I am incredibly happy that this bailout was voted down. The Capitalist market does not need to be tampered with. Everybody insists that Capitalism needs a little regulation for it to work and continually blames a lack of regulation for the continued struggle of our economy, but the fact is that the market has been regulated far too much, and that is the cause of this strife. After all, the federal government did essentially force these corporations to give out money to people they otherwise would not have because of the tremendous financial risk. Now the federal government wants the taxpayers to hurt even more to fix a mistake that they and the corporations made? I hope they do not expect to take it from my pockets.

I do agree with trickle-down economics. At least, I agree with the principle that corporations with money can hire more people and produce more goods to sell to more people with jobs. However, I certainly do not agree with focussing on that heiarchy as a way to stimulate the economy. Bailing out these corporations may help the economy in the short term, but it is clearly a long term disaster. The only way the economy is going to be fixed is to let the market renew itself. Out with the old and in with the new.

By forcing the people to pay an estimated $1.8 trillion dollars for all of the bailouts, including this $700 billion bailout plan, we are not going to do anything to stimulate the economy. We will be further bankrupting the government and the people. This will just cause more inflation, further weakening the dollar, and the people will be paying for it. It is the same reason why minimum wage is a disaster. Not only is it not the government's job to regulate the economy, the short-term gains from these regulations are no where near worth the inflation that we have to deal with.

Plus, those corporations should suffer for their own stupidity. I am not for helping the rich stay rich because we want to temporarily fix the economy. Let those at fault deal with the consequences of their actions. I do not think that bailing these corporations out will make the corporations learn anything to prevent this from happening again. They will just learn that the government will gladly hand over taxpayer and foreign money to them when they act stupid.

Oh, and my representative voted no, did yours? As for today's vote in the Senate, I fully trust that Carl Levin and Debbie Stabenow will vote for the bailout. In a sick, twisted sense, I hope that they do vote yes for it. I'd love to see Levin lose his seat in the Senate this November, but that is a different rant...

Gun control is a fantastical idea. It only works if everybody is willing to follow the law. That, obviously, doesn't happen, nor will it ever happen. That's the reason why laws are put in place to begin with. There are people that do not care about anybody but themselves, and gun control only helps these individuals in their pursuit to take away what we have, be it our posessions, sanity, or even our lives. Criminals aren't stopped by gun control laws, only law-abiding citizens are.

I'll admit it, pacifism is not a bad idea, in theory. In practice, however, that's a completely different story. I would like to be able to go places and not ever have to worry about the intentions of someone else. Unfortunately, that's just not possible in this reality that we live in. With criminals obtaining guns illegally, the citizens of the U.S. need a way to protect themselves, and preventing citizens from getting guns surely is not the sensible answer.

Guns are the great equalizers. It makes everybody equal in power. This is especially true for women. A strong woman is still no match for a normal guy. Men were just built to be more powerful, and some men take it upon themselves to use this power to take advantage of women. This advantage is erased when the woman is packing heat. No man is stronger than a well-placed bullet.

The Second Amendment is the amendment that upholds every other right given to us Americans in the Constitution. Without armed citizens, we become nothing more than puppets to our government. We can't fight back when they have all of the weapons. It's unfortunate that 30% of Americans polled don't care enough to keep our rights secure, but a mighty 67% polled are not blind to the facts.

Americans can rest easy tonight, knowing that they won't be considered criminals for wanting to protect themselves, their family, and their property. Criminals can start to worry. They won't be able to control law-abiding citizens through fear, anymore.

There seems to be too many people feeling betrayed by Ron Paul's decision to end his campaign, but wars are not won by single battles. Wars are long, drawn out, and costly. Putting effort into a losing battle when you can count your losses and mount a new, stronger, and more efficient attack is a stupid thing to do and can even cost you the war. Ron Paul's Campaign for Liberty is this new, stronger, efficient attack on the big government politics that we continue to see with the Republican and Democrat parties. We may not get to win back the White House in 2008, but we can damn sure make our presence known even more than we did with the presidential primaries.

Don't fool yourselves, the two major parties are very very powerful. They have the media in their pockets and deep-pocketed corporate sponsors. They can't be defeated in the course of 18 months or two years. We can't reach everybody and change their minds instantly. We have the cunning and we have the truth behind us. We won't be defeated if we continue to work to bring America back to the way it was meant to be.

The argument for liberty is much stronger than the argument for an invasive government. The American people have liberty in their bloods. It just needs to be awoken and brought out. This revolution is just the thing to do it. Once the beast is woken, there's no stopping it. The beast is awake. It's time for us to be a part of that beast and take back what's rightfully ours.

