This originally was supposed a comment response in a NIU Shooting thread on a Conservative Site.  It got too big so I figure I would just post it instead:

 "I hate to say it, but I think this is just going to get worse. So many kids just don’t care anymore. For them life and death have become the same. Neither gun free zones or armed security guards can end this madness. God help us indeed."

Yes, as society approaches mediocrity, this kind of stuff happens.  Education is getting worse, personal responsibility isn't happening for many, politicians aren't getting better thats for sure.  Decency is becoming rarer as the years go by.  Welcome to Socialism, the Welfare-Warfare State.  They are testing your kids, some are restricting your carbon consumption through unnecessary and ill crafted legislation.    Some are legally prohibited from adequately defending themselves.  Corporations are getting in on the deal as well, who do you think makes their family and friends lobbyists and "consultants".  Government is very corrupt right now and just as in the 90s there was push back, that very well may be down the line unfortunately but it is something that can be projected somewhat by looking at the actions of the government.  Some people don't know much, but subconsciously they know something is wrong and it causes abnormal behavior.  Other are religious fundamentalists that minus government intervention would be completely nonviolent.  Still others are taught that they are always the victim and are unable to cope with reality and that very victimization causes an inferiority complex that can be violent.  Of course the strength of the upcoming recession will determine the intensity of this.  I don't think it will be a regular thing yet, more of a gradual slide.  The extremes make the news, are exploited and distorted somewhat, but many innocents are hurt as well.   Unless people start rejecting government intervention in our lives on many levels we will just continue down "the Road to Serfdom".  Governments "accomplish" things in a very poor and inefficient manner, sometimes corrupt.  We can do it better ourselves.

And later added...

Also this shows our deficiency in the market of campus security. They are a service that is purchased by every university and you would think they should be adequate to handle this. You do not need to militarize this. We have plenty of young veterans that are coming back, many with a new respect for the quality of life and good skills for the job, and there have to be entrepreneurs out there that can screen for non PTSD types and provide a non invasive service to meet campus needs.

The school should be liable as well. Banks guard their money, stores take at least some inventory control measures on the whole to guard their product, and universities can take much better measures to guard our students from these types of attacks when they are in their buildings. It’s not like they are not getting enough government money.

Of late the two bear striking similarities.  With The New Republic's article on Ron Paul's newsletters coming out, Lew, other than dragging up an eighty year old article from The New Republic sympathetic to fascism and was taken from a Rothbard quote, decided to do his best Sergeant Schultz impersonation.  I see nothing,  I see nothing.  I am on the net all day and I do not see all these articles talking about a newsletter I had a part in and did write for and I was also called out as the supposed writer by numerous people in the know, but I tell you I see nothing at all.  Don't listen to the smears and smear merchants huh Lew?  Let's just all stay in denial and pretend nothing ever happened.  

Either Lew is blind or mute.  He either does not see the necessity to act just or he does not think speaking on the subject matter is required.  Both possibilities are bad for the movement.  Both possibilities turn the movement away from reason and logic.  You are Ron's partner in many business ventures, an adviser, and a friend and if both of you are friends to the movement you will quit this little act and shoot straight.  Both parties have stayed quiet and avoided full disclosure.  That leads me to ask what is next?  What will the next story be?  Can I even trust you guys if you assured me?  The response has been terrible.  For a candidate that explains policy so well, his explanation of this incident was deficient and unsatisfactory, with the very real potential that more news can be on the way.  No preparation on the topic between zero and twenty million dollars.  And of all things, the next money bomb is on Martin Luther Kind Day.  This looks like a sick gamble.  How stupid will people look if there is a bigger bombshell?  The longer they stonewall, the more them and their supporters look like the Republicrats.  Once this movement departs from reason, the rEVOLution becomes the REVOlution.  Point the finger where it belongs at Ron and his Sergeant Schultz.

