Paul Krugman has a must-read column today about how the thirty years of poisonous bait-and-switch politics is destroying the GOP:

How did American conservatism end up so detached from, indeed at odds with, facts and rationality? For it was not always thus. After all, that health reform Mr. Romney wants us to forget followed a blueprint originally laid out at the Heritage Foundation!

My short answer is that the long-running con game of economic conservatives and the wealthy supporters they serve finally went bad. For decades the G.O.P. has won elections by appealing to social and racial divisions, only to turn after each victory to deregulation and tax cuts for the wealthy—a process that reached its epitome when George W. Bush won re-election by posing as America’s defender against gay married terrorists, then announced that he had a mandate to privatize Social Security.

Over time, however, this strategy created a base that really believed in all the hokum—and now the party elite has lost control.

And a personal thanks to Krugman for both his restrained acknowledgment of the new definition of "santorum" and for correctly identifying what inspired the new definition:

Rick Santorum [is] the clear current favorite among usual Republican primary voters, running 15 points ahead of Mr. Romney. Anyone with an Internet connection is aware that Mr. Santorum is best known for 2003 remarks about homosexuality, incest and bestiality. But his strangeness runs deeper than that.

The effort to redefine "santorum" was not, as some have asserted, inspired by Rick Santorum's opposition to gay marriage. It was always about—it was in response to—Santorum's infamous 2003 interview with the AP. In that interview Santorum compared same-sex relationships to child rape and dog fucking. The goal was to make sure that no one would ever forget those remarks—"This episode will never be forgotten!", wrote the "Savage Love" reader who proposed the contest to redefine "santorum"—and here we are, eight years later, and Santorum is still answering for that interview.

I'm still fuming at our lead developer Jay for suggesting I listen to the most recent episode of This American Life. Titled "Reap What You Sow" the show is mostly devoted to a devastating piece by reporter Jack Hitt on the impact of Alabama's immigration bill, HB56.

It's horrible. Don't listen to it. It nearly had me in tears.

Okay, listen to it. It's important. Hear how hispanic schoolchildren are being heckled into moving to the back of the room during assemblies. Hear how immigrants are literally afraid to go to the grocery store.

The worst part is that this legislation isn't coming about because Alabama has a problem with undocumented immigrants. Alabama actually has a very small population of undocumented immigrants compared to states like Arizona. These ideas are coming from outside the state, from national GOP operatives who draft the legislation while hunting turkeys in Kansas, working out the kinks so these laws will get past the courts, and then advising the Republicans running for president how to push this issue.

The man responsible for the Alabama law is Kris Kobach, currently the Secretary of State of Kansas. Hitt reports that Kris' revelation about the immigration issue came... wait for it... right after 9/11, when he heard that "5 of the 19 hijackers were in the country illegally, and 4 of those 5 had traffic violations while they were illegally in the country."

His shockingly bad logic is that if the police officers who stopped these men had been able to act as immigration agents, PRESTO!, no 9/11. Because, as we all know, the hijackers did no research and had no idea what our law enforcement practices were, and had they been thwarted by the impenetrable shield created by empowering everyone to legally harass immigrants, they would have given up on their plans, decided to love America, and nobody would ever ever die again.

Q.E.D.

Anyway, listen, and be outraged.

Holy smokes! Eighty percent of the signatures counted thus for a marijuana-legalization initiative are valid, according to election workers at the Washington Secretary of State's office. That's well above the 68 percent validity rate required to place I-502 on the November ballot.

In late December, New Approach Washington submitted 354,608 signatures to the state; 241,153 of those must be signed by registered voters in the state.

Election rules stipulate that the measure can be approved by randomly checking 3 percent of the signatures submitted. In this case, the state is reviewing 10,638 signatures. So far election workers have reviewed about one-third of those (3,835 signatures) and accepted 80 percent as valid (3,067), The other 768 signatures were disqualified for registration or signature problems. Details are posted here.

Obviously, no guarantees here, but it looks like we'll be voting on a measure to legalize, tax, and regulate pot this year.

"After everything you've done for Mr. Santorum," writes "Savage Love" reader Jezebel in Wisconsin, "I really think you should share the 'get Rick his own damn uterus so he'll leave mine alone' campaign with your readers. We should all have a chance to mail that man a tampon."

Delighted, JIW. Here's Jezebel on their campaign:

Rick wants to believe that every uterus is his business, but, in his heart of hearts, he knows that he has no uterus that truly belongs to him. I know that if perhaps he had one to look after and name and teach tricks, he'd probably back off of mine and yours, enthralled with the joys of menstruation, bloating, possible monthly pregnancy, and, later on in life, ladycancers. Even though his Creator cruelly deprived Rick Santorum of a uterus by design, He would not have given human beings brains capable of discovering the wonders of medicine if He did not want us to implant a uterus in Rick Santorum...

Rick Santorum has shown the American people time and time again that he's the most anti-abortion of all the candidates, that more than anything, he wishes to have a uterus inside of him, so he can put a baby in it. And now, I'm appealing to you, American people. Let's give Rick Santorum all the uterine delights that most women casually take for granted. I'm imploring all of you to consider making a small donation to the Rick Santorum campaign today, so that we can help make Rick's dream of owning a uterus a reality. If you can't afford to donate a uterus, look inside your heart and consider donating something smaller, to help Rick care for his new friend.

1 Tampon will provide protection from three to seven hours of menstruation
1 Pad will provide Rick's new uterus with less invasive protection and overnight protection
1 Pregnancy test will let Rick know when his uterus is pregnant
1 Pack of Plan B will give Rick the opportunity to flush it down the toilet while crying "No! No! I'm going to have your baby!"
1 IUD will give Rick the opportunity to pretend that it's a Jaws Harp before throwing it away
$500 to $3000 will cover the cost of delivery for Rick's uterus's baby

On this day after the anniversary of Roe v. Wade, I call for you, America, to respect the rights of the man born without a uterus to have one of his own to manage. Donations can be sent to Rick Santorum's Florida campaign headquarters.

1680 Fruitville Road
Suite 102
Sarasota, FL 34236

Please don't send Rick $3000—not unless you want 300 ugly sweater vests showing up on your doorstep a few weeks later. But I love the idea of burying Rick's campaign headquarters in tampons, pads, and pregnancy tests! Might want gift Rick a few rape kits after his recent comments about the "gift" of a rapebaby.

To add to Dan's post below, today's Chicago Tribune has a story discussing Alinksy. And last week, the Sun-Times' Lynn Sweet had a column wondering why the Right seemed to like tossing his name around. She didn't answer the question, but I will: while Alinsky's radicalism was totally home-grown American, "Saul Alinsky" sounds . . . foreign. Russian, maybe. Or Jewish. It's a dog-whistle for the Right.

Sen. Rand Paul is outraged—outraged, I tells ya—that he was "detained" for refusing a pat-down after he set off a scanner at the Nashville airport. And I'd have more sympathy for Paul's disgust at the way TSA agents callously infringed his right to privacy, if he hadn't been on his way to speak at a "March for Life" rally in support of callously infringing on other people's right to privacy.

From the Q&A with Barney Frank in yesterday's NYT Magazine:

You’ve long argued for the decriminalization of marijuana. Do you smoke weed?

No.

Why not?

Why do you ask a question, then act surprised when I give an answer? Do you think I lie to people?

I thought you might explain why you support decriminalizing it but don’t smoke it.

Do you think I’ve ever had an abortion?

Go read the whole thing.