Bill Clinton Absolutely Crushes Republican Anti-Obama Fearmongering

I’m a fan of President Obama, but I’m not sure if there’s a president I’ll ever like more than Bill Clinton. While I know he (just like every other politician in United States history) is far from perfect, I’m not sure if there’s anyone better at getting their message across to the American voter. Well, at least those voters who have the ability to think for themselves.

During a campaign stop in Arkansas for Senator Mark Pryor, the former president absolutely ripped into right-wing anti-Obama rhetoric when it comes to this year’s elections.

Clinton said:

“You can not afford to do what their opponents want. They want you to make this a protest vote. All three of these races they’re saying hey, you may like these guys, but you know what you gotta do. You gotta vote against the president. After all, it’s your last shot. It’s a pretty good scam, isn’t it? Give me a six year job for a two year protest. That’s Mark Pryor’s opponent’s message.
Yeah, I voted to cut student loans. Yeah, I voted to raise the interest rate. Yeah, I voted against the Violence Against Women Act. No, I’ll never vote for equal pay for equal work. Are you kidding? Would I vote for raising the minimum wage? No way, but I’ll give you one more protest vote. To do it, you gotta give me six years for a protest that will be irrelevant in two. Does that make any sense to you?”

Mark Pryor is currently in a campaign battle against Republican Arkansas Rep. Tom Cotton.

But the former president is exactly right. Because Republicans couldn’t beat President Obama in 2008 or 2012, they’ve used the midterms (where liberal voters unfortunately show up in smaller numbers) to try to “defeat” the president. Even though no matter what voters decide on this November, President Obama isn’t going anywhere for another 2+ years.

And let’s think about that for a moment. The senators who are elected this November aren’t serving two-year terms. Oh, no. The candidates the American people elect to the United States Senate this November will be in office for the last remaining years on Obama’s second term plus the entire first term of the next president.

So, like Clinton said, how does it make any sense to vote against a candidate based on a president that won’t even be in office for most of their next term?

Besides, it’s asinine to vote for or against any politician based on who the president is. Vote for or against each individual candidate based on their voting record and what they stand for, not who currently occupies the White House.

And this whole anti-Obama propaganda is such b.s. anyway. Most conservative voters can’t even name five factual statements about the president. Most of what they dislike about him is based on misinformation or outright lies pushed by Republicans and the conservative media.

If you don’t like a president’s policies, that’s fine. But at least know the truth about those policies. Not some made up political drivel that’s based on propaganda rather than facts. Which is exactly what Republicans do.

I just hope for our country’s sake, Arkansas voters were listening.

Republican Candidate Gets Purged From Voter Rolls In Arkansas Because Of GOP Voter Suppression Laws

The Republican Party is throwing a temper tantrum after one of their own candidates was purged from the Arkansas voter rolls, and they only have themselves to blame.

Leslie Rutledge is the GOP candidate in the race to become Arkansas’ next Attorney General. Well, she used to be anyway. As it turns out, the state constitution requires candidates for public office to be registered voters, but because of voter suppression laws passed by the GOP, Rutledge has not only been disqualified as a voter, she could be disqualified as a candidate because of it.

Pulaski County Clerk Larry Crane booted Rutledge’s name off the voter rolls because she failed to follow proper procedure. She failed to cancel previous registrations in Washington DC and Virginia before she moved to Pulaski County, where she failed to re-register to vote.

Of course, this caused Republicans to accuse Crane, a Democrat, of engaging in “dirty tricks,” but Crane says he was legally bound to remove Rutledge’s name from the rolls after receiving a letter about the issue of her registration.

Rutledge isn’t the only person in Arkansas to be tossed from the voter pool. Thousands of Arkansas voters have faced the same treatment. They’ve been thrown off the voter rolls, interrogated about their personal information, and had their legal vote discarded entirely due to restrictive anti-voting measures passed by Republicans. But because their own laws are affecting one of their own, only now are they upset. In fact, Republicans are so pissed that karma came back to bite them in the ass that they’re complaining about a tactic that they themselves have defended ruthlessly for months across the country. In short, they’re being hypocrites.

