← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Centinel
Thread ID: 12012 | Posts: 21 | Started: 2004-01-24
2004-01-24 01:06 | User Profile
[url]http://www.newsday.com/news/politics/wire/sns-ap-duke-congress,0,4663934,print.story?coll=sns-ap-politics-headlines[/url]
David Duke Considering Run for Congress
By CAIN BURDEAU Associated Press Writer
January 23, 2004, 5:51 PM EST
NEW ORLEANS -- Former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke, in federal prison after pleading guilty to mail and tax fraud, is considering a run for Congress when he is released this year, his secretary said Friday.
Roy Armstrong said Duke is considering entering the race for the seat of Republican Rep. David Vitter. In 1999, Duke finished third in the primary for that seat.
Armstrong said Duke could be released to a halfway house in mid-April, a year after he began his prison term.
"He was skeptical that he would be able to raise the money to run an effective campaign in time, but he said he would consider his options," Armstrong said in an interview with The Associated Press.
Duke, whose telephone privileges are limited, could not be reached for comment.
The seat probably will be open because Vitter has said he is running for U.S. Senate.
Duke would not be the first convicted felon to run for federal office. For example, James Traficant, a former Ohio congressman convicted of bribery and racketeering charges, unsuccessfully ran for a House seat from prison in 2002.
The plea agreement Duke signed in 2002 did not restrict his right to run for office, U.S. Attorney Jim Letten said.
Duke spent one term in the Louisiana House in the late 1980s, but lost elections for the U.S. Senate in 1990 and governor in 1991.
In his federal trial, Duke was accused of bilking supporters by representing himself as being in dire financial straits while actually living extravagantly. Duke denied the accusations.
2004-01-24 02:02 | User Profile
Debbie DayCareCenter: "Duke?? Golly gee! He m-m-might return America to being a White r-r-r-republic!"
Sally ShoppingMall: "Right, Debster! America is a melting-pot, a democracy, and a really nifty rainbow of Blacks, Browns, queers and feminists. Just recall how our Founders embraced Blacks, queers and feminism!"
Do you know a Debbie or a Sally? I do...
:king: :king: :king:
2004-01-24 07:57 | User Profile
Mr. Duke's courage is admirable, but he's wasting his time. Even if he were by some miracle elected to Congress, he wouldn't be able to make any difference.
There is no longer any possibility of changing the System by working through the System. It simply will not happen.
2004-01-24 16:59 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Angler]Mr. Duke's courage is admirable, but he's wasting his time. Even if he were by some miracle elected to Congress, he wouldn't be able to make any difference.
There is no longer any possibility of changing the System by working through the System. It simply will not happen.[/QUOTE]
Sorry but I must agree. Remember Jefferson: a little violence here and there is what is needed. Daniel Shays, where are you?
2004-01-24 19:01 | User Profile
Duke would never be elected.
Even if he won the most votes.
You get the idea....
-Jay
2004-01-24 22:35 | User Profile
I do think he could get elected, and I think it would make a huge difference. White nationalism on the ballot or not - stop your pessimistic, self-pitying bitching and do something instead of being such a grim, Christianized sourpuss.
2004-01-24 23:47 | User Profile
"There is no longer any possibility of changing the System by working through the System. It simply will not happen."
While you may well be correct, what other option is there? Violent revolution. That option has one flaw; we're not ready to win just yet. David Duke's election to Congress (or even making another credible run) will help to draw attention to our point of view and serve to inspire people, particularly the young, who may be hostile to Political Correctness, but unsure how to channel those vague feelings. Once we build up a numerically sufficient core of such people, then we can consider the option of no longer feeling constrained by the law. Until such time as victory seems a plausible outcome, we are required to do things legally. And that means doing things like running David Duke for Congress....
2004-01-25 18:40 | User Profile
Kevin,
Sadly, David Duke has less chance of getting elected to Congress than Saddam Hussein. That's equally true for any other openly pro-White figure. And even if such a figure did run, he would get no serious media coverage.
As for breaking the law, of course I am not going to advocate such actions on a public forum that's probably being monitored by federal pigs. However, it can be discussed hypothetically...
There will never be enough militant pro-Whites in the US to defy ZOG openly. But if even a tiny group of, say, ten individuals spread across the country were to do their best imitations of the "Malvo and Mohammed" duo -- with the exception of targeting key ZOG personnel instead of random innocent people -- they could wreak sheer havoc on the System. Hell, even a single person could do a lot of damage if he played his cards right. If two black goofballs can elude a literal army of ZOG agents for weeks, then imagine what one or more intelligent, well-prepared Whites could do through a stealthy "guerrilla" approach. Again, I'm not saying that someone should do these things; I'm only saying that it would be possible.
