facebook installment 3

W.R.: Treaties are the highest law of the land and that is a fact.

L.B.: On you're second paragraph Rich, it seems to me pre Clinton/ Bush , government regulations of Wall Street were pretty effective in limiting the influence. Instead of going a little further and keeping the lobbyist out of D.C., Clinton and B...ush start lifting regulations. Now the Watch Dogs are former board members of the super elite companies that lobby for less restrictions. The head of the FDA is a former board member of the second biggest poultry company in the country (don't get me started on that), and the list just went on and on. This is what needs to change and I hope President Obama is making steps to change this. I know in Indian country, under his administration, he's put key people in the right place and there has been movement and noticeable change for the better. This was never the case under any administration that I can remember for Indian country anyway. The key is getting rid of the lap dogs for the RICH and bringing back the Doberman to make sure they can't just play with people's hard earned retirements.See More

W.R.: Ok I guess what I am missing is what EXACTLY is it that you would like government to step out of? Would you like government to stop controlling crime? Would you like government to stop helping the less fortunate? Would you like government to stop protecting animals and the environment? Government needs to be more powerful to stop greed. If we had a society that had strong informal social control we wouldn't need our government to be so strong; but unfortunately we don't so we need strong government. We would like to believe that without government stepping in on things like affirmative action, everything would be hunky dory and minorities and poor people would still get into college. But the truth is that it did not happen until laws were passed to enforce it. Many churches and families fail to instill the type of social control their members children require to cause them to automatically want to do what is fair, right, and good. Instead, they perpetuate the individual "I" type thinking that allows them to feel justified when they step all over the poor and minority to take every job and then mock them for not being "hard-working" Americans.See More

W.R.: And I totally agree that money, lobbyists, and corporations have way too much power in government. So why are you so against Obama, who has tried to put the reins on some of that unbridled control by passing stricter laws on lobbying, elections, and has tried to put some controls on the take over of our government by Wall Street? I'm not saying he has succeeded but he has at least been trying to change these things. I don't really think you have adequately explained what it is about Obama and his policies or as you call it "Big Government"- as if we haven't had that all along with all the corporate welfare going on in the past administrations- why is it all of a sudden such a bad thing for the government to be involved? And for that matter, unless you are rich, why would you not be for the government putting more restrictions on the very corporations you rightly state have taken over government? I'm just kind of confused about your argument? I can't understand where you are coming from or going with your thinking any more than I can understand your Fox News cronies.

Me: ‎"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land..." Article 4.

"He (the President) shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur..." Article 2, Section 2

Therefore, the Constitution CREATES the validity of treaties and elevates them to the highest law of the land.

Me: what lifted regulations are you referring to? Corporations, unions, and other monied interests have always held sway. The only thing limiting them has been the relative inability of government to pay them off with sweetheart deals.

Lobbyists are a symptom, not the problem. Lobbyists would have nothing to do if they could not pry dollars out of congress.

Me: The first time Obama's name came up was 6 minutes ago. I haven't commented on him.

Obama, like Bush and Clinton before him, is part of the problem, part of the system. D.C. is only interested in its own perpetuation, creating new ways to scam money from the people.

Any faith in any of these people is unwarranted.

Me: Government does not need to be more powerful to stop greed. Greed is not a matter of law, it is a matter of the human heart. Or are you telling me you are in favor of legislating morality?

Me: Government cannot remedy a failing societal structure, especially with more control and more laws. Laws only restrain moral people, the immoral will break laws.

Your arguments lead us to the conclusion that government should be our daddy, our god, and our church. Taxes are the tithe, and all the good we as individuals should be doing is transferred to government as its obligation.

I don't buy it. That is not the world I want to live in.

Me: I don't watch Fox News.