Fresh off her endorsement of the real estate mogul, Sarah Palin teamed up with Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump for a campaign rally Wednesday in Tulsa, Oklahoma (or, according to press credentials provided by the Trump campaign, "Tusla," Oklahoma). In her signature rambling style, the former Alaska governor delivered sweeping attacks of President Barack Obama, accusing him of wearing political correctness "like a suicide vest." 

Trump, not to be outdone by his opening act, hammered Democratic candidate Bernie Sanders for being "a socialist, a communist," repeatedly berated the camera crews for not panning to see how huge the crowd was, threw out several protesters, and, before leaving the stage, made his boldest promise yet of just how much winning America would experience under the leadership of a Trump administration.

"You people are going to get sick and tired of winning," Trump said. "You're going to say, 'Please, please, President Trump, we can't take this much victory. Please stop, we don't want any more wins.' And I'm going to say to you, 'We're going to win, I don't care what you say.'"

Palin, meanwhile, appeared to use the Monday night arrest of her son Track, after he allegedly punched his girlfriend and child's mother in the face and then threatened to shoot himself with an AR-15, to attack Obama. Palin slammed Obama for his alleged disregard for veterans like Track, who often experience difficulty after they return from combat.

"I can speak personally about this, I guess it's the elephant in the room because my own family, going through what we're going through today with my son, a combat vet in a striker brigade fighting for you all, America, in the war zone," Palin said, to cheers. "But my son, like so many others, they come back a bit different, they come back hardened...and it makes me realize more than ever, it is now or never for the sake of America's finest that we have that commander in chief who will respect them, and honor them."

In the fall of 1996, locked in a tough re-election fight against Republican Susan Sweetser, then-Rep. Sanders got a big boost when feminist writer and activist Gloria Steinem came to Burlington. At the time, Sweetser was running negative ads attacking Sanders' liberal positions, and so the Sanders campaign held an event to highlight his support among progressive women. An opening act, a former state senator, told the audience that "a feminist is a person who challenges the power structure of our country" and "Bernie Sanders is that kind of feminist." When it was Steinem's turn, she started off with an announcement: "I'm only here today to make Bernie Sanders an honorary woman."

In his memoir, Outsider in the House, Sanders, who went on to beat Sweetser comfortably, called the event "the nicest moment of the campaign."

Watch:

Sanders won't be able to count on a repeat performance this time around. Steinem, supported Hillary Clinton for president in 2008 and is back in her corner again.

On Wednesday morning, Sen. Rand Paul (Ky.) penned a Lord of the Rings-inspired Facebook post that likened Donald Trump to Gollum. He wrote:

One candidate on this national stage wants you to give him power. He tells you he is rich, so he must be smart.
 
If you give him power he claims he will fix America, but there is another tradition in America. A tradition that believes that power corrupts, and that our goal should be not to gain power but to contain power or limit Presidential power. Our founding fathers feared centralization of power.
 
...This race should not be about who can grasp the ring. Electing Gollum should not be our objective. This race should be about which candidate will best protect you from an overbearing government. I am the only one on this national stage who really doesn't want power or dominion over you. I want to set you free, I want to leave you alone, and I want a government so small you can barely see it.

In this scenario, does that make Rand Paul Frodo?

Perhaps inspired by Donald Trump's recent call for a Muslim database, one South Carolina representative just introduced a measure to create a different kind of strange registry—this time to track journalists deemed "responsible" by the state.

The bill, proposed by Republican state lawmaker Mike Pitts, would establish vague requirements for journalists to submit to a registration process by the state. Journalists found in violation of the registry, by either not registering or breaking his rules, would be subjected to monetary fines and even criminal penalties—a lighter version of how the Kremlin treats its own pesky champions of free speech. As the Post and Courier reports, quoting Pitts, the Secretary of State’s Office would maintain a "responsible journalism registry" and create the criteria, with the help of a panel, on what qualifies a person to be a journalist—similar to the licensing for doctors and lawyers.

More from the very real "South Carolina Responsible Journalism Registry Law" proposal:

When asked if the proposal was retribution for some unflattering press coverage directed towards Pitts—the lawmaker has been repeatedly cited for some of his more eyebrow-raising spending habits—he told the Post and Courier it was actually aimed to combat stories he believes have been unfairly targeting gun ownership.

