This is the only interaction Steve King should be allowed to have, the only questions that should ever be posed to him, anywhere he goes in public, for the rest of his life.
Every elected Republican should field constant questions: about their colleague Steve King; the host of other open racists in their party; their party's 50-year strategy of courting racism; their leader Don Trump, who attacks the 14th amendment, who repeats neo-Nazi conspiracies.
Since that is what they have chosen to make themselves, that should be what they are made to talk about.
I'd like to know how my representative, @justinamash, a first-US born generation Arab American, justifies belonging to a party that makes such overt appeals to open racism, which runs and elects and seats white supremacists, whose base enjoys attacks on birthright citizenship.
To my knowledge, he's never been directly asked how he justifies making common cause with a white supremacist outfit.
Personally, I think it should come up any time he's interviewed.
As it should with any elected Republican.
Or unelected.
Personally, I think it should come up any time he's interviewed.
As it should with any elected Republican.
Or unelected.
But *how* unhappy? I really want to know—how does he justify his continued involvement with a party who would enact it, and with an electorate electrified by the proposition?
And what would be his line? Is there one? How does he live with himself?
And what would be his line? Is there one? How does he live with himself?
How does @justinamash justify belonging to and supporting a party that is presently, right now, as we speak, ginning up their voters by vowing to strip citizenship from people with citizenship stories not so different from his own?
How is that not a constant question for him?
How is that not a constant question for him?
