return2ozmaBiden promised not to finance fossil fuels. So why is the US backing a huge gas project?
mozzThis direct contradiction of clearly articulated administration policy is possible because because of the bank’s nominal independence. It makes its own decisions and evaluates its own deals—it’s supposed to conduct transactions that support the American economy, free from political interference.
I see you have taken to heart my advice about making more subtle and "what? it's technically true"-defensible postings, that through the phrasing of their headline still feed the narrative that Biden's bad for the climate even though he pushed through a climate bill that's predicted to reduce US emissions by 40% in the next 6 years, and this particular financing deal is only tangentially related to him. (In the article it says the bank is actually forbidden by law from choosing deals to finance or not based on which industry they relate to.)
Vote for Biden. Seriously. I don’t care. Just know what you’re voting for.
A 40% reduction in emissions and continued American democracy?
CrazyFrog97A genocide enabler?
I’m tired of seeing this worn out point. What exactly would you propose he do that is:
Actually possible for him to do
Not going to make the situation worse
Not something he is already doing
Don’t get me wrong, I don’t like what Israel is doing either but the US has painted themselves into a corner long before the Biden admin. We can’t stop supporting Israel without basically ceding control of the region to Iran, and I guarantee Iran will do shit that will make Israel look like Mr. Rogers by comparison.
I’m not saying there’s nothing he could be doing better, but I don’t see any productive discussion from the people calling him Genocide Joe.
And all that aside, he’s still by far the preferable alternative to Don Cheeto who would likely actually be a genocide enabler.