@POTUS Joe's Promise isn't 'Broken' so much as it's #intercepted and #Mangled by @CONGRESSdotgov | @businessinsider @MicrosoftEdge @PenguinRandom @maddow #intercept #Mangle #intercepting
BusinessInsider explains 'what the legislature is putting Biden's idea through' in a report linked through 'that word' below; but first I want to understand that word better. And I find you understand words better if you look at 'the words at their base' (then going on to look at the words at those words' bases, then the words at those words' bases, etc.-etc. ad infinitum)
The word “Intercept (\ #Interceptor #Interception” is built on ancient words that mean "to Grasp (Take, Catch) Between."
The word “Mangle” is built on ancient words that mean |Maim, |Mutilate, |Wound (it's also the name of a Machine for pressing- & smoothing clothes after washing (somehow modeled after the #Mangonel---a type of |Catapult, with a name built on words that mean |Embellish, Trim, |Dress (any means of Deceiving or Tricking)).
I say his promise is 'intercepted & mangled' (and not "broken") because a 'promise' isn't something that CAN be 'broken!' (Especially not President Biden's promise) The very root of that word is "to Throw Forward" (it's also 'to Reach Forward,' but a crucial feature of the multiple-house government is that no one lawmaker has to carry an idea all the way through the process---it's a relay, an assembly-line.)
President Biden 'threw' that idea 'forward,' and his supporters in the American Public caught it and carried it as far as they could; but--when his Congress tried to catch it--a few of them let "reality" knock them out of range (the 'reality' that "the money for Biden's plan" has to come from somewhere!)
I don't know the specifics of the bill or the plan for the money (I'm not a 'Rachel Maddow'-level news-hound!), but I hear things & have my suspicions.
First, I hear that Senator Manchin's main objection to the bill (aside from its huge price-tag) is its environmental plan---something about 'reducing carbon-emissions,' when he represents a state that is heavily dependent on coal-industry (mining, processing, etc.) He would probably also need measures added to smooth his constituents transition from coal to solar or -wind or -whatever 'clean energy' they think will work better.
And then, there's 'where the money is coming from.' I hear a whole lot about how 'they' want to spend a certain amount, but I'm not hearing 'how it means they'll spend less somewhere else.' So--tho we knew the money was going to come from "our taxes"--it's not going to come from 'taxes we've already paid!' It's going to be added to The National Deficit---a debt that'll come due sooner than our children would like!
... or am I just 'buying into The Hype of The National Debt?' Straighten me out in The Comments!
Comments
Post a Comment
I appreciate your comment, and I'll probably approve it & publish it soon (give me about a week before you try to post it again when it doesn't publish immediately ... thanks)