"It strikes me as ironic that the first question is constitutionality from a press that has no problem demonizing firearms," Pitts, a lifetime NRA member, said. "With this statement I'm talking primarily about printed press and TV. The TV stations, the six o'clock news and the printed press has no qualms demonizing gun owners and gun ownership."

Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders spent much of the last week battling over the Vermont senator's proposal to create a nationwide single-payer health care system. In one of the most important exchanges of Sunday night's debate, they finally hashed it out face to face.

Watch:

What neither of them would say outright—perhaps because it's not an especially inspiring message for Democrats to hear—is that the question of how best to expand health care access is, at least for the time being, moot. Republicans have a huge majority in the House and will almost certainly continue to control the House in January 2017. But their argument exposed core differences between the two candidates on what the nation's health care system should look like, and how it should be paid for. And it doesn't look like a debate either candidate is about to abandon any time soon.

It's the Sunday night of a three-day holiday weekend, which can only mean one thing: the three remaining Democratic presidential candidates are having a debate. With the Iowa caucuses less than a month away and Vermont senator Bernie Sanders leading in some early-state polls,  former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Sanders have increasingly turned their fire on each other, fighting over past votes and current positions on universal health care and gun control. Why stop now? We at the Mother Jones' politics desk have put together a by-no-means-comprehensive list of questions we'd put to the candidates if we were on stage:

Bernie Sanders:

* In 2005 you voted to give immunity to gun makers from lawsuits. But the next day you voted against giving immunity to companies in the fast food industry, like McDonald's. Why exempt guns but not Big Macs?

* Your home state of Vermont adopted a single-payer health care system in 2011. But last year the state scrapped the plan citing rising costs. Now you're proposing single-payer for the nation. What went wrong in Vermont and how would you have fixed it?

* You've promised to reduce America's prison population by more than 500,000 people by the end of your first term. But more than 90 percent of America's 2.2 million inmates are in state and local facilities. What can a president do about them?

* You've said that the United States should take a backseat in the battle against ISIS, and instead leave the fighting to a coalition of Muslim nations including Iran and Saudi Arabia. In light of the most recent dust-up between the two countries and their deep political and religious differences, how will you get two nations that hate each other to take up arms together?

* Even with a Democratic super-majority in the Senate, President Obama struggled to deliver incremental change in Washington, ultimately accepting stripped-down versions of the Affordable Care Act and the Stimulus. How do you expect to push through an even more ambitious health-care proposal in a Republican-controlled Congress still trying to repeal Obamacare?

Hillary Clinton:

* A supporter of yours, Chicago mayor Rahm Emanuel, reportedly worked to suppress a video of the killing of Laquan McDonald by Chicago police until after his re-election, and even used public funds to pay the victim’s family to keep quiet. Sen. Sanders has said that "any elected official with knowledge that the tape was being suppressed or improperly withheld should resign." Should Mayor Emanuel resign?

* In October you said the Australian model of compulsory gun buy-backs "is worth looking at." Have you looked at it? And would you entertain the idea of a compulsory gun re-purchase in the United States?

* Colorado residents will vote next fall on a ballot initiative on whether or not to institute a single-payer health care system. If you lived in Colorado, would you vote to approve that measure?

* You’ve pledged to not raise taxes on anyone making less than $250,000 per year, and criticized your opponents for proposing to raise taxes on people you’ve termed middle class. What is your actual definition of middle class? Why include a household making $150,000—the top 10 percent for annual income—in the middle class?

* In 2005, you went to war against violence in video games, introducing legislation to restrict sales of games. You said: "We need to treat violent video games the way we treat tobacco, alcohol, and pornography." Do you still hold that view?

* David Brock, the head of a super-PAC that's supporting your candidacy, made news yesterday for a report suggesting he'd demand Bernie Sanders release his medical records. Brock's group, Correct the Record, has said it is coordinating with the campaign thanks to a special exemption in federal election law. Why is a candidate who has pledged to repeal Citizens United using a legal loophole to openly coordinate with a super-PAC?

All candidates:

* The Atlantic's Ta-Nehisi Coates argued in 2014 that African-Americans deprived of wealth through decades of federal housing discrimination should be able to apply for reparations from the government—similar to the program offered to Japanese-Americans who lost their homes and businesses during internment. Would you consider such a program if elected? And if not, what will you do to alleviate the lingering damages caused by formal government discrimination in the housing market?

* A recent poll found that 52 percent of Americans believe genetically-modified food to be "unsafe." Are they right?

