No one died during or as a result of the Watergate break-in. No one was injured. It had no effect on the outcome of the subsequent presidential election. Compare to: Benghazi; Fast and Furious; IRS targeting conservatives (and sharing the data with lefty organizations); Solyndra, et al; Black Panther voter intimidation; etc., etc.

It’s happening in/to NH. People leaving Massachusetts and escaping to NH are turning that state blue, too. “Live Free or Die” will soon disappear from NH car tags.

It’s easy to keep promises when using other peoples’ (taxpayers’) money to do it.

The focus of any “immigration reform” should be solely on the interests of American citizens and the States, yet the focus is entirely on non-citizens – to allow illegals to “come out of the shadows,” etc. It is malfeasant and morally reprehensible for the Congress and the Federal administration to put the interests of illegals ahead of those of citizens. Rubio has great potential, but by pushing this bill and providing cover for Schumer & McCain shows that he is either a dupe or corrupt. As Kurt says, he should run away, or he can kiss the WH goodbye.

It costs state legislators and governors zero personal dollars to craft, ratify, and implement laws that infringe on constitutionally guaranteed rights. It costs them zero personal dollars to defend those laws in the courts. They use taxpayers' money to do both – and they often also reap political advantage doing so. Those who contest those laws in the courts, however, are using their own money; whereas the states again use taxpayers’ money to defend the laws. Therefore, so long as there is this imbalance of cost burdens, state governments will burden us and infringe our rights with unconstitutional laws.

For the left/Dems, the focus of “reducing gun violence” is 100% on the guns. Only the right/GOP focuses any attention on the violence and on those who engage in it (and only feebly so). Going after the guns is easy; going after the violent/crazy people is difficult. The ACLU protects the violet/crazy people; the ACLU has no interest in the 2nd Amendment and the rights of individuals to protect themselves from violet/crazy people.

Church doctrine does not oppose or condemn the PEOPLE who engage in homosexual behavior; they condemn the BEHAVIOR - in the same way that church doctrine condemns adultery, lying, pedophilia, murder, etc. We are all sinners, but we are all not beasts. Since we are not beasts, we are expected to avoid engaging in bestial behavior. The LGBT community wants to define the issue as being against people, rather than as being aginst their behavior – more sympathy from the masses of low-info voters and low-info members of Congress.

The preacher condemns homosexual BEHAVIOR, not persons (who identify themselves as being homosexual).

Youssef, you’ve noticed a trend that I noticed almost 20 years ago – the unfortunately inexorable drift of the Episcopal Church to the left. I was raised from infancy as Episcopalian, as were my father & his forefathers back to the Revolution (& were C of E before that). Coincident with this drift, I’ve also noticed that the drift has overwhelmingly been instigated/promoted by those who were not raised Episcopalian. The conspiracist in me wonders whether it’s a targeted attack since the Church’s influence in American far surpasses its representation as a % of the population. E.g., although Episcopalians comprise < 2% of the population, ¼ of all US presidents have been (or were raised as) Episcopalian, the last 2 being Bushes 1 & 2.

ROS of oil companies = 9-11%. Pretty puny compared to, say, mascara companies. Yet no one talks about the “obscene profits” of mascara companies. The boogeyman scare only works when you have low-info voters.