The chairman of the Republican National Lawyers Association decided to defend Rutledge by whining about her being “systematically removed from voter rolls within 90 days of a federal election.” He also claimed that Democrats were responsible for this voter suppression.

The fact is that it is a clear and unmistakable attempt at the most harmful kind of voter suppression in violation of federal law – removing a qualified female voter from the rolls notwithstanding her valid registration and actual votes in the last 4 elections in violation of her civil rights. Democrats should be embarrassed.

Democrats, however, are not the ones who have pushed voter suppression laws in states around the nation. The Republicans did that. Where were they when citizens who have been voting for decades were denied their right to vote because of the laws they themselves passed? Oh, that’s right, they didn’t give a damn because the laws they passed are supposed to target Democratic voters, not Republican voters.

But in this case, the voter suppression laws enacted by the GOP not only affected a Republican voter, it took down a Republican candidacy. And now they’re throwing a fit and accusing Democrats of voter suppression. Unfortunately for the GOP, Democrats are not to blame for their own misfortune. They already know who the true culprit is, all they have to do is look in a mirror.

Tom Cotton and the era of post-truth politics

A couple of years ago, Mitt Romney developed a bad habit. As part of his national campaign, the Republican nominee would attack President Obama over some perceived failing. Then the attack would be fact-checked and be proven wrong. Romney, confronted with proof that he was lying, would repeat the claim anyway, convinced that it didn’t matter whether he told the truth or not. It happenedover and over and over again.

It underscored a dangerous development: the era of post-truth politics.

Two years later, the phenomenon hasn’t gone away. In Arkansas last week, Rep. Tom Cotton (R), his party’s U.S. Senate nominee, was caught in one of the most brazen lies of the 2014 campaign season. The right-wing congressman claimed he voted against this year’s Farm Bill because President Obama “hijacked” it, “turned it into a food-stamp bill,” and added “billions more in spending.”

As a factual matter, literally none of this is even remotely true, and fact-checkers came down hard on such shameless dishonesty – all of which might matter if Cotton gave a darn. But as Peter Urban reported, the congressman just doesn’t care about getting caught.

Rejecting criticism of its latest TV ad, Republican Senate hopeful Tom Cotton plans to keep running the “Farm Bill” message beyond its current ad buy. 

“We’ve gotten such great feedback from farmers, taxpayers, and supporters that we’re actually going to increase the size of the ad buy,” said David Ray, a spokesman for the Cotton campaign.

In a local interview this week, Cotton said he’s “proud” of his demonstrably dishonest commercial, adding that the fact-checkers didn’t spend time “growing up on a farm,” so he knows “a little bill more about farming than they do.”

As defenses go, Cotton’s argument is gibberish. One need not grow up on a farm to recognize the basic tenets of reality. The congressman told a lie, he knew it was a lie, he got caught telling a lie, and instead of doing the honorable thing, Cotton has decided he likes this lie.

The public discourse isn’t supposed to work this way. Under traditional American norms, politicians could be expected to spin, dodge, and slice the truth awfully thin, but there was an expectation that a candidate who got caught telling a bald-faced lie to the public was likely to end up in real trouble.

Cotton seems to believe those norms no longer apply – he can get caught lying and pay no real price at all.

In other words, Tom Cotton sees American politics in a post-truth era. He can say what he pleases, without regard for honesty, because there won’t be any meaningful consequences for deceiving the public on purpose.

Is he right? This didn’t work out too well for Romney, but Cotton’s in a much better position to prevail in Arkansas.

Once the standard is set that lying will be rewarded, what incentive will politicians have to be honest?

WTF Arkansas?

GOP candidate runs into voter-ID problem in Arkansas

When voting-rights advocates complain about voter-ID laws as an unnecessary suppression policy, the right generally responds with rhetoric that might seem sensible: “everyone” already carries identification, so these laws are no big deal and the left’s concerns are exaggerated.

Evidence to the contrary is fairly common, and once in a while, even amusing.

Asa Hutchinson, who won the Republican nomination in the race for Arkansas governor Tuesday, forgot his ID when he went to the polls, despite backing the state’s new voter ID law, according to the Associated Press.

