Time for some amendments

In the U. S. Senate, the Republican "leadership" (or lack thereof) has chosen to abdicate their Constitutional duty to provide advice and consent on the nomination of Merrick Garland to the U. S. Supreme Court. 

One suggestion has been that President Obama wait until "enough time" has passed with the Senate failing to act on his nomination of Garland and then just swear Garland in as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court himself; arguing that the silence of the Senate is their implied approval of the nominee.  One of the arguments offered against this idea was that there is no time limit set forth in the Constitution for the Senate to carry out their duty to provide advice and consent.  That got me thinking that this would be a good moment to make some amendments to the Constitution.  Here is a rough draft of some idea for a 28th Amendment to the United States Constitution:

The Constitution of the United States, as previously ratified and amended, is further amended as follows:

Article 2, Section 2 is amended to add the following language:  "It is the duty of the Senate to provide their advice and consent to any presidential nomination within 90 days of a nomination being made.  If the Senate fails to do so, consent of the nomination will be considered to have been given and the nominee will assume the duties to which they were appointed.

Article 2, Section 2 is amended to add the following language:  "The Senate will enter into recess for a period of one week on two separate occasions per year.  The Senators, by majority vote, will choose the periods of recess each year prior to the end of January.

Article 2, Section 3 is amended to add the following language:  "The president cannot pick and choose among the laws of the United States in terms of enforcing them.  The duty of the president is to enforce all laws enacted by Congress and signed into law by a president throughout the entirety of the president's tenure in office.

 * * *

I thought about adding some things about exercise of good judgment and common sense but realized that would be a waste of time.

Tenuous Ties

"C" (for client) came to see me in 2014 to get his taxes done.  He was in his late 20s and a gregarious, energetic man.  He referred a couple of other clients to me. 

"L" is someone I met a long time ago in an internet chat room.  We spent hours talking online and on the phone about almost anything and everything.

"G" is someone I met more than a decade ago playing an online game.  We became friends in the real world as well as the world of cyberspace but I haven't seen her in person for quite some time.

What got me thinking about our tenuous ties to some of the people in our lives was something that happened at work the other morning.  "O" is a client that C referred to me and in the middle of preparing O's tax return, he mentioned that C had died recently.  I did not know that C had issues involving substance abuse and that he'd passed as the result of complications from the inhalation of whipped cream.  Just to clarify, people who do that aren't overdosing on the delicious whipped cream, they are seeking a high from the nitrous oxide that serves as the propellant that propels the cream out of the cannister.  I know all about people who use nitrous oxide that way, I used to date someone for whom that was their drug of choice.  But hearing that someone I knew had died from this was pretty shocking.  It was a reminder to me of how tenuous our ties are to those we don't interact with in the real world.

I have 221 "friends" on Facebook as of this date.  Some I know through my work.  Some are longtime friends I first met back in elementary school or later on in high school.  Some I connected with during my military service and the rest I've encountered since leaving the military.  Of this group, some I touch base with almost every day, and some only rarely.  I feel even more disconnected than ever before after this incident.

L died in 2010, suddenly and unexpectedly.  She was a little older than me, with grown children.  She had found love again and gotten married.  She'd found a new home, a new job and a whole new life and then it was gone.  I didn't know she'd passed until I read loving tributes to her on her FB page.  Her friends and family still write to her there and I think that's pretty cool.

I'd been worried about G because more than a month had passed since her last message but I heard from her a few days ago.  Problems with her access to the internet.  Like me, she has health issues and I'd been concerned.  I feel better knowing she is alive and well.

The best boss I have ever worked for just posted that someone she'd been friends with for more than 35 years had died.  I had listened to her stories about that friend for decades and thought very highly of him as a result. 

Our ties to those we consider friends, and to our family are indeed tenuous. 

Appointing "diversity" members to the Academy leadership is not the answer

This past week the leadership of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences announced the appointment of three new members to their Board of Governors.  Reginald Hudlin, Gregory Nava and Jennifer Yuh Nelson.  This is part of their effort to respond to the #OscarsSoWhite campaign and the fact that the 20 acting nominees from last month's Oscars were all Caucasian.

Anyone who believes for a moment that this will make any changes to the composition of next year's group of nominees is sadly mistaken.  That's because in order for anything to change in Hollywood, the people who need to change how they make decisions are those who have the power to "green light" a movie.  These new Academy governors don't have that power and they don't have a lot of influence or control over those who do.

