So... God Gave us Trump?

Have you seen the new Trump Adoration video? It's a total rip-off of the famous 1978 Paul Harvey speech, "So God Made a Farmer," of course, and it's a doozy.

In addition to being full of things God would never say, it's full of comical contradictions, such as Trump coming home hungry - in the dark, as he's seen in this picture - but having to wait for Melania to finish lunch "with friends, and then tell the women to come back real soon - and mean it."  

There are other mismatches between the video and the script; you might need to sit through it a couple of times to catch them all.

I took the opportunity to edit the script; if I had the talent and patience, I'd create a video to go along with it, but I'm pretty sure you'll get the picture - all of the pictures, in fact. 

And on June 14, 1946, God looked down on his planned paradise and said, “I need a charlatan” so God gave us Trump.

And then God said, “I need someone who will play tennis and baseball while stricken with bone spurs, and use those bone spurs as a reason to avoid fighting for his country,” so God gave us Trump.

And then God said “I need someone who will party all night and then get up in the morning and spend all day lying about his business prowess, talking about his money, and showing off his gold-plated toilet,” so God gave us Trump.

And then God said, “I need someone who will salivate over his own daughter, relentlessly promote her sexy body, and suggest that if only she weren’t his child, he’d be dating her,” so God gave us Trump.

Inexplicably, God said, “I need someone who will get up before dawn and cheat on his first wife with his second, his second with his third, and his third with sex workers,” so God gave us Trump.

And then God said, “I need someone who will mock and denigrate women, boast about sexually assaulting them, say because he’s rich he can get away with it, and buy a beauty pageant so he can prowl the contestants' dressing rooms unabated,” so God gave us Trump.

At some point, God said, “I need to test the capacity of Americans to take their civic duty seriously, and to do that we need a celebrity blowhard who used to call into radio shows using fake names to promote himself to run for the president of the United States,” so God gave us Trump. 

And then God said, “I need someone rude enough, with arms strong enough to push his way through a group of world leaders to get in the front for the picture, and stupid enough to share the nation's secrets with people willing to pay to spend time with him," so God gave us Trump.

And then God said, “I need someone strong enough to suck up to dictators like Vladimir Putin, Viktor Orban, Kim Jong Un, and Xi Jinping, and bold enough to talk about how much he admires their strength, their total control over their people, their intelligence, and the pageantry of their military parades,” so God gave us Trump.

Again, inexplicably, God said, “I need someone who’s not afraid to lie about belonging to a church, who says the Bible is his favorite book, is unable to mention even a single passage he’s fond of, who will hold the Good Book upside down for a photo op as protestors are cleared from My house, and autograph copies for his adoring fans,” so God gave us Trump.

And speaking of adoration, God said, “I need someone who doesn’t represent anything I stand for, to gloat while others lay hands on him, proclaim him their Savior, and shout his praises from the pulpit,” so God gave us Trump.

And God said, “I need a patriot who’s unafraid to maul and grope the United States flag as if it was one of his sex workers, to hug it and kiss it while making lewd faces, as a crowd of people who despise many of the freedoms the flag stands for cheer him on,” so God gave us Trump.

And God said, “I need someone so self-centered he will mock our war heroes when they disagree with him, call them losers, say he doesn’t like people who were captured and tortured by our enemies,” so God gave us Trump.

And God said, “I need a leader to tell Americans to ‘get over it’ when faced with yet another school shooting, to proclaim he had the tallest building in New York City after terrorists attacked and destroyed the tallest buildings in New York City, and to comfort natural disaster victims by tossing rolls of paper towels to them,” so God gave us Trump.

And God said, “I need someone who will quote the vile language of evil leaders who came before him, taking the words as his own, knowing that others will immediately rise to his defense and take the words as their own,” so God gave us Trump.

And God said, “I need someone who will lie about everything, who will steal from charities, and who will raise children who do the same,” so God gave us Trump.

And God said, "I need someone who will ignore the law when it suits him, and face dozens of civil and criminal charges; someone who will proclaim immunity no matter what, even murder; who'll talk about 'his judges' as if they swore an oath to him, not to the Constitution, and who will, even now, refuse to commit to accepting the results of an election," so God gave us Trump.

