"Much of David Duke's '91 Campaign Is Now Louisiana Mainstream" is the headline over a Times news article by a freelance contributor, Jeremy Alford.
The article claims: "Two decades later, much of his campaign has merged with the political mainstream here, and rather than a bad memory from the past, Mr. Duke remains a window into some of the murkier currents in the state's politics where Republicans have sought and eventually won Mr. Duke's voters, while turning their back on him."
The article's premise seems unsupported by facts. The only thing close to evidence is the assertion, "Mr. Duke supported forcing welfare recipients to take birth control. Now there are near-perennial attempts by members of the Louisiana Legislature to give welfare recipients drug tests." It seems to me there is a difference between forced birth control and attempts (apparently unsuccessful) to make welfare conditional on a drug test.
Then there is the claim that Mr. Duke "focused on anti-big government and anti-tax mantras that preceded the Tea Party movement. His decision to run to the right of the field is now a common maneuver in Louisiana's open primary system."
The whole accusation is just tenuous, at best — it comes off as an attempt to smear the entire Louisiana GOP as a bunch of David Duke-style racists. It's possible that that is true (though I rather doubt it for Bobby Jindal), but there's no evidence for it in the article.