Take a look at the very early predictions in the Hollywood Reporter for potential 2016 Best Picture nominees for the awards to be held in 2017.   The overwhelming majority of names and photos are of "white people."  When they cast Jennifer Lawrence and Chris Pratt in the upcoming "Passengers" were any people of color even remotely considered for either of the lead roles?  I think not.

Until the power brokers change their positions and take risks on people of color in the "important" films in meaningful roles, changing governors of the Academy is an exercise in futility.

Talent is not a function of racial makeup.

A lession in civics and history for Republican Senators

In a speech on the floor of the United States Senate, Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said that he will not allow a confirmation hearing on President Obama's nominee to the U. S. Supreme Court.  He said “The next justice could fundamentally alter the direction of the Supreme Court and have a profound impact on our country, so of course the American people should have a say in the court’s direction.  The Senate will continue to observe the 'Biden Rule' so the American people have a voice in this momentous decision. The American people may well elect a president who decides to nominate Judge Garland for Senate consideration. The next president may also nominate somebody very different. Either way, our view is this: Give the people a voice in filling this vacancy."

First let's take a moment to point out to Senator McConnell that there is no Biden Rule in the United Stages Constitution.  But there is language that makes it very clear that Senator McConnell and his Republican cohorts have a duty to perform and that by failing to hold confirmation hearings, they are shirking their responsibility to provide the proper Advise and Consent for a presidential nomination.  There is also nothing in the Constitution that speaks to what the failed presidential candidate Marco Rubio talked about last month.  Senator Rubio said "Because actually, it's not just for the Supreme Court, even for appellate courts, both parties have followed this precedent," Rubio responded. "There comes a point in the last year of the president, especially in their second term, where you stop nominating, or you stop the advice and consent process."

Senator Rubio is as misinformed as his colleague Senator McConnell.  In fact, in 1956 it was a Republican president, Dwight D. Eisenhower who made a recess appointment of Justice William Brennan much later than March in the election year of 1956.  In fact there are several precedents for SCOTUS nominees receiving confirmation hearings in election years.  As for the so-called Biden Rule, it has no meaning.  As it was originally stated, it did not accurately describe historical precedent.

But there is a larger issue here.  Combined with the finite but now real possibility of Donald Trump being elected, Republicans need to turn their attention to 2018 and 2020 as well as 2016.  If by chance, Donald Trump is elected to the presidency in 2016, it is a strong possibility that the Democrats could wind up in control of both the House and the Senate, bringing about another two years of gridlock.  And in 2020, the Democrats could wind up controlling Congress and the White House.  That would be a setback that the Republicans may never recover from.

Their intransigence in refusing to even hold confirmation hearings will come back and bite them right on their collective red state asses.

Donald Trump has a new book out

This is the press release regarding Mr. Trump's newest book

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact:  Peter Prevaricator
Trump for President
www.donaldjtrump.com
email:  chiefliar@donaldjtrump.com

DONALD J. TRUMP BOOK BEING RELEASED NEXT WEEK

To respond to the charges that Donald Trump does not have a detailed plan for making America great again, Mr. Trump has just completed a book.  Fearmongering Press will be the publisher of Mein Trumpf, a complete blueprint for the making of the United States.

Learn how to inspire rally attendees to throw sucker punches.  How to fleece investors by "smart" use of the bankruptcy laws. 

Trump's Tax Plan is laid out in detail, obfuscating how his plan accelerates the inequality of wealth and income curve while convincing his army of sycophants that he has their best interests at heart.

Trump's Plan to End Immigration is explained.  You will be able to finally know just how Mr. Trump plans to identify Muslims among the huddled masses yearning to be free attempting to enter the United States.

Look for Mein Trumpf in bookstores on March 22, 2016

#30

A look inside the charitable nature of Donald Trump, such as it is

One of the reasons many of us want to see the personal income tax returns of Donald Trump is because they will give us some insight into his charitable nature.  We will get to see just how much of that considerable income he boasts about is given back to society in the form of contributions to charities.

But we don't have to wait to look into the charitable contributions of his private foundation, because the foundation tax returns are a matter of public record.  In 2014, his private foundation received only $497,400 in contributions, not a single dollar of which came from Mr. Trump.  The return also shows that Mr. Trump received no pay from the foundation for what he claimed was the 30 minutes per week he spent on the foundation's business.

