the sin that will bring down America for having displeased God.
Letters to the Editor Rob Bennett
As a longtime reader, I realize you have to post letters from both sides of an argument, but when one side is clearly ignorant, why put it in your publication?