Marianne Williamson

Rank 27 of 47
|
Score -6
10/17/2025, 9:39:27 AM
X
In reply to:
High Command
@_smile_think_
·
27d
@marwilliamson @Raqitabanana How would it have fixed the problem?

Until you specifically answer, you will be offering nothing more than a hollow political talking point here.
Marianne Williamson
@marwilliamson
·
27d
@Raqitabanana Both parties are to blame for their inaction over decades. But Biden wanted to sign an 8B bi-partisan bill that would have gone far towards fixing the problem. Trump came to DC and told GOP Senators to not vote for it because it would have give Biden a win in an election year.
RaqitaBanana
@Raqitabanana
·
27d
@marwilliamson Ice agents dont write immigration law...why didnt dems just change the law when they had power a couple years ago?
Marianne Williamson
@marwilliamson
·
27d
ICE agents are basically waging war on innocent people (including American citizens).
Are there still people saying, "This is what we elected them to do"?

The statement is part of a public discourse on immigration policy and government spending. It provides a factual response to a question about the allocation of funds, contributing to the civic dialogue on this issue.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement does not use harmful language and provides information, thus adhering to the principle of doing no harm with words. [+1]
  2. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    By providing a factual answer, the statement promotes understanding and potentially empathy by clarifying how funds are used. [+1]
  3. Principle 4:
    I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
    The statement engages in constructive dialogue by answering a question, although the initial remark about not doing a Google search could be seen as slightly dismissive.