Now let's take a look at the grants made by the Trump Foundation in 2014:

Organization                                                                     Grant Amount

Alliance for Lupus Research                                            $10,000
All Faiths Beautification and Restoration Program         $10,000
American Skin Association                                              $5,000
The American Spectator Foundation                                $25,000
The Andrew Glover Youth Foundation                            $2,000
Anti-Defamation League                                                  $26,500
BAK Middle School of the Arts                                       $5,000
Big Dog Ranch Rescue Inc.                                              $5,000
Boynton Beach Community High School                        $5,000
The Brooklyn Hospital Foundation                                  $5,000
Damon Runyon Cancer Foundation                                 $10,000
Central Park Conservancy                                                $5,000
City Parks Foundation                                                      $3,000
CityMeals on Wheels                                                       $1,000
Columbia Grammar and Preparatory School                   $50,000
Citizens United Foundation                                             $100,000
Dana Farber Cancer Institute                                           $25,000
FAU Athletics - Spirit Team                                             $700
Fashion Footwear Charitable Foundation                        $5,000
Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund                      $20,000
The Friends of Samuel Frederick Foundation                 $10,000
Green Beret Foundation                                                   $10,000
Harry Hurley in the Morning Golf Tournament               $1,000
Hollyrod Foundation                                                        $1,000
James Whitcomb Riley Memorial Foundation                 $250
John A. Moran Eye Center                                               $10,000
K9s for Warriors                                                               $5,000
Labyrinth Theater Company                                             $10,000
Leukemia and Lymphoma Society                                   $10,000
Long Island Sled Hockey                                                  $1,000
Maestro Cares                                                                   $10,000
Mariano Rivera Foundation                                              $4,000
Nicklaus Children's Health Care Foundation                    $25,000
The New York Jets Foundation                                         $10,000
New York Presbyterian Hospital                                       $1,000
Orthopaedic Foundation                                                    $5,000
Palm Beach Opera                                                             $5,000
Police Athletic League                                                      $25,000
Protect Our Winters                                                           $5,000
Ronald McDonald House of New York                            $15,000
The Salvation Army                                                           $1,000
The Shaun O'Hara Foundation                                           $5,000
The Skyscraper Foundation                                                $1,000
Sports Hall of Fame of New Jersey                                    $5,000
St. Francis Food Pantries and Shelters                               $1,000
The Economic Club of Washington, D. C.                         $6,000
The UCLA Foundation                                                       $5,000
UJA Federation                                                                  $15,000
The Unicorn Children's Foundation                                   $10,000
The Wayuu Taya Foundation                                              $1,000
Women in Need Inc                                                            $5,000
The Family Leader Foundation                                          $10,000

Now there could be massive contributions listed on Mr. Trump's personal return for 2014 but we won't know that unless and until he releases that return.  What we do know from reviewing this list is that of the $591,450 in grants made by Mr. Trump's private foundation, only $20,000 of that amount went to support of veterans.  Further, it should be noted that 75% of that amount is limited to the support of only those men and women who were part of the Green Berets and other Spec-Ops forces, and their families.  So unless a veteran served in a Special Forces unit, the only charitable contribution made by Mr. Trump's foundation in 2014 went to a charity to provide dogs to veterans.

I'm not going to bother to list out the $913,075 in grants made by the Trump Foundation in 2013 but I will point out that only $10,000 of those grants went to veterans organizations, and they were all limited to either Spec-Ops veterans or veterans who were involved in Marine Corps law enforcement.  Also worth noting is that none of the $565,832 in contributions made to the foundation during 2013 came from Mr. Trump.

There were $1.7 million in grants made by the Trump foundation in 2012 and not a single dollar went to veterans organization as far as I could determine by looking over the list.  And while $500,000 of the $1.2+ million in contributions to the foundation in that year came from NBC (probably through association with "The Celebrity Apprentice"), no funding came directly from Mr. Trump.

I'm not the first to suggest that Mr. Trump isn't a very charitable sort.  In a piece published in 2011 The Smoking Gun did an extensive review of the tax returns of the Trump Foundation and pointed out that between 1990 and 2009 Mr. Trump donated only $3.7 million to his private foundation.  The WWE (World Wrestling Entertainment) has donated more than that to the Trump Foundation, probably for Mr. Trump allowing this to happen:

Give till it hurts, Mr. Trump.  I guess that's another lesson you were never taught by your parents. 

