Did anyone ever doubt that Ron Paul was lying when he said he never signed off on those racist newsletters?

The Raw Story

Republican presidential hopeful Ron Paul has consistently denied having written — or even read — the inflammatory racist and anti-gay remarks that went out under his name in newsletters he published in the early 1990s. Although numerous associates agree that Paul does not hold racist views, however, it appears that he may have known more about the racist articles than he has been willing to admit.

The Washington Post reported  on Friday that three people with first-hand knowledge of Paul’s operations say “he was deeply involved in the company that produced the newsletters, Ron Paul & Associates, and closely monitored its operations, signing off on articles and speaking to staff members virtually every day.”

“It was his newsletter, and it was under his name, so he always got to see the final product. … He would proof it,’’ former company secretary Renae Hathway told the Post.

According to these sources, the main author of the racist passages was Lew Rockwell, who was then the vice president of Paul’s company.

The Post also details how closely entangled Paul’s political career, his business ventures, and members of his own family were during those years. According to one source, who chose to remain anonymous, Paul and his associates made a deliberate choice in the late 1980s to increase sales of the newsletter by making it more provocative.

“It was playing on a growing racial tension, economic tension, fear of government,’’ the source stated “I’m not saying Ron believed this stuff. It was good copy. Ron Paul is a shrewd businessman.’’

Cato Institute President Ed Crane, who frequently lunched with Paul during this period, similarly told the paper that when the two of them discussed how to increase the circulation of Paul’s newsletters, they agreed that “people who have extreme views” were most likely to respond. Paul told Crane his best response had come when he used a mailing list from the racist and anti-Semitic newspaper, Spotlight.

If that was the strategy, it apparently worked. According to the Post, political disclosure forms show that between 1984 and 1995, Paul went from being up to $765,000 in debt to having a net worth of up to $3.3 million.

A Paul spokesperson contacted by the Post for comment expressed doubt about the assertions made by Crane and the other sources.

Related articles

• Paul Approved Racist Newsletters (politicalwire.com)
• Associates: Ron Paul Proofed, Signed Off On Newsletters (minx.cc)
• “It was his newsletter, and it was under his name, so he always got to see the final product. … He…” (shortformblog.tumblr.com)
• The Racist Newsletters Return To Haunt Ron Paul (kaystreet.wordpress.com)
• Ron Paul was heavily in involved in racist newsletters, associates say (thegrio.com)

Wow are they saying that AZ Governor Brewer is lying?  Uh, in a word…yes!

TPM Muckraker

Out of the three officials who met President Obama on an airport tarmac near Phoenix earlier this week, Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer (R) is now the only one who has characterized the president as anything other than cordial.

In numerous TV and radio interviews since the meeting, Brewer has said the president was “tense to say the least” and took issue with a book she wrote last year. She said Obama walked away from her while she was in mid-sentence and even told one Phoenix television station she felt “a little bit threatened” by the encounter.

But Phoenix Mayor Greg Stanton, who was standing just feet away from the president and the governor on Wednesday during their now-infamous encounter, told TPM that Obama seemed calm the whole time.

“He wasn’t tense at all,” Stanton said on Friday. “The guy’s a pro.”

Though Stanton declined to discuss exactly what the governor and president said to each other, he said Obama’s classic coolness was evident.

“He doesn’t get animated, but he looks you in the eye and tells you what he thinks,” Stanton said. “And I think that’s honestly what he did is he looked the governor in the eye and spoke and told her what he was really feeling.”

Stanton, a Democrat, is now the second elected Arizona official whose account of the incident contradicts the way Brewer has described it.

Continued here…

Related articles

• Mesa Mayor Contradicts Brewer Account Of Obama Meeting (alan.com)
• Obama on beef with Brewer: ‘Blown out of proportion’ (thegrio.com)
• Obama Doesn’t Have Time for Jan Brewer’s Shit, But Don’t Tell Her That [Politics] (jezebel.com)
• Obama: Tarmac Spat No Big Deal (foxnews.com)
• McCain says Obama has ‘prickly personality’ (seattlepi.com)
• Obama: Brewer chat “not a big deal” (cbsnews.com)

