John Abarr, Former Ku Klux Klansman, Running For Congress in Montana To ‘Save The White Race’

John AbarrChristine Roberts writes in the New York Daily News:

A former organizer for the Ku Klux Klan announced Wednesday that he will run as a Republican for Montana’s U.S. House seat.

John Abarr, 41, says he wants to run in response to the election of the America’s first black President in effort to “save the white race.”

“I am running to draw attention to the fact that white people are becoming a minority and losing our political power and way of life,” he said.

Abarr is running on a platform of legalizing marijuana, increasing mental health programs, keeping abortion legal and abolishing the death penalty.

For more information, see original article.

, , , , , ,

39 Responses to John Abarr, Former Ku Klux Klansman, Running For Congress in Montana To ‘Save The White Race’

  1. Anonymous June 18, 2011 at 5:58 pm #

    “Abarr is running on a platform of legalizing marijuana, increasing mental health programs, keeping abortion legal and abolishing the death penalty”.

    Pretty progressive for an obvious racist Republican. Weird.

  2. GoodDoktorBad June 18, 2011 at 1:58 pm #

    “Abarr is running on a platform of legalizing marijuana, increasing mental health programs, keeping abortion legal and abolishing the death penalty”.

    Pretty progressive for an obvious racist Republican. Weird.

    • Narwhalnecropsy June 18, 2011 at 2:17 pm #

      Exactly my thoughts. Strange indeed.

    • Blah June 18, 2011 at 4:12 pm #

      what if racialism had nothing to do with being progressive nor reactionary? interesting indeed.

      • Chaorder Gradient June 18, 2011 at 5:32 pm #

        but will it be seen that way by the masses and media…?

      • GoodDoktorBad June 18, 2011 at 8:03 pm #

        Apparently there is no clear-cut rule book. Of course no politician can be trusted at their word anyway. All too often they promise one thing and do the opposite. 

        Which almost makes the question sort of irrelevant. lol

        • SF2K01 June 19, 2011 at 6:29 am #

          I think it’s just part of his strategy. If racism is number one on his priority list, then he’ll side with whatever it takes to get him popular. Eventually people will get suckered in and say, “Sure he’s racist, but that’s not so bad because he’s for so many good things” etc. His agenda is mostly likely to simply spread racism with the a new kind of racist, i.e. one that appeals to a broad audience.

        • SF2K01 June 19, 2011 at 6:29 am #

          I think it’s just part of his strategy. If racism is number one on his priority list, then he’ll side with whatever it takes to get him popular. Eventually people will get suckered in and say, “Sure he’s racist, but that’s not so bad because he’s for so many good things” etc. His agenda is mostly likely to simply spread racism with the a new kind of racist, i.e. one that appeals to a broad audience.

        • SF2K01 June 19, 2011 at 6:29 am #

          I think it’s just part of his strategy. If racism is number one on his priority list, then he’ll side with whatever it takes to get him popular. Eventually people will get suckered in and say, “Sure he’s racist, but that’s not so bad because he’s for so many good things” etc. His agenda is mostly likely to simply spread racism with the a new kind of racist, i.e. one that appeals to a broad audience.

  3. Narwhalnecropsy June 18, 2011 at 6:17 pm #

    Exactly my thoughts. Strange indeed.

  4. TheBiz June 18, 2011 at 6:20 pm #

    This guy is not news worthy.
    Especially for this site.

  5. TheBiz June 18, 2011 at 2:20 pm #

    This guy is not news worthy.
    Especially for this site.

  6. Anonymous June 18, 2011 at 6:29 pm #

    Legalizing cannabis will draw attention to the fact that white people are a minority? If you say so.

  7. JoiquimCouteau June 18, 2011 at 2:29 pm #

    Legalizing cannabis will draw attention to the fact that white people are a minority? If you say so.