The Contradictions of Trump

Let me get this straight.  The Trumperor says he does not condone violence and he also says he prefers the good old days because a protester would have been carried out on a stretcher.  I'll spare you the video of the Trumperor saying he will pay the legal bills of any of the attendees at one of his rallies who punch protesters who were planning to throw tomatoes at him.

The Trumperor claims to get along with everyone.  That he's a "nice guy" and that everyone loves him.  Nice guys don't use insults.  Nice guys don't refer to their rivals as "Little Marco."  Nice guys don't talk about blood coming out of the eyes of a woman they can't handle in a debate setting.

However the biggest contradiction is the Trumperor and his views on freedom of speech.  He has said for the record he wants to limit the free expression of the media, of journalists.  He demands the right to his own freedom of speech during his rallies.  But he has absolutely no regard for the free speech rights of those who want to protest his campaign.  Free speech includes the right to protest.  It includes the right to burn the U. S. flag, no matter how horrific some will find that action.  It includes the right of the KKK to hold events.  Those who oppose the KKK have every right to PEACEFULLY protest those events. 

Students at Cal State University Los Angeles went too far in their protests of a speech held on campus.  The speaker was an extreme conservative whose rhetoric isn't easy to listen to.  Carrying signs outside the location would have been fine.  Standing in the venue in protest without violence would have been fine.  But pulling a fire alarm went too far.

So how is it that Donald Trump, the Trumperor wants the right to say whatever he wants at his rallies, but no one else there has any free speech right to protest whatsoever?  Just doesn't add up, much like the numbers in any of Trump's proposals for our nation's future.

#DumpTrump

Is it enough to be the best at what you do?

I decided to treat myself to my favorite breakfast this morning after the positive result of Monday's cardio version and my surviving a very long day of work on Tuesday.  They are the best at this particular choice in terms of the meal itself.

But the service is a factor and on this particular morning it was less than satisfactory.  It took ten minutes for the server to take my order.  Now I understand all too well the life of a server, having performed that job on more than one occasion.  But there are acceptable and unacceptable ways of dealing with a heavy customer load.  You keep telling the person who you are keeping waiting that you haven't forgotten about them.  You serve them their beverage choice, rather than just asking if they want coffee and upon hearing no just move on to the next customer.  On most days I'd have left at the end of the ten minute wait but I just did not want to have to drive somewhere else.

It reminded me of my own work.  I'm very good at what I do.  Most of my work colleagues come to me with their questions when they aren't sure how to proceed.  I teach the subject.  I've worked hard to learn about what I do.  But that is not why I'm successful at attracting and retaining a client base.  It is because I focus on providing those clients with the best possible service.

Today is a good example of how I believe we have to commit to providing that legendary level of service to our customers, in any industry.  I remembered during that protracted wait to place my breakfast order that I'd promised a client that there would be something waiting for them to pick up today.  But I'd been so slammed with clients yesterday I'd forgotten to do it before I left last night.  So after I ate, I went to the office and made sure the paperwork was waiting for the client.  I could have phoned the office and asked someone to call the client and let them know their paperwork wouldn't be ready for them until Thursday.  It would have been easier.  But it wouldn't have been part of remaining client-focused and remembering that without those customers, we would have no reason to remain in business.  They pay the bills.

I know I'm preaching to the choir with a large part of my small audience in writing this.  I just wanted to repeat it for some odd reason.  Have a great day and continue to be willing to excel.

The Clinton Tax Returns

There is a lot of information in the tax returns released by the Hillary Clinton campaign today.  In the year 2013, in 11 months of giving speeches for money, Secretary Clinton earned nearly $10 million.  That's not unusual. 

The Clintons are very generous, giving an annual average of more than 10% to charity, although it is worth noting that almost every single charitable contribution they've made in the past few years was to their family's foundation.  Again, not unusual.

But there was one line item in the 2013 return that caught my eye.  In 2013 the Clinton's claimed a credit of $100,000 in foreign taxes paid.  Again, not unusual except the source of the income and the amount seems out of balance.  It appears from reading the Form 1116 and supplemental statements in the return that there was a payment to the Clintons of $7.5 million from India.  An income source where the Clintons claimed direct expenses of $1.7 million against this specific income item.

I've used a number of different search engines and cannot find any information on just what Bill or Hillary did in 2013 that earned them this gigantic amount of foreign source income.  What services did they provide for this money?  To whom?

Inquiring minds would like to know.  Apparently the mainstream media isn't interested in knowing this.  They are far more interested in pointing out that the Clintons paid a much higher rate of income tax than Mitt Romney ever did.

