President Trump

[YourGrandpa]

Yes it did. Obama started the mass detention program, but he never separated children from their families. It was wrong then and it's still wrong now, and I critisized him for it at the time.

You seem to be under the impression that I loved Obama and everything he did. I started questioning him right out of the gate in 2008 when he started cracking down on marijuana dispensaries in CA harder than Bush did before him. The bailout of the banks didn't help my opinion of him, either. He's just as corrupt as Clinton and Bush, and now Drumpf is taking it to a whole new level.

Well good, at least you're equally critical. Too bad all that criticism doesn't come with anything productive.

[YourGrandpa]

Get your facts straight before calling someone a dope.

You have yet to get your facts straight dopey.

[Eraser]

Well good, at least you're equally critical. Too bad all that criticism doesn't come with anything productive.

Yours does?

[Transient]

Well good, at least you're equally critical. Too bad all that criticism doesn't come with anything productive.

I've donated hundreds of dollars to progressive campaigns. I started dialogues with dozens of people I met through work during 2015 and 2016 about their votes. I've spoken at length with several local politicians about their views. I don't know what more I can do short of running for office myself.

[YourGrandpa]

Well good, at least you're equally critical. Too bad all that criticism doesn't come with anything productive.

Yours does?

What was I critical of?

[YourGrandpa]

Well good, at least you're equally critical. Too bad all that criticism doesn't come with anything productive.

I've donated hundreds of dollars to progressive campaigns. I started dialogues with dozens of people I met through work during 2015 and 2016 about their votes. I've spoken at length with several local politicians about their views. I don't know what more I can do short of running for office myself.

Follow up your critique with a viable idea/resolution.

[Transient]

The progressives I support already have a solution: get money out of politics. It's the root of all this corruption and if politicians couldn't get unlimited campaign money from people like the Koch brothers or George Soros, they would start representing their constituents again. There are dozens of Justice Democrats running for office and several have already won their elections to Congress.

Check out Wolf-PAC. It's a political action committee to end all political action committees, whose goal is to pass an amendment to overturn Citizens United and get money out of politics. They plan to use an Article V convention which requires passage in 34 states in order to bypass our useless Congress. Currently it has passed in 5 states; California, Illinois, New Jersey, Rhode Island, and my home state, Vermont.

[shaft]

lol @ if you don’t have a solution don’t critizise injustice. Hey if you don’t like Trump maybe you should become a billionaire, run for office and come up with solutions. gramps is such a dipshit.

[Κracus]

He's straight up just making shit up at this point. Some people's ego are a little too brittle.

[shaft]

Kracus if you don’t post a solution to world hunger on the quake3world messageboard don’t you say a fucking thing about it.

[Eraser]

What was I critical of?

Nothing. That's the problem.

[Captain]

Hey if you don’t like Trump maybe you should let a billionaire give you money, run businesses to the ground, and come up with nothing while tweeting like a mentally-challenged 5-yr old. gramps is such a dipshit.

ftfy

[Κracus]

Kracus if you don’t post a solution to world hunger on the quake3world messageboard don’t you say a fucking thing about it.

Lol

[YourGrandpa]

The progressives I support already have a solution: get money out of politics. It's the root of all this corruption and if politicians couldn't get unlimited campaign money from people like the Koch brothers or George Soros, they would start representing their constituents again. There are dozens of Justice Democrats running for office and several have already won their elections to Congress.

Check out Wolf-PAC. It's a political action committee to end all political action committees, whose goal is to pass an amendment to overturn Citizens United and get money out of politics. They plan to use an Article V convention which requires passage in 34 states in order to bypass our useless Congress. Currently it has passed in 5 states; California, Illinois, New Jersey, Rhode Island, and my home state, Vermont.

I agree with most of what you're saying and the Wolf-PAC seem like a pretty good start. But I'm not so sure a "Democrat" or "Republican" is the answer. Not only is the government not accountable to the people, they traditionally tow the party line. I personally think our two party system is divisive and consequently unproductive. It only truly severs a small percentage of extremists, leaving everyone else two choose the least of two evils. We need a moderate party that has the fiscal mind of the Republicans and the social mind of the Democrats. One that will make decisions for the people, not their party, special interest, or otherwise. That being said, none of this speaks directly to immigration reform...