Christian Olson, a spokesman for the Republican candidate, told the AP that Hutchinson believed the situation was a “little bit of an inconvenience” and that a staffer retrieved his ID so he could cast a ballot. Olson said the former congressman still believes voters should be required to show an ID.

The larger takeaway from this should be obvious.

As the Arkansas Times’ Max Brantley explained, “Such an episode is an all-too-human reminder of how the law can be an impediment to the franchise. Hutchinson is a successful lawyer with an entourage and the day off to politic. He was going to get a ballot cast yesterday. The hourly factory worker trying to cast a ballot in the midst of a long commute to work who left his license back at the house? He might have a harder time setting things right. Never mind those who don’t have a valid ID at all and no ready means to get to the county clerk’s office to get one.”

Indeed, in this case, the gubernatorial candidate – the one who supports blocking voters from participating in their own democracy unless they show identification they never had to produce before in order to cast a ballot – dispatched an aide to go back to his law office to fetch his ID.

Ask yourself: how many voters usually go to their local precinct with paid staffers in tow?

What’s more, as Republicans impose new voter-ID requirements in states nationwide, all to address a fraud problem that doesn’t exist in reality, problems become more common.

In North Carolina recently, the new voting restrictions caused quite a bit of confusion. Not long beforehand, Texas’ state attorney general was temporarily disenfranchised by his own voter-ID law.

We’ve seen a judge nearly blocked from voting because the name on her ID didn’t match closely enough with the name on the voting rolls, and we’ve seen a former U.S. Speaker of the House get turned down for a voter ID.

None of this is necessary. Voter-ID laws, which have struggled recently in the courts, are a solution to a problem that doesn’t exist, and creating new problems that didn’t used to exist.

In Arkansas, Asa Hutchinson was able to finally vote after one of his employees gave him a hand, and he went on to easily win his gubernatorial primary. But the fact that he was delayed from casting a ballot should have given him new insights into what might happen to others – most of whom don’t cast ballots while surrounded by aides.

ARKANSAS: Senator Calls For Impeaching Judge Who Overturned Marriage Ban

An Arkansas GOP state senator wants to impeach the judge who overturned that state's ban on same-sex marriage. How surprising. 

Senator Jason Rapert says the judge's decision should not stand since he says 75% of Arkansans voted in 2004 that marriage is between a man and woman. He said, "I have been contacted today by other legislators that would seek to start impeachment proceedings in the House of Representatives against Judge Chris Piazza." The Attorney General's Office plans to appeal the decision. The office also submitted an emergency stay to the court, which would mean the same sex marriage ban would stay in place until the Supreme Court can make a decision on the issue.

The GOP speaker of the Arkansas House strongly disagrees. 

"Trying to impeach a Judge because you don't like his or her decision notwithstanding the subject matter is absurd and goes against hundreds of years of the way our great country has conducted business under our three branches of government. Circuit judges are elected by the people, as are our appellate and state Supreme Court judges. The appellate process needs to run its course. Our forefathers saw the importance of our constitution and system of self-governance. That system has worked well for a long time and make us who we are as a country. I won't support any effort to undermine that."

In January, Rapert called for the impeachment of the "dictator" President Obama because he has "denounced the well-documented fact that America is a Christian nation."

ARKANSAS ATTORNEY GENERAL SAYS HE SUPPORTS GAY MARRIAGE BUT WILL DEFEND STATE'S BAN

Arkansas Attorney General dustin McDaniel told attendees at the Associated Press Managing Editors convention that he supports marriage equality but he plans to defend the state's ban in court, the AP reports:

McDaniel, a Democrat serving his final year as the state's top attorney, became the first statewide official in Arkansas to back same-sex marriage....

...McDaniel had voiced support for civil unions when he ran for attorney general in 2006, but said then he believed marriage was between a man and a woman. McDaniel ran briefly for governor but dropped out early last year.

McDaniel said he was not calling on any other statewide officials or candidates to support gay marriage, and said he would not campaign for ending the ban while serving as attorney general.

McDaniel told the reporters:

"I want to tell you I do support marriage equality and I do believe Arkansans should have the right to be equal in the eyes of the law...I'm going to zealously defend our constitution, but at the same time I think it's important to let people [know] where I stand on the matter."