Honestly, I am not a fan of violence. I tend to believe that violence should only be used in defense of life, liberty, or valuable property. But there are other ways of screwing up the ZOG machinery -- some legal, most not -- that don't involve violence against people. Anyone can use a bit of ingenuity to come up with them. If someone were to use such nonviolent methods and then be threatened with arrest or physical harm, then the option of using force would still be available.
ZOG is developing weapons and surveillance technology at a frightening rate. In about 10-20 years, ZOG will be so powerful that even the most determined guerrilla resistance might be futile. Will it be possible to make meaningful changes to the System by staying within legal boundaries -- i.e., by obeying the Jew -- before it's too late? That's the main question in my mind.
2004-01-25 23:06 | User Profile
"Sadly, David Duke has less chance of getting elected to Congress than Saddam Hussein. That's equally true for any other openly pro-White figure. And even if such a figure did run, he would get no serious media coverage."
Hmmm, well, David Duke DID get 44% of the vote in a U.S. Senate race against incument Democrat J. Bennet Johnson (who received 53%) and the following year, he ousted the incumbent Republican governor of Louisiana (by relegating him to 3rd place in the first round of voting) and then carrying 39.5% in the run-off. In 1990, he got over 65% of the White vote, and over 60% of the White vote in 1991. He received an enormous amount of national press attention during these two runs. Duke's strength was augmented by the recession of that period, which was not nearly so deep as the present one....
Also, when Duke was elected, with 51% of the vote, to the Louisiana state house in 1989, it was from a district within the congressional district he's planning to run in (he's also served for several years as a Republican Party Parish Chairman within that same district). It seems that a WN who got 44% of the vote in a statewide race should have a shot at carrying one of the Whitest and most conservative congressional districts in that state.
"As for breaking the law, of course I am not going to advocate such actions on a public forum that's probably being monitored by federal pigs. However, it can be discussed hypothetically..."
Obviously, all such discussions contain an element of the hypothetical. I'm certainly not advocating anyone do anything illegal, nor would it be rational for anyone to interpret such discussions as these as being advocacy of such activities on the part of any of its participants. When people are faced with a dictatorship they can't influence through any legal means, its simply natural they will choose to hypothetically discuss extra-legal methods of gaining the influence we are constantly told, by official representatives of that same dictatorship, is our due by virtue of our citizenship. If they don't want us too seek power, and to discuss the only ways to realistically do so, which happen to be illegal, then it behooves the powers that be to cease blathering on about "democracy." Of course, it also behooves the powers that be that they would go and hang themselves, due to their unbearable shame....
"There will never be enough militant pro-Whites in the US to defy ZOG openly."
What portion of the society do you think it would take? If 10% of White Americans accepted the basic WN premises, and aided a more militant 2% of the White population that actually took up arms, I'm not at all certain the state could survive such an onslaught. One eighth of American Whites does not strikes me as an unobtainable goal (and there must, after all, be some reason the powers that be are so interested in limiting our efforts at activism via legalistic harassment, intimidation and the like). I think we're already there, in fact, we just haven't heated these people up to a sufficient level for them to act. We probably can't. We'll just have to leave that to the Black and Mexican murdering gang rapists, soon to be infesting upper New England and the Great Plains just as much as they presently do New Jersey and southern California, nationwide mass poverty & unemployment, the ever-growing and over-reaching arrogance of the Jews and their homosexual and Feminist allies, and other such myriad blessings of multiculturalism, to get them riled up for us, as seems almost inevitable to occur. I can easiy envision the American regime going the same way as Romania's Nicolae Ceaucescu back in '89. Once the government has been swept away, the Mexicans will probably be smart enough to scamper back over onto the safe side of the border. The Jews will have left weeks earlier, along with many/most of the Asians. It will mainly be the Blacks, and those elements which seek to champion them, that will require a relatively brief war of racial cleansing in order to deal with....I'm not trying to encourage complacency, but simply suggesting that there may well be many historical trends working in our favor, i.e. it may not be quite so bleak for our future as the Jews wish us all despair in it being.
"ZOG is developing weapons and surveillance technology at a frightening rate. In about 10-20 years, ZOG will be so powerful that even the most determined guerrilla resistance might be futile. Will it be possible to make meaningful changes to the System by staying within legal boundaries -- i.e., by obeying the Jew -- before it's too late? That's the main question in my mind."
Its certainly a question worthy of great consideration. With the rise of Russian/White nationalist, anti-Semitic political parties in Russia (not to mention the rise of similar parties in central and western Europe), and President Vladimir Putin's applauding of the remarks of Malysian Prime Minister Mohammed Mahatir, its possible we may be able to receive substantial international support in the not-too-distant future, especially if the Russians see a Jew-dominated USA as leading to their doom (which would be a reasonable conclusion for them to reach).
