I had one more thought about this appropriations bill thing and then I'm gonna go back to working on cars...
I was wondering about the one side "using Covid as blackmail" thing to get stuff put into the bill other side didn't want. I found a copy of last years Consolidated Appropriations Act 2020. Last years version of the same big appropriations bill.
Well guess what... That stuff did NOT get stuck in there with Covid. In fact, that other stuff was already IN there. The Covid relief stuff is new, but the rest of that stuff? Already there.
Some of the numbers changed a little (presumably for inflation?), but the same language for the same things was already there. I found the first four items and stopped. I'm assuming the rest of them are all in there as well.
So what's the point? The point is... It's the example of twisted misleading "semi-facts" that are being used to tell you what your opinion is. It sounds plausible or it wouldn't work. And it sounds like something terrible that one side forced on the other using Covid relief as blackmail, but in fact it was in there already. And it was approved before.
The people who are complaining about these items now... They approved it last year, right? And they didn't flag it as a problem last year, right? And they've had a year to finish reading last years details, right? I didn't dig back further than last year, but I suspect much of that stuff goes back a number of years.
Here's what I'm talking about:
Makes me wonder why are they making such a stink about all of a sudden? Wasn't it just as much of a problem last year? Did they just get around to doing their job and reading it this year? Did someone suggest they could blame the other side for blackmail and nobody would actually read any of it and figure out that it's not true? Did someone above them tell them their opinion and now they're telling you yours?
OK... I think I'm talked out. I think I'm gonna go machine something.