Hillary Clinton: Here's what I want in the Supreme Court

You cannot ban hate speech. As much as I get it, we cannot stoop to a level that if I disagree with you or get offended, I'll just call it hate speech and BOOM, now I'm suing you to death. That is something I'd expect to see in Russia or countries like that where "free speech" is free when I tell you it is. I think certain types of hate crimes need a revisit (Louisiana's hate crime if you kill a cop for ex). No job should instantly make a murder a hate crime. But that is a state level affair until it is challenged in federal court. I can agree with some of the items you listed, but I cannot support the death penalty when there is a chance the wrong man will die, but I DO support it when the correct man or woman is convicted and there is no doubt this IS the person responsible. I'd consider shortening the number of appeals, or the number of years between conviction and death, with the same number of appeals. No reason for a death row inmate to live longer than the children of the person that was killed, or have a natural death to old age. Working wage is a touchy topic. If you do like Seattle did and raise it to $15.00hr, technology will replace the worker. Look no farther than Detroit. Look back 30-40 years ago, when everything was man made, with the assistance of robots, and now it's robots with limited assistance from man. McDonalds in Japan is already testing out a store where there is minimal human interaction. Now with the living wage thing, testing will soon become reality, and you're worse off than before being it IS cheaper over the long haul to pay a high price for this now, and reap the benefits later. Everyone wants technology....even when it can put them out of a job.

I've Heard It. Great News. Love It.

Never heard of 538, which probably doesn't bode too well for them. The New York Times may be famous, but they're not well reputed as of late, my friend. And you could safely say they are well-lodged up the posterior of the candidate they so obviously swoon for. I'd call the debate of yesterday evening a draw tactically and inconclusive strategically. Neither Trump did as bad nor did Hillary do as well as you state. He came across with his usual sods and redundant "this is a big deal/this is bad" statements, and she came across with her obviously-recited jeremia of half-truths, diversions and deceit, despite the fact the nation's "doing well."

I shudder at the possibility of Hillary appointing any justices to the high bench given the bent "progressive" politics has taken this country downward in the last several years. I don't like where we are, and, more to the point, I don't like where we're going. Something that was barely touched on last night was foreign policy, a truly troubling aspect of a debate that was actually pretty well-proctored by Chris Wallace. While everyone's feasting on groping allegations and crooked foundations, the world's slowly unraveling, not least due to the feckless neo-isolationism unleashed by Obama and our crack foreign policy team at Foggy Bottom that's only enboldened our adversaries and caused our allies to grow justifiably concerned.

As far as the laundry list of stuff you think should be constitutionally guaranteed, perhaps you'll find a more accommodating political dyanamic in one of the socialist utopias that, for whatever reason, aren't very highly touted at the moment. Venezuela comes to mind. The only things I want my government to do is defend the nation, build and MAINTAIN roads, bridges and tunnels, field a professional first responder force, and perhaps most importantly of all, leave me the hell out of their political melodramas.