2004-01-26 00:27 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Angler]Mr. Duke's courage is admirable, but he's wasting his time. Even if he were by some miracle elected to Congress, he wouldn't be able to make any difference.[/QUOTE]
Yes, but think of all the media coverage that he would generate - not just for himself, but for white nationalism in general.
Besides, I really do think he would have a chance to win a Louisiana senatorial seat. Just think how nuts the kosher media would go if that happened! The last time I remember the media flipped its lid in any similar way was when Pat Buchanan won the New Hampshire primary in 1996. The European media was in an absolute uproar in 2002 when Le Pen defeated a communist in a major upset.
2004-01-26 00:42 | User Profile
Duke won't get elected because our people are probably the biggest bunch of jackasses to ever embarrass a few moments in time.
Forget insurrection. There is nothing zog would love more than a little dust up with nationalists. It would benefit the zog so much they may false flag it. How does one imagine that terrorism by nationalists would do any good?
What we are doing right now is all we can do. Educating our people to have a sense of themselves as a group with interests that need protecting. That is all we can do.
We must let the multicults themselves bring the system down through overspending, military over-extending, third world revolts, and whatever else the gods throw in their path.
If nothing else, eventually nature will throw up a crises and Amerikwa the damned won't be able to meet it because she is a house divided against herself. That is when we break off a seperatist Republic. America as we have known her is dead.
2004-01-26 00:54 | User Profile
[QUOTE=AntiYuppie]I disagree. Even if David Duke were unable to affect a change in legislation, having him hold Federal Office would give somebody with our views a visible platform and a daily sounding board. It would put the views espoused on this board into the forefront - labelled "fringe" and demonized by the mass media, naturally, but nevertheless far more visible than we are now. And that just may be enough to win the hearts and minds of the lukewarm.[/QUOTE] Well, it certainly couldn't do any harm to have Duke in Congress -- it's pretty clear that having him on Capitol Hill would be better than having him in prison. But I just can't help being extremely pessimistic about the effects he would have on any level, whether on actual legislation or the sentiments of the general population.
Take Ron Paul of Texas as an example. As you probably know, he is very much a libertarian and a strict Constitutionist who is affiliated with the Republican Party in name only. He opposes taxpayer aid to Israel, gun control, abortion "rights", "pre-emptive" wars, much federal taxation and welfare -- the works. He's truly a great man, even if he isn't racially conscious (at least not openly) like we are on this board. But in spite of Dr. Paul's great courage and integrity, I don't think most Americans even know who he is. He's only one man out of more than 500 in the House of Reps. What difference has he been able to make in turning the tide in the US toward libertarianism, his excellent efforts notwithstanding? It would very likely be the same situation with David Duke if he were by some freak chance elected to the House.
2004-01-26 01:04 | User Profile
Well let me tell ya, I was just up there this last Thanksgiving and David Duke could very well win a house seat running out of the central/north parishes.
We need to exploit every opportunity available to us and Duke campaigning for Congress would certainly have all of my support. I think it is a wonderful idea.
2004-01-26 01:38 | User Profile
Forget insurrection. There is nothing zog would love more than a little dust up with nationalists. It would benefit the zog so much they may false flag it. How does one imagine that terrorism by nationalists would do any good?
ZOG is terrified of an insurrection. That's why they keep up their relentless efforts to ban firearms. Schumer, Feinstein, Waxman, Boxer, and all the rest are certainly not interested in banning guns for reasons of public safety. The Jews are interested in having a monopoly on force through their control of the government. In 10-20 years they'll very likely have it.
If an insurrection of any substance does occur (or ZOG, as you say, "false flags" one) -- say, a couple of fairly high-profile public figures are sniped -- then the imposition of martial law will likely result, and gun confiscation efforts might even be carried out. If anything can awaken sleeping Whites to the reality that "their" government does not answer to them, that would do it. Of course, they still might not make the "Jewish connection."
I guess it's all a major gamble regardless of what is or isn't done by Whites. We can continue to spread the word as we are currently doing while waiting for ZOG's empire to collapse under the weight of its own stupidity. That is quite possibly still the best option at this point, but it could allow ZOG enough time to gain even more legal and technological power instead. That's the thought I can't get out of my head. Since I do science for a living and keep up with many developments, I know for an absolute fact that some very frightening technology for our enslavement is being continually developed. At the very least, we should all stay aware of it and be prepared to defend ourselves (gas mask, rifle, etc.).