[YourGrandpa]

lol @ if you don’t have a solution don’t critizise injustice. Hey if you don’t like Trump maybe you should become a billionaire, run for office and come up with solutions. gramps is such a dipshit.

Sure... Scream like a child from your hi-chair and let someone else deal with it. Sad but typical.

And I'm the dipshit. LOL.

[HM-PuFFNSTuFF]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/Laurie_Garrett/status/1010200880556146688[/tweet]

[Κracus]

lol @ if you don’t have a solution don’t critizise injustice. Hey if you don’t like Trump maybe you should become a billionaire, run for office and come up with solutions. gramps is such a dipshit.

Sure... Scream like a child from your hi-chair and let someone else deal with it. Sad but typical.

And I'm the dipshit. LOL.

You really are, you're straight up making shit up then refusing to address it when people call you out on it. That's the definition of a dipshit.

[YourGrandpa]

I haven't made anything up, you dope.

[Κracus]

You totally did, you said the clinton's created the zero tolerance policy when it was the current administration that made that policy in April.

[YourGrandpa]

What did the Trump administration place the "zero tolerance policy" on?

BTW, I didn't say the Clinton administration created the zero tolerance policy. LOL.

[Κracus]

You did when you said Sessions enacted a law created by the clintons. Enacting something means making something law. That's like saying the Clinton's already had that law/policy in place but sessions just enforced it which isn't the case at all.

Adding a policy to an existing law isn't at all the same thing as enacting something someone else has already done and pointing at the fact that it was the Clintons is just trying to deflect blame.

That's a bit like adding a policy to speeding charges where you get the death penalty for speeding 30mph over the limit. It's not the administration that originally created a speeding laws fault for creating that policy nor did they ever assume anyone would pass such a stupid policy.

The Clinton's have nothing to do with the policy Sessions added in April.

[YourGrandpa]

I didn't say enacted, I said enforced...

The law was already in place that would allow for children to be separated from their parents under specific conditions. The Trump administration placed a zero tolerance policy on that law in an attempt to discourage illegal immigration. The media got a hold of it and it blew up in his face. Certainly they are going to try and deflect some of the blame by pointing out the origination of the law. However, the Trump administration isn't the only administration that separated children from their parents. It has happened many times under previous administrations. So all of this is really just another case of selective outrage. Something dopey people on both sides of the political fence are guilty of.

I never said it was right. I never said I agreed with the law or Trump's zero tolerance policy. I was merely challenging the newly outraged children, screaming about how bad it was to offer a sound alternative.

Are you going to be okay now?

[Κracus]

I know you're a bit of dope and that causes you to speak out of turn. So let me help you out.

Sessions ENACTED a "Zero Tolerance" policy for a law that was passed under the Clinton administration. That was done as a deterrent to discourage illegal immigration. Do I agree with it? No. Was it a bad idea? Clearly.

Saying a country has the money for something that they don't currently have, doesn't mean they have it.

Uh huh, sure you didn't. Just keep making shit up.

Before you said he enacted the law, you said he enforced an already existing law, which wasn't the case either. Keep making shit up, would you like a shovel with that?

Edit: Also, there was NO LAW REQUIRING PARENTS TO BE SEPARATED FROM THEIR KIDS. You are making that up.

[YourGrandpa]

Uh huh, sure you didn't. Just keep making shit up.

Before you said he enacted the law, you said he enforced an already existing law, which wasn't the case either. Keep making shit up, would you like a shovel with that?

Edit: Also, there was NO LAW REQUIRING PARENTS TO BE SEPARATED FROM THEIR KIDS. You are making that up.

I'm not making anything up...

I said enforced an existing law and enacted a zero tolerance policy. Two completely different things. The existing LAW allowed for the separation of children under certain circumstance. But the zero tolerance POLICY mandated the separation.

GFY.

[Κracus]

You're either making shit up as you go or you simply have no understanding of what adding a new policy to an existing law means.

Either way, Clintons have nothing to do with this, it's entirely the Trump administration.