* The Obama administration is currently reviewing a proposed rule to expand overtime to most workers who earn less than $50,000 a year. Is that number too high, or too low?

* Over the last half decade pro-life groups have fundamentally re-written abortion laws at the state level, resulting in shuttered women's health clinics and forcing women to crisscross state lines to get an abortion. Aside from appointing more pro-choice Supreme Court judges, what can a president do to reverse these setbacks at the state level and insure the right to an abortion established by Roe?

* Two years ago, Harry Reid and Senate Democrats used the so-called "nuclear option" to remove the filibuster for judicial nominees. Should the filibuster still exist for legislation and Supreme Court nominees, or should it be wiped out entirely?

Lindsey Graham is now the first former GOP presidential candidate to back one of his old rivals: the senator from South Carolina endorsed Jeb Bush this morning in North Charleston, the site of Thursday night's Republican debates.

Graham, who was the GOP field's most notable (and sometimes most hilarious) foreign policy hawk, said Bush was the right candidate to keep the country safe. "I have concluded without any hesitation, without any doubt, that Jeb Bush is ready on day one to be commander-in-chief," he said. He also praised Bush for pushing back against other candidates who attacked Islam and Muslim Americans, another one of Graham's pet themes during the debates.

The Bush campaign and Graham both seem to think South Carolina can "reset this race," as Graham said during his endorsement. If Bush can survive Iowa and do well in New Hampshire, a win in South Carolina would give him a plausible chance of emerging as the mythical GOP mainstream consensus candidates. And, as the Washington Post pointed out, "Graham is a savvy pol, a talented spokesman with a real statewide organization."

Of course, this probably actually means nothing. Graham never broke out of the GOP undercard debates or the low single digits in national polls. And while Bush was already the runaway leader of the endorsement primary, that hasn't stopped him from becoming an afterthought among GOP primary voters. The Post noted that Bush needs "all the help he can get at the moment"—even if that's not much at all.

Last night, Sen. Ted Cruz said some stupid things about "New York values" being a synonym for like money-grubbing, fame-hungry monsters. Donald Trump used the moment to go full "9/11" on Cruz and, at least to my aged eyes, the Princeton educated, Goldman Sachs spouse left the exchange the worse for it.

Anyway, the New York Daily News did its thing and went hard after Cruz with today's cover.

("Go back to Canada" is a reference to the fact that Cruz was born in Canada—though he is a naturally born American citizen by virtue of his mother's citizenship— and rings a bit birther for my taste, but c'est la vie.)

The NYDN isn't like some big Trump supporter either. Previous covers have lambasted the GOP front-runner.

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie made a bold pronouncement at Thursday's Republican debate: the founders considered the right to bear arms to be one of the most important constitutional amendments—that's why it was the second one on the list. "I don't think the Founders put the second amendment as number two by accident," he said, adding, "I think they made the Second Amendment the Second Amendment because they thought it was just that important."

But that doesn't make a lot of sense—the Third Amendment (which prevents citizens from quartering soldiers against their will) is not more important than the Fourth Amendment (which prohibits unwarranted search and seizure), simply because it has a lower number. Nor would you be able to find many conservatives who believe the Tenth Amendment, which delegates rights to the states, is somehow the least important of the bunch.

The other problem with this line of thinking is that the Second Amendment as we know it wasn't really the second amendment to be written—it was the fourth. James Madison proposed 12 amendments to the Constitution, but the first two were not ratified by enough states. The original First Amendment concerned the size of congressional districts—not quite as big of a deal in the grand scheme of things as, say, the original Third Amendment (which would become freedom of expression). The original Second Amendment would have prohibited Congress from raising its own pay (it was eventually ratified as the 27th.)

This is all a bit confusing but you have to bear in mind the Founding Fathers were drunk most of the time.

During Thursday's GOP debate, Sen. Ted Cruz was forced to weigh in on his eligibility to run for president of the United States—a controversy Donald Trump has been vigorously fanning as the Canadian-born senator has risen in the polls.

Cruz's initial annoyance was palpable, but it was clear he was prepared for the "birther" issue to come up. Throughout the campaign, Cruz has avoided hitting back against Trump. But this was the moment the gloves finally came off.

"The Constitution hasn't changed," Cruz said. "But the poll numbers have. And I recognize that Donald is dismayed that his poll numbers are falling."

Watch the tense exchange below: