My must read of that day is "Rep. Mo Brooks: Dems wage ‘war on whites’," in Politico:
Alabama Republican Rep. Mo Brooks repeatedly accused Democrats of waging a "war on whites" in a pair of interviews Monday, saying they use the tactic in campaigns and on the issue of immigration. […]
"This is a part of the war on whites that’s being launched by the Democratic Party. And the way in which they’re launching this war is by claiming that whites hate everybody else," Brooks told Ingraham.
"That characterization’s a little out there," Ingraham responded. The conservative radio host said Democrats have played the race card as well as waging a war on women, but to Brooks’ comments she added, "I just think that phraseology might not be the best choice."
It’s not just "a little out there." It’s a really, really stupid characterization.
Is there an argument to say that Democrats focus on racial and gender groups, and that constitutes dividing people up based on superficialities? Yes, there is. One could argue that it is unproductive and facilitates deeper divisions within our society, but it is absolutely not a "war on whites."
Republicans complained when a DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz said advocacy of voter ID laws meant Republicans wanted a return to Jim Crow laws; they complain when a Democrat suggests Republicans hate minorities or poor people because they support welfare reform—and rightfully so. Those are moronic blanket statements, and so is Brooks’ insistence, in two different interviews, that Democrats are waging a war on white people.
Crazy thought—what if politicians stuck to making a substantive argument about policy. None of this rhetoric benefits your constituents, and it doesn’t help your campaign. Brooks has, however, emboldened the worst stereotypes about Republicans. If that’s what he was aiming for, nice work.