Tuesday, August 28, 2018. Less than 1 year away, Arizona will have their state primary.

Incumbent Republican Jeff Flake will be primaried, and hard.

Arizona uses a hybrid primary system where unaffiliated voters may vote in either primary, but voters registered with either party may only vote in that particular party's primary.

We really need to flood their polls with everyone we can and ensure Flake gets their primary win. Then, in the general, strive to get our Democratic Party candidate in (hopefully Mark Kelly will have decided to run by then).

If Flake wins the General, then we still at least have a republican that won't sheeply support the Rumpus agenda.
If our Dem wins, we gain what was a virtually unattainable seat.
If Flake Loses, and our Democratic Party candidate looses , and the rumpus backed candidate wins.. which could even be that prick Sheriff Arpaio we really lose.

If you live in Arizona, please consider changing your registration as unaffiliated if you aren't already.

Would love to see the seat go to a Democrat!
Can stomach another round of Flake. (yes that was intentional),
Dread the idea of a shithead like the rumpus pardoned criminal Arpaio being added to our Senate.

In the last week two people that I know who had ACA exchange policies for a couple of years now have received letters that they aren't being dropped, but that no further claims will be honored due to lack of funding.

Both of them are residents of Louisiana.

My cousin Mike, who has been very limited due to a hip injury back in his 20's, has hypertension, type 2 diabetes, low kidney function (not dialysis level but close at 30% function), and is a prostate cancer survivor was dropped last week. Personally, he and I stopped speaking since the dumb shit was a Trump supporter, but his wife and I remain friends on Facebook, and she was asking for some help.

Likewise, one of my younger brothers best friends also joined the exchange a few years ago, and is likewise not "dropped" but has received a letter advising that future claims will not be honored. This poor young man has more medical issues than I can begin to name.

I don't know if the 2 of them were with the same company on the Louisiana exchange or not, but was wondering if anyone else is starting to hear of situations like this? Or if this is just some small fluke isolated to something going on in one or two insurance companies in Louisiana.

Source: The Washington Post

Attorney General Jeff Sessions on Monday said he'd be issuing a new directive this week aimed at increasing police seizures of cash and property.

“We hope to issue this week a new directive on asset forfeiture — especially for drug traffickers,” Sessions said in his prepared remarks for a speech to the National District Attorney's Association in Minneapolis. "With care and professionalism, we plan to develop policies to increase forfeitures. No criminal should be allowed to keep the proceeds of their crime. Adoptive forfeitures are appropriate as is sharing with our partners."

Asset forfeiture is a disputed practice that allows law enforcement officials to permanently take money and goods from individuals suspected of crime. There is little disagreement among lawmakers, authorities and criminal justice reformers that “no criminal should be allowed to keep the proceeds of their crime.” But in many cases, neither a criminal conviction nor even a criminal charge is necessary — under forfeiture laws in most states and at the federal level, mere suspicion of wrongdoing is enough to allow police to seize items permanently.

The practice is ripe for abuse. In one case in 2016, Oklahoma police seized $53,000 owned by a Christian band, an orphanage and a church after stopping a man on a highway for a broken taillight. A few years earlier, a Michigan drug task force raided the home of a self-described “soccer mom,” suspecting she was not in compliance with the state's medical marijuana law. They proceeded to take “every belonging” from the family, including tools, a bicycle and her daughter's birthday money

Read more: http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/jeff-sessions-wants-police-to-take-more-cash-from-american-citizens/ar-BBECcJm?li=BBmkt5R&ocid=spartandhp

---

Really.. just what this legalized theft from citizens really needed.. expansion. I'm sure this won't be abused, or targeted at the "undesirable" people out there.

My own little creation for deciding which Democrats to, or not to support in future elections.



Like it or not.. this is how we reclaim Congress and the presidency.

Everybody of course knows the latest travesty of Merrick Garland.

Perhaps people need a refresher of just how MANY times the Democratic Senate Majority has confirmed a Republican nominee, and how few times a Republican Senate has confirmed a Democratic Nominee:

GW Bush got both Souter and Thomas on with Democratic Party Senate majorities.
Reagan got Kennedy on with a Democratic Party Senate Majority.
Ford got J.P. Stevens on - Democratic Party Senate maj.
Nixon got Burger, Blackmun, Lewis Powell, and Rehnquist on.
Ike got Brennan, Whittaker, and Stewart on with that same Democratic Party Senate majority.

NOT SINCE PRESIDENT CLEVELAND IN 1894 HAS THE REPUBLICAN HELD SENATE EVER CONFIRMED A SINGLE DEMOCRATIC POTUS SCOTUS NOMINATION.

Sooooo, they can kiss my f'n ass on "Democratic Party obstructionism".

With the current SCOTUS numbering 8, I think a 4-4 split is the BEST case that #45 could possibly hope for. Not a chance that Justices Ginsburg, Sotomayor, Breyer, or Kegan would decide to uphold the decision.

Kennedy has long been the wild card, and this is just the kind of federal overreach type of case he's famous for crossing over on.

Justice Roberts has at least a fair chance of crossing over and deciding in our favor. He's been fairly good about maintaining the decisions of the lower courts.

Alito and Thomas have a tendency to align their decisions with conservative causes, but in this case, especially with #45's criticism of the court, it's actually possible that the SCOTUS to give a unanimous decision to uphold the lower court decision..

Damn that would be a SWEEEEEEEEET result.

Soooo, I'm not sure where this whole "snowflake" meme originated, but I'm more than happy to take ownership of it.

Sure, a snowflake alone is fragile, delicate, and prone to melting. However, in large numbers, which us "snowflakes" make up the majority by the vote, and our numbers in our protests, Snow is a powerful force of nature. Snowflakes in masse will bury homes, wipe out an entire forest when they avalanche down a mountainside, collapse a roof, or strand a vehicle. Snowflakes, when they stand together are a powerful force of nature.

Peeresident Rumpus followers however, I now call them pissdrips in honor of their lord and savior's extra curricular activity preferences. They aren't snowflakes, they are just the drips of piss that will run down trumps leg when he tries to tuck his tiny penis back into his trousers after using the urinal. Pissdrips are powerless, messy, deplorable, undesirable, and stinky.

So from now on, when I address them, I address them as pissdrips.