And God said, ‘I need someone who will surround himself with people who believe everything he says, twist and turn his worst ideas into action plans, help strip rights away from anyone who disagrees with or has nothing to offer him, and who are willing to go to the ends of the earth in service to him, but not me,” so God gave us Trump.

And then God shook his head and said, “Holy cow, they actually fell for that?”

Sunday School 2/12/23

We'll start your Sunday School lesson in the State of the Union classroom, where Jake Tapper talked with Rep. Mike Turner (R-OH), chair of the House Intelligence Committee.

Here's Turner's take on classified documents. 

I just don't get this, Jake. I don't get it with Biden, Pence, or Trump. All of them keep finding documents that are classified, stuffed places. I just -- I have no understanding of it. I can tell you that members of Congress who, like me, deal with highly classified information in the Intelligence Committee, the Armed Services Committee, the Foreign Affairs Committee, we're all just stumped. We don't understand how this could be happening. We don't understand how all three could have been so lackadaisical about this.

He said there's legislation "that will make it even more difficult and give different penalties to be able to enforce mishandling classified documents."

Turning to Ukraine, he's "very disappointed" in folks on both sides of the aisle who think we've done enough.

The majority of Congress understands that this is crucial. We are fighting on the front lines of democracy. The fact that Zelenskyy has been -- as president, they -- will rally his country to fight against Russia, and we have been able to arm them, it is really unprecedented that a nation like that could stand to a superpower like Russia. But they're doing so with the commitment to keep the sovereignty of their nation. And Russia's atrocities are just appalling. Anyone who sees what Russia is doing in killing innocent civilians, destroying the infrastructure there has to be moved to want to support the Ukrainians.

In the MTP classroom, What's-his-name talked with Rep. Jim Himes (D-CT) about our relationship with China, especially if the recent objects we've shot down turn out to be theirs. Himes said we need to be careful since we don't know yet what those objects were.

I think it's fair to say that the Chinese are probably pretty embarrassed that they let a surveillance platform – the first one – go over the United States. It became a, you know, 'cause célèbre' around the world. We now own it. That's not a comfortable thing for the Chinese. And, of course, we canceled the trip of the Secretary of State. So my guess is that the other two objects are not Chinese, that China is doing everything they can right now to keep as low a profile as possible. But, who knows? We won't know for – I guess, until the administration fully briefs on what these things are. And to be fair, remember, Chuck, when you go by one of these things in an F-22 or an F-18, you're moving pretty fast. Until you actually pick up the pieces on the ground, there'll be some uncertainty.

It'll be fun to watch this unfold, especially since we shot down a third one after the show aired. 

In the This Week classroom, George Stephanopoulos talked with David Miliband, head of the International Rescue Committee, about the difficulties in getting aid to Syria after the devastating earthquake last week.  

There are several issues, not the least of which is that part of Syria is rebel-controlled. Miliband said 

there is news from the United Nations that the Syrian government is going to allow aid to go into this rebel-held area from the government-controlled side. But, frankly, that’s an indirect route, and it’s caught up in politics.

The UN says the "most direct route to help people is across the Turkish-Syrian border, north to south, opening up more crossing points." 

People haven’t gotten food. They haven’t gotten medicine. They haven’t gotten basic hygiene supplies. The water and sanitation is in ruins. So this is a community for whom the earthquake was one massive hit. But the grave danger they face now almost affects more people.

He also explained that borders are effectively blocked for survivors and that people are afraid to go into government-controlled areas.

They fear being prosecuted or recruited into the army of President Assad. Many... about one and a half million to 2 million of those trapped in northwest Syria have fled from other parts of the country because of the fighting. And the Turkish border is also blocked for them. So, these people are caged in, effectively.

The US needs to lead - diplomatically through the UN,  financially, and by ensuring that the Syrian people aren't forgotten, after the dozen-year civil war.

The world has moved on. But the crisis has not been resolved. And a forgotten crisis is not a resolved crisis. What happens is that people on the edge, left on the edge where natural disasters strike that pushed over the precipice, and that’s what we’re seeing now.

