Kyrsten Sinema agrees to massive spending bill after Democrats guarantee loopholes for billionaires
It appears that political maven Kyrsten Sinema gave the green light to a new slush fund in the name of environmentalism and inflation reduction — oddly enough (or perhaps completely predictably), only after her Democrat peers agreed to insulate private equity billionaires. In an article from ZeroHedge:
Arizona Senator Kyrsten Sinema — the lone Democrat holdout on the Biden administration's revamped reconciliation bill — has finally signed off on it, after Democrats agreed to preserve the so-called carried interest loophole that allows investment managers (like her former bosses) to shield the majority of their income from higher taxes.
The tax change was probably the only good and fair thing in the bill. If death by taxation be the fate of ordinary working-class Americans, why should hedge fund billionaires like Soros receive an exemption from the suffering?
Schumer, Pelosi, Biden, and the rest of Democrats have railed against the rich continuously, but somehow this huge tax break remained intact. In reality, they have always catered to their rich donors.
Although it shouldn't need to be said, the bill has nothing to do with reducing inflation or the deficit. Rather, it has everything to do with the continuing intentional destruction of the affordable energy sector and the economy, while lining the pockets of Establishment Democrat politicians.
The internet is forever. In 2008, Barack Obama said, the last thing we should do during a recession is raise taxes on the middle class. That’s precisely what Biden and the Democrats will do with their, “inflation reduction act.” pic.twitter.com/cKLuDEh4rJ— Wesley Hunt (@WesleyHuntTX) August 4, 2022
Even Obama had enough sense not to raise taxes during a recession, saying in 2008, "In an economy like this, the last thing we should do is raise taxes on the middle class." In the audience, Joe and Jill Biden can even be seen clapping along...
If Democrats truly believe that "climate change" is the number-one threat, why do they buy multimillion-dollar beachfront properties, engage in behavior that makes them the top spewers of carbon emissions, and eat meat while they're trying to strong-arm us into switching to crickets?
No matter how many articles we read, movies we see, nightly news programs we watch, all that's parroted are talking points from Democrats, telling us the science is settled — although we never see actual scientific data to support the claims.
The reason we aren't shown data is that facts have never mattered to leftists. They are pushing their radical agenda to transform America, and if the public saw the actual numbers, the political elites would lose support.
Here are some factual data that are easy to find but we will never see:
- The average temperature on Earth lies somewhere around 57 degrees Fahrenheit, while in 1990 it was 59.8 degrees Fahrenheit.
- The U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) estimates that the world consumed 92.2 million barrels per day (b/d) of petroleum and other liquid fuels in 2020, a 9% decline from the previous year and the largest decline in EIA's series that dates back to 1980.
So, according to records, the average world temperature in 1990 was 59.8 degrees, and today it is around 57 degrees. All this occurred while crude oil consumption has risen from around 65 million barrels per day in 1990 to close to 100 million barrels per day now. Those numbers were obtained after an analysis from data collected at 2,000 meteorological stations around the world, dating as far back as 1880.
Government policies should be based on actual scientific data, not easily manipulated computer models that have been 100% wrong, nor U.N. "predictions" that have been 100% wrong, nor worthless and superficial talking points that say the science is settled.
Will anyone at the WaPo, or any other of the propaganda media outlets, ask Schumer, Biden, Kerry, Pelosi, or their fellow Democrats for scientific data to justify the destruction of the affordable energy industry before our economy is intentionally destroyed? I doubt it, because facts haven't mattered for a long time (if ever).
It is all a massive fraud.
They can't afford to debate because there are no objective scientific data that supports their position, and they would get their clocks cleaned in a debate. Gore would be no better in a debate than Kerry, Gates, Obama, Kamala, or Joe. Can you imagine the word salads coming out of Joe's and Kamala's mouths if they were asked for the scientific data that support the destruction of a functioning energy sector?
The media and other Democrats pretend they care about the poor and middle classes, small businesses, and family farms, but their actions and policies prove they don't. If they succeed in destroying the fossil fuel industry, the rich will just go elsewhere for their oil — after all, they're entitled to their yachts and jets.
Isn't it sad that those who called inflation transitory are financially secure, living high on the hogs off the backs of working Americans, all the while pretending they're experts, or responsible, when it comes time to fiscal and financial matters? It is as pathetic as the fact the congenital liar Fauci leeches over $400,000 a year off us — and that's only what's "known."