Rhythm is an interesting thing

At this moment, for the first time in over a dozen years, I am walking in rhythm.  Sinus rhythm.  That's because I underwent a procedure known as cardioversion this morning.  Considering they shock the heart, they do it under general anesthesia.  I'd had this procedure before, two years back and it was not successful.  The difference this time is directly connected to the fact my doctors prescribed some drugs known as antiarrthymic agents and was probably helped by the fact I've somehow managed to lose 26 pounds since last December.

I'm very grateful to my friends who were there to help me out with this.  Monica, for getting me to the hospital on time.  Anita who would have picked me up had the nurse not already called my mother.  My mom for coming to take me home.  All those who wished me luck before and congratulations afterward.

I'm keeping my fingers crossed that I will be able to remain in a normal rhythm because it means my chances of living a longer life are improved.  It's only one health issue dealt with (hopefully) of a long list, but one step at a time.

Steven Seagal and Donald Trump

Saturday night was Steven Seagal night on AMC and watching some of the old favorites from Seagal's early days made me realize that some of the titles provide excellent metaphors with what's wrong with the notion of Donald Trump as President.

Above the Law - As far as Donald Trump is concerned, the rules don't apply to him.  He constantly violated societal mores and folkways and we've just learned he consistently violated the GOP debate rules by consulting with his campaign manager during breaks.  In fact, at the most recent debate on Fox New Channel, Trump's campaign manager actually went onto the stage during a commercial break and talked to the Donald.  This was the most brazen violation yet, as in the past they've employed at least some subterfuge in their rule-breaking.

Hard to Kill - No matter what Donald Trump says, it is impossible to make his legion of sycophant supporters aware of his failings as a candidate and as a human being.  Trump trumpets his business acumen and attempts to excuse his four business bankruptcy filings as being good business.  Not so for those who invested in his businesses.  The bondholders of the junk bonds that financed his first hotel/casino to file for bankruptcy lost millions.  The banks that were involved lost millions.  Trump lost half of his stake in a business he'd run up a $4 billion debt financing.  Trump Airlines is another example.  He bought an airline shuttle service, gold-plated the faucets and installed other luxuries and then defaulted on his loans.  It failed.  But we don't see those failures on his resume, or in the eyes of his supporters.

Executive Decision - I love this film if for no other reason that we get to see Steven Seagal dying the ignominious death the Trump campaign is so deserving of.  But it points out another fatal flaw that a Trump presidency would expose.  There is an adage in the military.  You can't be a leader until you've learned to be a follower.  Trump has never been anyone's follower.  He has no real concept of leadership, although he has some management skills.  Some.

Under Siege - The idea that the United States of America, where we have a Statue of Liberty welcoming all would close the golden door to people solely because there is a possibility that their faith may be an indicator that they might be terrorists is possibly Trump's biggest failing.

Let's clear this up once and for all

At the 11th GOP debate we heard Senator Marco Rubio claim that Donald Trump inherited $200 million.  We also heard Donald Trump claim he began his business empire with a small loan of $1 million from his father.  So who is wrong?  The answer is almost certainly both.

The Washington Post fact-checked the claim by Mr. Trump that he began his empire with that small loan of $1 million and gave it four Pinocchios, their highest rating of dishonesty.  The story provides proof that Donald Trump received more than $350,000 in direct income from a trust his father set up for him in just the years 1979 through 1981.  It also proves that Mr. Trump has admitted to borrowing $9 million from his future inheritance during a 2007 deposition and that he and his siblings almost certainly divvied up a $30 million trust that Fred Trump established to provide for his wife after his death.  Donald Trump's mother died in 2000, so he certainly ireceived more than $1 million from that trust. The story also provides evidence that the first big Donald Trump real estate project received far more than a $1 million loan from Fred Trump. 

But we can clear this discrepancy up very easily.  Mr. Donald Trump simply needs to authorize the release of his father's estate tax return and the documents regarding all of the trusts set up for his benefit and those tax returns.  He can protect the privacy of his siblings if they wish by redacting any portion of those documents that make mention of those siblings.

It won't happen.  Donald Trump is obfuscating every single attempt to look into his personal financial history with the sole exception of the documents he is required by law to furnish as part of his political campaign.  He could release every single one of his personal tax returns that is not currently being audited very easily.  Why doesn't he?  It's a pretty good question that he won't answer.