  8. jackedu317 June 18, 2011 at 7:05 pm #

    the sad part is he might actually get some votes… he wants people stoned, on prozac, killing babies but not criminals… i’m confused…

  9. jackedu317 June 18, 2011 at 7:05 pm #

    the sad part is he might actually get some votes… he wants people stoned, on prozac, killing babies but not criminals… i’m confused…

  10. jackedu317 June 18, 2011 at 3:05 pm #

    the sad part is he might actually get some votes… he wants people stoned, on prozac, killing babies but not criminals… i’m confused…

  11. Anarchy Wolf June 18, 2011 at 7:07 pm #

    What a very strange basket. Full of progressive ideals and also racism…

  12. Anarchy Pony June 18, 2011 at 3:07 pm #

    What a very strange basket. Full of progressive ideals and also racism…

  13. JoJoDancer June 18, 2011 at 7:44 pm #

    There are plenty of dope-smoking, psychiatrist-boosting, baby-killing, criminal-defending racists out there.  Life is not some media cartoon!  As for the generic progressive, how many die-hard liberals do you know who live among high concentrations of non-white minorities? 

    Most of my staunch liberal friends are educated and fairly wealthy–so they live with other educated whites in suburban or upper class urban neighborhoods.  So it only makes sense that a few progressives would finally come out of their operationally racist closets. (I’m half-joking, man, calm down…)

    Besides, only thoughtless people with no spine toe the party line to the point that all of their views line up on a homogeneous platform.  That said, I don’t trust a rehabilitated Klansman anymore than I trust a former affiliate of the Weatherman Underground.

  14. TennesseeCyberian June 18, 2011 at 3:44 pm #

    There are plenty of dope-smoking, psychiatrist-boosting, baby-killing, criminal-defending racists out there.  Life is not some media cartoon!  As for the generic progressive, how many die-hard liberals do you know who live among high concentrations of non-white minorities? 

    Most of my staunch liberal friends are educated and fairly wealthy–so they live with other educated whites in suburban or upper class urban neighborhoods.  So it only makes sense that a few progressives would finally come out of their operationally racist closets. (I’m half-joking, man, calm down…)

    Besides, only thoughtless people with no spine toe the party line to the point that all of their views line up on a homogeneous platform.  That said, I don’t trust a rehabilitated Klansman anymore than I trust a former affiliate of the Weatherman Underground.

    • ArgosyJones June 18, 2011 at 4:19 pm #

      Well said.  

    • Nuggett June 22, 2011 at 1:35 pm #

      This guy doesn’t fit the profile of the typical upper class suburbanite with racist proclivities.  

      The typical upper class suburbanite would rather die than admit affiliation with the KKK because it would mar their high maintenance cloak of egalitarianism.  

      I may sound like a raging conservative just there, but as a moderate democrat, I can’t stomach the elite/ rich Democrats who cling to their ivory towers and idealism.  In my experience, they exhibit more natural, pent up racism in their thoughts towards american blacks than your average Joe Plumber who is trying to seem racist just to fit the status quo.  

      As for your homogeneous platform comment, I guess I am one of those thoughtless, spineless people.  No party is perfect, and I have routinely disagreed and agreed with many politicians across party lines.  My leanings are as homogeneous as they come.  To Democrats I seem like a Democrat, and to Republicans, a good ole’ boy.  In fact, if dwelling too long in conversation, people in both parties I’ve spoken with would eventually think I belong to the opposite party, simply because I entertain their ideas and hold back heart-felt emotion on the issues.

      This doesn’t mean I have no opinions.  More accurately, it means I can empathize with the oft overzealous opinions of both parties with no emotional baggage and even discuss their respective ideas with zeal and passion, regardless of my definitive thoughts on the matters, if they even yet exist.  

      The truth is, both parties have good intentions.  The extreme positions are always less balanced and more conspiratorial in nature.  The more towards the center you are, the more you understand both parties and their concerns.  And, when the time comes for you to put your money where your thoughts are, your opinion/vote is very powerful.  (this theory of neutrality coupled with a lack of empathy works swimmingly for greedy banksters, btw)

      I will continue this line of thinking, because the truth ALWAYS lurks somewhere in the middle.

  15. Vic Bramble June 18, 2011 at 7:48 pm #

    This feels like a trap.