It was the last debate before the Florida primary on Jan. 31 the candidates fought to maintain a sunny disposition befitting the Sunshine State. They also fought to hold a sunny disposition about Latino immigrants… about whom some of them had been – well – let’s just say they’d been “less enthusiastic” in states where there are drastically fewer Hispanic Republicans. Indeed, it suddenly seems that if there’s one thing all the candidates agree on, it’s that grandmas are awesome, no matter where…

Related articles

• Republicans Fight For The Latino Vote (npr.org)
• Florida’s Latino voters will be a factor in the primary (politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com)
• Final showdown before Florida’s crucial primary (politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com)
• The Sunshine states showdown means the stakes couldn’t be higher ahead of CNN debate (worldviewtonight.wordpress.com)

Think Progress

Since the 1970s, New Hampshire police have operated under a progressive policy for handling domestic violence cases that has saved countless lives. Under current law the presumption is that an arrest will be made when police observe evidence of abuse. They have a large degree of discretion and don’t need to witness the assault firsthand or obtain a legal warrant before they can separate the alleged attacker from his victim.

All that will change if Republicans get their way. The state’s GOP legislators are pushing two bills that will reverse a half century of progress, the Concord Monitor reports:

Domestic violence is no longer taken lightly legally or by society. That’s the way it should be, but two bills under consideration by this most unusual of legislatures, would undo that progress and put lives in danger. Both deserve a speedy defeat.

House Bill 1581 would turn the clock back 40 years to an age when a police officer could not make an arrest in a domestic violence case without first getting a warrant unless he or she actually witnessed the crime. That’s an exceedingly dangerous change. Consider the following scenario, one outlined for lawmakers by retired Henniker police chief Tim Russell:

An officer is called to a home where she sees clear evidence that an assault has occurred. The furniture is overturned, the children are sobbing, and the face of the woman of the house is bruised and bleeding. It’s obvious who the assailant was, but the officer arrived after the assault occurred. It’s a small department, and no one else on the force is available to keep the peace until the officer finds a judge or justice of the peace to issue a warrant. The officer leaves, and the abuser renews his attack with even more ferocity, punishing his victim for having called for help. [...]

It’s impossible to say how many lives the policy, in place since the 1970s, has saved or how many injuries it’s prevented. If they adopt House Bill 1581, lawmakers might find out, but the price paid could be extraordinarily high.

The other bill Republicans have proposed, HB 1608, limits judges’ ability to order the arrest of someone who has violated a domestic violence restraining order by contacting or abusing the person named in the order. It would also prevent judges from ordering defendants to surrender their weapons or block them from buying guns.

Police say the bill stops them from intervening to protect victims. For instance, they would be stripped of their power to arrest someone who is threatening to use violence against a victim or child. It’s unclear why New Hampshire Republicans have set their sights on repealing protections for abuse victims when promised to focus on economic priorities.

Related articles

• KCBS In Depth: Domestic Violence (sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com)
• Special thanks to Delegate Herring and Senator Herring (rcasa.wordpress.com)
• Domestic Violence: An endless cycle of power and control (chicagotalks.org)
• Police domestic violence nearly twice average rate (sfgate.com)
• New Hampshire Republicans Propose Bills That Prevent Police From Protecting Domestic Abuse Victims (thinkprogress.org)

Gabby Giffords gives America moment of unity

A Frosty Meeting for Obama and Brewer

The 20 Most Dangerous Conservatives And Their Organizations : politics

Rachel Maddow, Chris Matthews Disagree Over Mitch Daniels’ State Of The Union Response

New York Bill Would Make SAT Cheating A Felony

Gingrich Pledges To Establish Permanent Base On The Moon

Santorum: Rape Babies are Gifts from God

Video: Romney on the wrong side at the wrong time

Video: Politifact, you’re fired

U.S. Commandos Free 2 Hostages From Somali Pirates

Who are the SEALs?

The Huffington Post

Virginia Republicans are the latest to advance drug testing for the poor and jobless as a half-dozen bills requiring the needy and unemployed to prove they’re not on drugs move through the state legislature.

More than 30 states in the past year have considered legislation to require drug tests for welfare recipients, and several have also targeted unemployment claimants. Virginia State Sen. Richard Black (R), a sponsor of drug testing, told HuffPost he’s not surprised by the surge of interest.

