Of course it is- we've been taught that since we took social studies or civics in high school. But the interesting question is why.

Management and systems experts have proven conclusively that the system, or context in which one operates, is more powerful than individual values. They put it this way: "the context, or system, always trumps personal values."

In school it's called peer pressure. In business it's called to get along you go along. In the military it's called looking out for your unit and your buddies. In most social circles it's called etiquette or honoring social norms. No matter what the system happens to be, most of us figure out that it's just good business and good judgment to follow the norms.

They exist because we all function better when we honor the same agreed upon rules. When we have a system which doesn't honor these rules we get a society which is fearful and sometimes paranoid.

Honoring social contracts is observable in every country and every social structure. If the system you're a part of has good values, it will be easier for you to both behave honorably and maintain your membership in good standing without fear of reprisal of any kind.

The U. S. Constitution provides a systematic way of maintaining good values whereby all members of society can exist in peace and harmony. By stating that the rights of the individual are paramount, and that the government is here to serve us, and not the other way around, the Constitution and Bill of Rights pretty much cover the way a civil and civilized society can flourish.

It is obvious that people's behavior is very much governed by their context. Change the rules of the game and we are only asking for trouble - which, unfortunately, seems to be a commodity we have in great abundance.

Living by wise and proven rules protects all of us - even those who would otherwise stray were the rules relaxed. Weaken those rules and we're just asking for trouble.

The current administration has done far more harm than is obvious when it says to its citizens, and to the rest of the world - we don't have to follow the rules.

The Bush administration is dangerous because it is essentially ignorant of the benefits this country has enjoyed due to its profoundly wise Constitution. Thus we have both elected and appointed officials who lie with impunity, an Attorney General nominee who can't say that waterboarding is torture and other government agency heads altering reports when those reports don't support their own ideological positions.

Supporting our Constitution is not a political option; our survival depends on it. If we are to survive, and democracy and human rights are to spread it can only happen if we are willing to stand up for what is right and decent. That is our mission - to be an exemplar of honorable and humane treatment of all people,everywhere. And it starts right here at home.

I think the essence of the many negative comments about HRC is whether her campaign practices are an accurate indicator of her governing skill. If she plants questions, will she manipulate ( in other words, lie) if she is elected?

If she dodges questions, will she be less than forthcoming if she is president?

If she is very focused and well organized, does that mean she will be unresponsive to any new ideas or new input?

In other words: is she just a very smart version of President Bush? Is she a person who has an agenda unconnected to reality, and a person who will completely stifle any new input or honest concerns?

I think people are honestly and sincerely worried that HRC is not genuine and has a hidden agenda, which is that she is beholden to all the special interests that have gotten us into the current mess.

I have never run for office, so I don't know how I'd respond to the incredible pressures one must face. I bet , however, that I might not look much different that the current candidates.

I suspect that the knight in shining armor is still eluding our grasp, and we are stuck with all the human frailties that affect any politician.

Will HRC be a carbon copy the inept and ignorant person now in the White House?

I think that's what being asked now; my opinion: no way.