2004-01-26 01:40 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Texas Dissident]Well let me tell ya, I was just up there this last Thanksgiving and David Duke could very well win a house seat running out of the central/north parishes.
We need to exploit every opportunity available to us and Duke campaigning for Congress would certainly have all of my support. I think it is a wonderful idea.[/QUOTE] Something else just occurred to me: Is Duke even eligible to run? He is now a convicted felon. Aren't there laws against him holding office?
2004-01-26 18:33 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Angler]Something else just occurred to me: Is Duke even eligible to run? He is now a convicted felon. Aren't there laws against him holding office?[/QUOTE]
To be honest Angler, I don't know.
2004-01-26 23:30 | User Profile
"Something else just occurred to me: Is Duke even eligible to run? He is now a convicted felon. Aren't there laws against him holding office?"
There is no law against a felon holding federal office. Some states ban felons from holding state office, but generally the only ban is on the felon voting in electons his or herself.
2004-01-27 01:36 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Angler]Well, it certainly couldn't do any harm to have Duke in Congress -- it's pretty clear that having him on Capitol Hill would be better than having him in prison. But I just can't help being extremely pessimistic about the effects he would have on any level, whether on actual legislation or the sentiments of the general population.
Take Ron Paul of Texas as an example. As you probably know, he is very much a libertarian and a strict Constitutionist who is affiliated with the Republican Party in name only. He opposes taxpayer aid to Israel, gun control, abortion "rights", "pre-emptive" wars, much federal taxation and welfare -- the works. He's truly a great man, even if he isn't racially conscious (at least not openly) like we are on this board. But in spite of Dr. Paul's great courage and integrity, I don't think most Americans even know who he is. He's only one man out of more than 500 in the House of Reps. What difference has he been able to make in turning the tide in the US toward libertarianism, his excellent efforts notwithstanding? It would very likely be the same situation with David Duke if he were by some freak chance elected to the House.[/QUOTE] Its interesting first that you have such an admiration for Ron Raul and strict Constitutionalist views. I sense some Paleocon sentiment ;)
I tend to agree somewhat with your assessment of Duke's campaign for the House though. I'm not much of a student of revolutionary theory, but being a member of a very small minority sitting in a legislature, let alone Congress, doesn't seem to be a particular efficacious way of building power. It could give him a platform, but I'm not sure Duke did anything particular noteworthy in the LA House, from a propoganda standpoint. The comments about segregated blood supplies are the sort of thing the media picked up on.
There is a school of revolutionary thought that says a movement may do better starting in the provinces, building up a base. If Duke is going to be a real success, by that token, you'd think he'd want to stay in Louisiana, maybe running for mayor of Metarie for instance as the most visible embodiment of this strategy. Of course being are representative could be useful along these lines perhaps, if he focuses his attention on this area. I'm not sure though for what reason, but he never seemedto have too much success along these lines in the past though.
There's another thing that makes me suspicious about Duke and a little more pessimistic about his chances - his past record in selling the list of his campaign donors. That may be comon in politics as Duke said. However Duke by his own admission is no ordinary politician, and correspondingly his campaign is no ordinary campaign, which for some reason he didn't realize.
That past record of his has got to make it harder for him to raise money.
2004-01-27 07:31 | User Profile
Well I'll say this, the more I've learned and read from David Duke the more I've grown to really like the guy, devil be damned. And to be consistent with my defense of Buchanan by overlooking what he did wrong, I'm not going to judge negatively Mr. Duke by any mistakes he may have made along the way. He's had a very tough row to hoe and I don't think there are too many of us who know what it's like trying to win a political office on any level when the entire American establishment is focused on you with both guns blazing. I can only imagine the stress and pressure only to end up so far where he's at now in federal prison.
I just can't see how his running for elected office in any way, shape or form hurts the greater cause.
2004-01-27 09:32 | User Profile
Just imagine Duke making special order speeches on C-Span:
"Tonight, Mr. Speaker, I want to talk about a subject considered utterly forbidden for discussion in the House in recent decades. I feel that it is my solemn duty to call to the attention of the American people the mortal threat posed to our nation by the insidious influence of Organized Jewry....."
Such a prospect can only be to the good.
2004-01-27 10:21 | User Profile
[QUOTE]David Duke should have instead concentrated on winning a Senate Seat in Louisiana. Ten years ago he would have had a chance, today, even many of his potential supporters are uneasy about voting for a (right or wrong) convicted fellon. Sure, anything Duke has done wrong probably pales in comparison to what went on daily in the Clinton administration, but it still gives his enemies more ammo than Duke can afford.[/QUOTE]
Buddy,you don't know Louisiana politics! If being a crook or convicted felon disqualified you from holding office, [I]nobody [/I] would be in charge there.