“Frankly, I think the use of drugs for some people is the reason they are unemployed,” Black said. “I don’t believe that taxpayers have an obligation to pay for recreational drug use … And I think if a person has the money to pay for illicit drugs, then they have the money to support themselves.”

Over objections by Virginia House Democrats, the Committee on Health and Welfare Institutions on Tuesday approved one of several bills that would require welfare recipients to be screened in order to qualify for assistance.

The bill  would require every person on public assistance in Virginia to be evaluated to determine the likelihood that they are on drugs. Anyone who aroused suspicion in an initial screening would have to submit to a drug test or be thrown off public assistance for one year. The law would allow those with positive results to attend an approved drug treatment program.

Continue reading here…

Related articles

• Georgia lawmaker who sponsored welfare drug testing bill busted for DUI (kaystreet.wordpress.com)
• Strictest Rules Yet Proposed For Unemployment Benefits (huffingtonpost.com)
• Ala. Lawmakers Propose Drug Tests for Welfare (addictionts.com)
• Drug Testing For Welfare Applicants Resurrected In Michigan (huffingtonpost.com)
• Georgia Republican Favoring Welfare Recipient Drug Testing Arrested For DUI (alan.com)
• Newt Gingrich’s Latest Assault On The Constitution: Drug Test Americans Before They Get ‘Any Kind Of Federal Aid’ (kaystreet.wordpress.com)
• As GOP Pushes To Drug Test For Government Benefits, Only 1 Percent Fail Tests In Indiana (thinkprogress.org)

The POTUS came away from The State of The Union speech with some amazing stats.

Now we know why the Republicans in Congress look so uh…ill…during last night’s State of the Union speech.

Mario Piperni

There’s a lot out there on the President’s SOTU, so I’ll keep my thoughts short and sweet.

• The speech did what it had to do which was target liberals and independents and set in motion the 2012 election campaign.
• It took on the right’s case against him (weak, job-killing socialist) and threw it back in their face as the job-creating, bin Laden-killing, commander-in-chief willing to tackle the big problems facing the country.
• Made the case that the economy IS improving. Slow as the recovery might be, the numbers point to an economy which is in a better place than it was in 2009.
• Painted the opposition as the obstructionist, power hungry entity it is.
• And all this while coming off as the adult in the room.  What more do you want?

Whatever criticism liberals might have of this President, he did not disappoint last night and gave every indication that he’s more than ready to face Mitt or Newt.

UPDATE

Draw your own conclusions from this.

An overwhelming majority of Americans approved of the overall message in President Obama’s State of the Union speech on Tuesday night, according to a CBS News poll of speech watchers.

According to the poll, which was conducted online by Knowledge Networks immediately after the president’s address, 91 percent of those who watched the speech approved of the proposals Mr. Obama put forth during his remarks. Only nine percent disapproved.

Last year, 83 percent of viewers approved of Mr. Obama’s State of the Union remarks.

This year, 82 percent of those who watched the speech said they approve of the president’s plans for the economy, up from 53 percent who approved before the speech. Eighty percent said they approved of Mr. Obama’s plans for the deficit — in contrast to 45 percent before the speech. Eighty-three percent approved of Mr. Obama’s proposals regarding Afghanistan, which received only a 57 percent approval rating beforehand.

The sight of Democrats and Republicans sitting side by side gave speech watchers more confidence about the possibility of bipartisan cooperation: 62 percent said they expect more bipartisanship now than in years past.

Encouraging but the 62 percent who are expecting Republicans to play nice and compromise on some issues, sorry but it won’t happen. If you can be sure of anything in this election year, it’s that Republicans are going to obstruct any and all measures to create jobs and improve the economy.  Their only hope for victory in November, regardless of whom they choose as nominee, is that the economy deteriorates and unemployment climbs back up over 9 percent.

Bipartisanship?  Not from this crew of cutthroat, lying Republicans who refuse to place country before party.

Related articles

• CBS News Poll: Overwhelming Majority Approved of Obama’s State of the Union Speech (themoderatevoice.com)
• Wingnuts Hoot at Obama Speech, But 91% of Americans Approve (littlegreenfootballs.com)
• Obama: No Retreat, No Surrender (themoderatevoice.com)
• The SOTU (ken_ashford.typepad.com)
• Republicans Attack Obama’s Record (myfoxny.com)