Hillary got the first shot at our racially discriminatory justice system. Bernie, going second, sounded redundant to me, and I laughed when he dragged a reference to Wall St. into his rant.

Hillary answered the question on the "deadly heroin epidemic" without calling for more jail. She called for cops to carry Narcan, the antidote to heroin and opiate overdoses. She said it must not be treated as a crime, but a health issue, and users should be diverted into treatment. She said her plan calls for $1 billion in expenditures to re-orient and change the direction of our response to the drug problem.

Bernie says he "agrees with all that" but adds the pharmaceutical companies and drug companies should be held accountable. But the question was about the deadly heroin epidemic -- No pharmaceutical or drug companies make or sell heroin. They make opiate pills that are legitimately needed for pain. Why should they be accountable for heroin deaths or even abuse of opiates? They don't prescribe them, they manufacture them. Heroin use has increased because of the restrictions on opiates. It's the federal government that over-criminalizes the use of opiates, resulting in limiting their availability which leads people to use heroin in their stead. The pharmaceutical companies manufacture opiates, not heroin, and would love to sell more opiates. Why should they be held accountable for heroin addiction?

O'Malley said as Mayor in 1999 (or later as Governor, he ended incarceration for simple marijuana possession and was the first Governor south of the Mason Dixon Line to repeal the death penalty.

I thought Hillary decimated Bernie on health care with her passionate defense of Obama care. Andrea Mitchell says Bernie released a new Medicare for All single payor program 2 hours before the debate. Bernie interrupts Andrea Mitchell while she's asking a question. That's about the angriest I can recall seeing Hillary. Bernie comes back with England, France, and Medicare for all. (No mention of Norway this time.) O'Malley touts an all-payor system where doctors get paid for keeping people out of the hospital. That strikes me as a bad plan -- what doctor is going to take on seriously ill patients that need hospitalization if it means less pay? (Maybe that's not what he meant, but that's what I heard.)

Bernie: We can't fix the system because of Wall St and the insurance companies and pharmaceutical companies. (Is anything not their fault?) Congress is owned by "big money" and refuses to do what the people want it to do. How will Bernie, as President, change how Congress acts? He doesn't say.

Hillary basically says he's dreaming. She reminds us that Democrats couldn't get "the public option" (where people could buy into Medicare) passed. What got passed was the Affordable Care Act. Why start all over, let's make it better.

Bernie, hoarse now, touts his campaign contributions and support for his campaign by young people. The debate airs a question from a young you tuber with 5 million followers. He wants to know how the candidates will appeal to his generation. Someone should ask him why do young people historically have such a low voter turnout, despite all the Rock the Vote and similar efforts? What good does Bernie's 2:1 support among youth do him if they don't turn out to vote? If they didn't turn out in great numbers for Obama who glorified hope and change, why will they turn out for grandpa?

Bernie to O'Malley: A handful of billionaires control the economic and political life of this country. We need a political revolution.

Hillary recites Bernie's record of attacks on Obama. He laughs while she's speaking and then denies it.

O'Malley says he would be tough on Wall St. He says he respects Hillary and then attacks her for her relationship with Wall St. Hillary responds he has raised money from Wall St. She repeatedly defends "Dodd Frank."

I don't think Bernie is as liberal as he claims to be. On the one hand, he says our criminal justice system relies too heavily on incarceration (even Republicans now agree with that.) But he continually calls for more prosecution of Wall St execs which will result in more people being incarcerated. Calling for more prosecution and incarceration of any group of non-violent offenders is not progressive in my view. We cannot jail ourselves out of our "Wall St" problem. A truly progressive candidate would recognize that we need to stop looking to the criminal justice system to cure every conceivable economic, political and social ill.

They are on climate change now. This part will not distinguish the candidates, they are all on the same page. It's just an opportunity for them to bash Republicans. While Republicans should be bashed on climate change and environmental issues, I don't need to watch a debate to hear this.

Must be time for a bathroom break (Donald, look away.) NBC moderators and Chuck Todd are filling space.

Next up: Iran and maybe ISIS. Not sure I will stick around. I've had enough, particularly of Bernie and his non-stop focus on Wall St, campaign finance and pharmaceutical companies. Will he weave them into his answers on ISIS? (Actually, like climate change, all three agree: No American combat troops. O'Malley goes for political correctness and tells everyone we shouldn't use the term "boots on the ground." It's offensive to our serving military.

Sanders says the fight against ISIS is a fight for the "soul of Islam." He says Muslim countries in the Middle East need to fight ISIS on the ground, with Muslim troops. He quotes the King of Jordan (as he's done in the past. Middle Eastern countries need to "put some skin in the game" and not rely on the U.S. for anything but support. Muslim troops, not American troops, belong on the ground fighting ISIS.

I don't care for Bernie's use of the term "Muslim troops." First, Muslim connotes a religion, not a nationality. I also don't like singling any group out by its religion. Second, some American troops are Muslims. Third, what about Israel? It's in the Middle East. ISIS has declared it a target, shouldn't it be contributing to the fight against ISIS, even though it's not a Muslim country?

How about non-middle eastern countries like the Philippines, Indonesia, and Morocco? Aren't they at closer risk geographically from ISIS than the U.S.? Shouldn't they contribute? India is not a predominantly Muslim country but has ramped up domestic efforts against ISIS. How about the European countries who provide ISIS with the greatest number of foreign fighter recruits? And is Bernie going to suggest we accept Iran (and its Shi'a militias) in the coalition fight just because they are Muslim?

Question: Will Democrats fed-up with the shouting between Hillary and Bernie turn to O'Malley in protest? He certainly was the calmest. In his final comments he referred to immigrants and unfairness to Puerto Rico. He lost points in my view when he endorsed the fight against drug traffickers in Guatemala and Central America. Enough with the war on drugs, here and abroad, it's just a failure.

Hillary refers to Flint Michigan as the topic not addressed at the debate about which she had something to say.

Bernie ignores the question (which was to raise issues not yet raised) and for the billionth time, rails against Wall St.

Summary: Bernie Sanders comes off as a one trick pony. All he cares about is Wall St, campaign finance and fighting billionaires. Despite his calls for revolution, he's no Che Guevara. (I might support him if he was.) I'm sure there's a role for him somewhere, but I just don't think it's as President. Hillary strikes me as the logical choice. I also think she is the only one of the three with a chance of winning the election in November. This is about winning, isn't it?