Reading further into the book, I came across a quote by Henry Hyde. Paul doesn't mention him by name, but after a little searching, I discovered that it was Mr. Hyde who said the following, in reference to Ron Paul's "radical" idea that Congress be the one to declare war: "There are things in the Constitution that have been overtaken by events, by time, Declaration of war is one of them. There are things no longer relevant to a modern society. We are saying to the president, use your judgment. [What you have proposed is] inappropriate, anachronistic; it isn't done any more."

I share Paul's sentiment, in the next paragraph, which mentions how it's such a relief [note: sarcasm] that we have politicians who are keeping us updated on what's "relevant" in our Constitution. One question, though, isn't it up to the people to decide what's relevant? That question then begs the following: are we really losing this much control of our government? The sad answer is a resounding "YES!"

It bugs me how overgrown our government has become and all in the name of freedom. It really creates an oxymoron out of "government protection". Yes, by giving up our liberties, we may be more likely protected from poverty and foreign governments, but those are the things that should worry us least. The thing that we should be protected from the most is the one thing that our government can't and won't protect us from... itself. I'll admit, it'd be foolish for the government to want to relinquish the power it has.

As individuals, we must give up power in order to gain order and protection from external threats, but a government has no such threats and need for protection, so the idea of giving up its power doesn't make much sense. That's why it was important that our government's powers be limited in the Constitution. The Constitution wasn't written relevant to those specific times. It was written because they knew what a government would do with no restraints. They saw it with England, and we get to see the same thing with our ever-growing government.

We, as Americans, are no safer from terrorism than we were pre-9/11. Our government has its agenda to uphold, so they're going to make all of these claims that the eroding of our civil liberties is working to protect us. Sadly, people are wiling to buy into this propaganda. There is no doubt that our government has thwarted terrorist attacks since 9/11. I, just, don't believe that the Patriot Act and similar legislation has had anything to do with that. We thwarted terrorist attacks prior to 9/11, as well. We can't all be naive to believe that the only terrorist attacks planned were successful ones. The extra protection given to us, if any, is not worth the civil liberties that we are continuing to lose.

As long as neocons and liberals continue to see an increasing need in government intervention whether it be at home or in a foreign nation, our liberties will continue to dwindle while we see no reasonable increase in security, but a decline in protection from a tyrannical state that our Constitution was meant to prevent. If we allow our politicians to continue to shit on the document that has given us the ability to stand up and fight, then we have turned our backs on founding fathers and on what it means to be free. We have turned our backs on what it means to be American. We weren't meant to be free of hardship and pain. We were meant to be free of a government that offers us no protection while actively working to take away what liberties that we are willing to give up before fighting back. We need to restore our Constitution. We need our elected politicians to respect the document that our nation was founded on, that they took an oath to uphold, and that millions of Americans have fought and died to protect.

Besides the fact that the government would be parenting us with such a ban, they would also be stripping the rights away from business owners. If a business owner wants to lose revenue by deciding that they want to allow smoking in their place of business, then it is their choice to make. It is not the government's job to "protect" each business owner from the negative consequences of their actions/decisions. What makes America great is the fact that we can sink or swim by our own decisions. It is what makes us free people, and I would not have it any other way. There are arguments that businesses are losing a lot of money because of this issue, but I cannot help but to disagree. I feel that business owners are, generally, smart enough to realize that they are losing revenue due to a missing demographic. If such was the case, they would be quick to change the environment their business offers. If they do not, then they should not own a business if they are ignorant enough to think that they do not have to cater to the desires and needs of their customer base. It takes smarts to make it in the world of business, and any "hand-holding" that the government does with businesses only hurts the evolutionary process of creating smarter and more productive businesses.

I guess my overall point is that the government's job to protect its citizens only applies to external threats. There is no need for the government to protect us from ourselves. I would like to think that I am fully capable of making the decision of whether or not I want to endure a smoky environment for the duration of my meal. I realize the overall health benefits this would create, but the government just should not be that involved in our lives. Should our government force us to adhere to strict nutritional habits, as well? After all, that would have tremendous health benefits attached to it. I am sure you see my point, but I feel that I cannot stress it enough. There are a lot of things that would make mankind healthier and, theoretically, better off in society, but that would take away so many of our freedoms that life would become boring. There cannot be joy if there is no pain, and how can we feel the exhilaration of success if we have nothing to overcome?

I am not willing to give up my liberties because some people are too stupid to realize that they can choose not to go to restaurants that allow smoking. If people want businesses to change to their needs, they need to work on the businesses instead of trying to pass legislation that tramples on the liberties of people such as myself. My government already controls enough of my life. I do not need it in this area of my life, as well.