[The Urban Sombrero]

And yet at every point conceivable, have you lavished a spirited defense on his behalf. I have written extensively on the President's Executive Orders. And though I admit freely that I choose not to address the rest of your endless parade of rehash on grounds of refusal to lend credibility to the patently absurd, I do sometimes seize on the opportunity to stand up for what is right.

For example, homosexuals were already equal under the law prior to the ascension of your hero, Obama. What he did and what you advocate, is for those of us who reserve the right to judge what is moral or immoral according to the dictates of God of ourselves, (note; see Establishment Clause) to be run over or otherwise legislated into submission under the laws of men. Because as the record clearly reveals, referendum after referendum on the matter of gay marriage went down to resounding defeat on each occasion. Your ilk, (the living document light and transient causes crowd) therefore proceeded to go around the will of the people, using seeded and openly biased activist judges to circumvent said referendums in an epic display of jurisimprudence. Not to mention the fact that such actions are an example of blazing opposition to the authority of Almighty God. We the 'reasonable' people therefore, in an effort to limit the insanity, pray that Judge Neil Gorsuch will somehow be confirmed to the USSC, in order that we may be spared any additional such affronts on ours and the Lord's behalf in the immediate future.

But whereas there is vast difference between the tactics of McConnell and Reid, there is almost no difference between my writing style, as I use inflection and vocabulary, and your use of my writing style in same. With one major exception that is, your expressed opinion is given to you courtesy of sourcing such as the DNC, where mine is my own.

You're a regular legend in your own mind, and, troublingly, showing signs of paranoia. Note: McConnell and Reid are the same animal in different stripes: political animals.

You claim homosexuals were "equal under the law." By your reasoning, the "reasonable" people may maintain Jim Crow laws, and if "heeded into submission" it is somehow a travesty upon the Constitution. How convenient. You have plainly come a bit unhinged. The only absurdity existing in our debate is your inability to recognize, let alone grasp, nuance. It's ridiculous.