Sheridan High squelches yearbook profile of gay student

The Student Press Law Center reports that Sheridan High School administration ordered the school yearbook to scrap six planned student profiles rather than include one on a gay student who talked about his experience.

Raw Story summarizes the case, in which the yearbook is fighting to go to press with the feature. But high school principal Rodney Williams has refused to discuss the issue.

Under Arkansas law, students theoretically have editorial control of their publications and administrators may not censor them.

Junior Taylor Ellis told the Law Center’s Lydia Coutré that he doesn’t understand why the school has an issue with publishing his story.

“I think that it’s a good thing for people like me to see that it’s OK to be openly gay in school,” he said. “(The principal) said that it was personal, but it’s really not that personal because everybody knows. It’s not that big of a deal…It’s just showing other people that it’s OK to be who you are.”

The principal reportedly met with Ellis to try and talk him out of publishing his story, telling the teen he could be beaten up or bullied. {Yellowjacket assistant editor Hannah] Bruner, however, said that it’s school officials who are doing the bullying.

“They don’t really care about the law, and they’re sending a message to the whole student body and they’re just censoring all of us,” she said.

Today is the deadline for sending the yearbook to the printer.

Arkansas Attorney General Approves Language for 2016 Marriage Equality Ballot Measure

Arkansas Attorney General Dustin McDaniel (pictured) has accepted language for a proposed 2016 ballot measure submitted by Arkansas Initiative for Marriage Equality (AIME) that would repeal the state's constitutional amendment prohibiting same-sex marriage and would bring marriage equality to the Natural State.

Back in September, McDaniel approved the wording of a proposed 2014 ballot measure by a separate group that would repeal the constitutional amendment, but wouldn't specifically call for legalizing gay marriage. The Houston Chronicle reports:

[AIME Founder Jack Weir] said he planned to help the group trying to get the gay marriage ban repeal on the ballot next year while also gathering support for his 2016 proposal. McDaniel had rejected earlier versions of Weir's proposal because it didn't address the ban currently in the constitution.

"It's going to take a lot of effort from our people and the newcomers we'll have in the next three years," he said. "I see people's hearts and minds changing every time we go to an event and talk to people. I see a big change coming in Arkansas."

Weir said he hopes to quickly begin gathering the necessary 78,133 signatures from registered voters needed to place the proposal on the ballot.

Three Students Banned From School Because They Might Be HIV Positive

Apparently, Arkansas thinks it’s 1985.

In 1985, 13-year old Ryan White, who became HIV-positive from a blood transfusion, was banned from attending school. Over 100 parents and 50 teachers in Kokomo, Indiana, signed a petition demanding White not be allowed to attend classes, for fear of infection.

After almost 30 years and the passage of the Ryan White Care Act (August, 1990,) Arkansas is doing the same thing.

Three students, all siblings, have been banned from attending classes by the Pea Ridge Public School District, until and unless they can prove they do not have HIV. It is illegal to ban children from attending public schools based on HIV status — perceived or otherwise. It also may be illegal to force them to take an HIV test.

The Pea Ridge Public School District is in Benton County, Arkansas. Its website claims, “Pea Ridge School District does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, sex, national origin or disability in any of its policies, practices or procedures.”

“In a letter sent to parents, the district cites district and Arkansas School Boards Association policy 4.34, in part, as the reasons for their decision. They also say they consulted the school district attorney and a private law firm,” local KNWA TV News reports:

According to the DRC, over the summer, the school district completed a thorough review of records and found an evaluation on one of the boys that stated that the mother and one sibling were both HIV positive.

The school called a meeting on Monday, September 9, 2013, and informed the service provider that the students could not return until documentation could be provided to the school ensuring that the students were HIV negative, according to the group.

“The actions taken by the Superintendent of Pea Ridge School District are appalling and is reminiscent of times past and the case of Ryan White,” says Tom Masseau, Executive Director of DRC. “The fact that the foster families have to provide documentation that the children are HIV negative before entering the school is unlawful and immoral. Further, the fact the school’s attorney authorized this unlawful act is at best appalling. It stigmatizes individuals with disabilities or their “perceived” disabilities as there is no indication these individuals have HIV. There is only an unlawful fear that they do.

Watch: