I would like to discuss with Senator Clinton this idea of geographically-delimited rights.

I would tell her that the 2A sould be infringed in places like NYC, DC, and Chicago ... because they really need to control crime more efficiently. From her previous statements, I am sure she would agree.

I would then ask her if the 4A could be infringed in those same places ... because lots of people in neighborhoods there illegally carry guns and drugs, and warrentless seizures would surely help control crime.

I would also ask her if the 13A could be suspended in, say, the rural Mississippi river delta area or CA's San Joaquin Valley ... because the economy is hurting and those farmers down there really need to get work done more efficiently.

This idea that fundamental rights are subject to geographic location is appalling ... and we have a United States Senator who apparently believes it's appropriate!

Un-frigging-believable.

Great point, Carl. What gets me all riled up is seeing Presidential candidates putting out "Montana Plans", and talking about finding National solutions (or at least engaging in National discussion) about issues that states & localities are much better at resolving, each to their own satisfaction.

The Clintons are both lying sacks of cr*p (and that's not "crop") who will say and do just about anything to get into public office so they can continue feeding at the public trough and secure more self-aggrandizement and power. Hillary has been planning for decades on getting into the highest public office she possibly can. And Bill is a real class act, isn't he? He recently called a writer for Vanity Fair a "scumbag" because he disagreed with something the guy wrote. Wow, such intellectual discourse from Mr. Rhodes Scholar there. The mark of a true leader of men, patriot and statesman.

I cannot wait for Hillary to be relegated to the dust heap of history where she belongs. I really wish they all would just go away. Feh.