  16. Vic Bramble June 18, 2011 at 3:48 pm #

    This feels like a trap.

  17. Blah June 18, 2011 at 8:12 pm #

    what if racialism had nothing to do with being progressive nor reactionary? interesting indeed.

  18. ArgosyJones June 18, 2011 at 8:19 pm #

    Well said.  

  19. Chaorder Gradient June 18, 2011 at 9:32 pm #

    but will it be seen that way by the masses and media…?

  20. Potter Dee June 18, 2011 at 10:23 pm #

    this isn’t a news site.

  21. cosmicserpent June 18, 2011 at 7:56 pm #

    Watch American History X. Racism has nothing to do with his progressive stance because racism is a thought disease of its own.

  22. Anonymous June 18, 2011 at 11:56 pm #

    Watch American History X. Racism has nothing to do with his progressive stance because racism is a thought disease of its own.

  23. Anonymous June 19, 2011 at 12:03 am #

    Apparently there is no clear-cut rule book. Of course no politician can be trusted at their word anyway. All too often they promise one thing and do the opposite. 

    Which almost makes the question sort of irrelevant. lol

  24. Anonymous June 19, 2011 at 10:29 am #

    I think it’s just part of his strategy. If racism is number one on his priority list, then he’ll side with whatever it takes to get him popular. Eventually people will get suckered in and say, “Sure he’s racist, but that’s not so bad because he’s for so many good things” etc. His agenda is mostly likely to simply spread racism with the a new kind of racist, i.e. one that appeals to a broad audience.

  25. huj June 19, 2011 at 4:11 pm #

    It makes a lot of sense that he is Pro-Choice.  Most abortion cliniics are in areas with high (non-white) populations. 

  26. huj June 19, 2011 at 8:11 pm #

    It makes a lot of sense that he is Pro-Choice.  Most abortion cliniics are in areas with high (non-white) populations. 

  27. Jahopson Tx June 21, 2011 at 10:04 am #

    Jeeeeeezuz…not this again. Yes, boys and girls – racism BAD. Spelling test next week.

  28. Jahopson Tx June 21, 2011 at 2:04 pm #

    Jeeeeeezuz…not this again. Yes, boys and girls – racism BAD. Spelling test next week.

  29. Nuggett June 22, 2011 at 5:35 pm #

    This guy doesn’t fit the profile of the typical upper class suburbanite with racist proclivities.  

    The typical upper class suburbanite would rather die than admit affiliation with the KKK because it would mar their high maintenance cloak of egalitarianism.  

    I may sound like a raging conservative just there, but as a moderate democrat, I can’t stomach the elite/ rich Democrats who cling to their ivory towers and idealism.  In my experience, they exhibit more natural, pent up racism in their thoughts towards american blacks than your average Joe Plumber who is trying to seem racist just to fit the status quo.  

    As for your homogeneous platform comment, I guess I am one of those thoughtless, spineless people.  No party is perfect, and I have routinely disagreed and agreed with many politicians across party lines.  My leanings are as homogeneous as they come.  To Democrats I seem like a Democrat, and to Republicans, a good ole’ boy.  In fact, if dwelling too long in conversation, people in both parties I’ve spoken with would eventually think I belong to the opposite party, simply because I entertain their ideas and hold back heart-felt emotion on the issues.

    This doesn’t mean I have no opinions.  More accurately, it means I can empathize with the oft overzealous opinions of both parties with no emotional baggage and even discuss their respective ideas with zeal and passion, regardless of my definitive thoughts on the matters, if they even yet exist.  

    The truth is, both parties have good intentions.  The extreme positions are always less balanced and more conspiratorial in nature.  The more towards the center you are, the more you understand both parties and their concerns.  And, when the time comes for you to put your money where your thoughts are, your opinion/vote is very powerful.  (this theory of neutrality coupled with a lack of empathy works swimmingly for greedy banksters, btw)

    I will continue this line of thinking, because the truth ALWAYS lurks somewhere in the middle.

Leave a Reply