I heard a report from the BBC this morning that two additional border crossings have been approved for international aid to flow into the rebel-held part of the country; up to now, there had been only one. 

WWYD: Disaster Tax Relief

As we wait for the House to re-approve the "massive tax cut for the middle class" today (after yesterday's SNAFU on a handful of provisions not meeting Senate reconciliation rules), and wait for another 'excitable boy' gavel bang from Paul Ryan, I thought it would be fun to put some of the changes through the What Would You Do? meter.

The Rs have said their plan 'reforms' and 'simplifies' our tax code; they did that by tinkering or massaging a tax benefit here and there. Tax benefits, for the purpose of this discussion, includes those things people derisively refer to as loopholes - things that benefit only certain Americans, primarily 'other people' (hence the derision).

One of these benefits extends to people who suffer losses from disasters such as floods and fires.

Right now, disaster victims can deduct losses that aren't insured and that amount to more than 10 percent of their incomes.

So, think about friends, family and others living in the Gulf Coast or Puerto Rico who were impacted by the hurricanes and floods earlier this year. Think back to Sandy, Irene, Katrina, and Andrew and all of the other storms we remember by name.

Think about all of the people who were impacted by the flooding right here in NY along the Lake Ontario shore, for months. The official declaration was made for most of counties along the shore back in November, but some were left out and are waiting for a review to be finished to know for sure whether they'll be included in the declaration.

It's easy to picture losses from those and other disasters far exceeding 10% of a homeowner's income, isn't it, especially since flood insurance is prohibitively expensive for many people? And, especially since in many cases (my own backyard included) the flood maps don't make a whole heckuva lot of sense outside coastal areas, major rivers, and other obviously flood-prone areas.

Think about all of the people who have lost their homes in the California fires this year - epic and historic wildfires, still burning. Sure, some of them are celebrities, but most of them are just regular folks, right?

So, what's different after the GOP's massaging of this loophole? Well,

Under the new tax plan, the deduction could only be claimed for those disasters that the president declares a federal emergency. The proposed change would go into effect January 1, 2018, meaning disaster victims could file one final deduction this year if they experienced a loss that did not receive Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) support.

What's the impact of the change? It's hard to say for sure, but we do have some historical info.

In 2015, more than 72,000 people filed a casualty or theft deduction resulting in $1.6B in claims, according to the IRS' Statistics of Income Division (The IRS lumps casualty and theft deductions together in its count). 

Most of us can pretty readily recall the big ones, the national disasters that do receive the presidential declaration, but unless we are paying particular attention or are personally impacted, it's harder to remember the ones that don't. Here's a reminder of just one that didn't make the cut.

The historic wildfires that hit Kansas, Texas, Oklahoma and Colorado last March, however, did not receive a federal disaster designation, meaning those affected would not have been able to utilize the personal-loss deductions if such an event had occurred under the new tax plan... 

Losses to the High Plains wildfires last March were significantly less (than those associated with Harvey and Irma). The fires burned 2100 square miles in the four states, causing about $55 million in fence losses. In Texas alone, the personal losses to farmers and ranchers was estimated at $25.1 million.

While farm and ranch losses to wildfire, tornadoes, etc., pale in comparison to damage from major hurricanes, losses to individuals from either event are the same. 

So,  if you were making the decisions about how our tax plan should work, what would you do about deductions for disasters?

1. Allow deductions, with no percent of income limitation, regardless of whether a federal disaster is declared.
2. Allow deductions, with a percent of income limitation, regardless of whether a federal disaster is declared.
3. Allow deductions, with no percent of income limitation, only when a federal disaster is declared.
4. Allow deductions, with a percent of income limitation, only when a federal disaster is declared.
5. Do not allow deductions, but offer low interest federal loans to everyone to cover uninsured losses.
6. Do not allow deductions, but offer low interest federal loans only to those households with income under $200,000.
7. Do not allow deductions or federal loans; the homeowner, rancher, businessman, etc. would be responsible for either having enough insurance to protect themselves, or being able to secure loans through state or local governments or their financial institutions.

Have at it, legislators.