Not knowing that she’s already addressed the issue is literal ignorance.

Yeah, otherwise someone might look at what she said and draw a cynical, bad faith conclusion. She really should just make it so nobody will do that to a young, prominent, leftist Muslim congresswoman.

This is so tired. If christian politicians were constantly asked to reaffirm their commitment to America, in light of the treason and terrorism of the KKK, and in spite of their general vote history, demeanor, and prior statements, they might view this “innocent question” in a similar light.

that wasn’t my point.

Maybe one day you’ll be able to see the forest for the trees. 

Quasi, let me give you an example that might resonate...

If you have to resort to debating semantics, then you probably don’t have much of an argumentative leg to stand on, eh?

Because if she says “I condemn that and have voted for and even sponsored legislation to that effect,” that’s going to suffice? She won’t just be asked the same question a month from now, just like she hasn’t been asked it time and again, most of the time in bad faith?

Splinter this morning: Asking about the FGM to someone that has already sponsored laws to address the issue from a Muslim activist that should know this already is nonsense.

And she's been giving help, notably amd repeatedly, with examples. Which any activist should know. There is no need to ask her to do something she's already doing, and yeah, the activost is an idiot. 

She probably gets asked about this issue ten times a day, so she got annoyed. It happens.

I don’t think you’re quite getting it.

That look she gives the questioner is all of us trying to put up with this bullshit.

So the officers suspicion is enough to invalidate his right to due process?

How will it hurt Labour when it has nothing to do with Labour?

I’d argue that professionalism—the kind that demands a tight-lipped, unified front even in the face of negative pushback—is warranted and even laudable in the right situations. Working for a boss/company/organization that is pushing through a rough patch on the way to doing good for others (or at least not doing evil)…

Except, as the article pointed out, the Republicans suffered no ill-effects from shutting down the government; in fact they were rewarded with the Senate majority they continue to maintain. They also suffered very little for impeaching Clinton, winning the presidency in 2000 after suffering losses in proportion to…

*note: if you vote against unconditionally funding concentration camps Pelosi will openly attack you for not knowing your place

You do understand that the conservative “centrists” have been calling the shots all along? They are the ones that keep failing to kick republican Lucy’s football over and over and over and over and over again. They are the ones that keep saying defeatist and weak garbage like “impeachment is off the table”.

“The purity faction” doesn’t care about the debt ceiling, though. That would be the moderate centrists.