I was going to write Ron Paul in before there was ever any possibility of him running, let alone gain as much steam as anyone expected and that is part of the problem.  See what happened is Paul originally went in figuring he could get a little name recognition and say what he believed because this country is going right down the tubes if you are a true fiscal conservative, believe in Federalism, care about the expansion of Federal "Law" Enforcement, care about civil liberties, detest big government, believe in the concept of sovereignty, detest open borders, care about privacy, respect the bill of rights, dislike deficits, abhor corruption, dislike lobbyists current clout, don't think we should be the world's policeman, or are libertarian minded.  Also no Republican candidate that is "viable" will address any of these concerns.

But what is the worst part of this story is that Ron didn't have a contingency plan of dealing with this, that he didn't properly explain what exactly was going on as he does when he explains policy.  He is hesitating to do so.  What is bad about this is that many many non kooks, I can assure you that, donated money to this man.  I think many reasonable people would fall under the grievances I cited above, whether all, or just a combination of these, or just one important one, many of these people are regular people who just take an interest into politics as others take to the lives of celebrities, mindless entertainment, or whatever skill they might take interest in. And there are some of us who remember what being a conservative meant in the 90s or at least how it was marketed.  But Ron took advantage of that group, he failed to address the issue, on very devastating news, that most people should know about if you are asking them for 2300 dollars.  That is fraud.  His record in congress is why so many people like him, it is excellent and his votes versus any other congressman's or candidate's votes and he beats any of them.  Most people couldn't see this coming and the ones that did know didn't talk.  There was that one blurb about the one newsletter piece, but the story cut the majority of its quotes from the same article and made it look like it was numerous times, and not much came of it.  A one time thing that he did not know about was pardonable, considering the writing style was much different than Paul's writing style.  If they knew that the content was this rampant, somebody should have dealt with this one way or another before the campaign took off.  

The rEVOLution is now the REVOlution, but there are still a lot of people who find our current nominees in all major parties as completely unacceptable and now that they can read stories on the internet from multiple sources, along with ease of association through simple internet tools and they will have a network that will be maintained long after Paul fades out.  That is not going anywhere.  The political climate doesn't look the same for those with sympathies and allegiance to parties and their mouthpieces as it does with the Paul supporters that are just going to step aside for the time being and not defend a man who does not deserve to be defended.  His personal transactions and the reporting of such does not take away from the ideas because he didn't invent them.  I did not gain my political convictions from Dr. Paul, and his fading will not change my political convictions, which is my perception of reality, and a lot better than the people with their blinders on, from the Republicans, to the Democrats, and the other Paul supporters who are going to try to believe the BS they spew as they defend the indefensible, just like so many on Townhall "Conservatives" do in their columns everyday.  If you defend Paul's actions you are no better than the Busheviks, both mean well, but both are completely divorced from reality.

Clinton had "Don't Stop," Kerry had "No Surrender," campaign songs have always been vital to the campaigns of liberals.  So I think since there is a liberal in my party who is currently the "front runner" that I should suggest a proposed campaign song in case he is the Republican Candidate.  Especially since I do have much interest in music and harmony.  I think Giuliani would best be served by a song than embraces his view of Foreign Policy and fighting both the terrorists and islamo-hitlers and how that will effect us.  I think "WW III" by the Anti-Nowhere League definitely gets across his main points:

We talk of stories yesterday
Of how we worked and never played
How that things were better then
when lads were lads... and men were men
your history means nothing now
it never meant much any how
all your crying is in vain
your gonna die in screaming pain...pain...pain...pain

Let's roll on world war III
Were burning the rubbish of society
roll on world war III
Your gonna burn with me...

This world is big but you are small
Your words are meaningless most of all
All you do is criticise
of how your better in your eyes
Well don't you know that your all kids
your kids grew up... you never did
all your crying is in vain
your gonna die in screaming pain...pain...pain...pain

Lets roll on world war III
Were burning the rubbish of society
Roll on world war III
Your gonna burn with me...

So we talk of stories yesterday
Of how we worked and never played
How that things were better then
When lads were lads... and men were men
Well don't you know that your all kids
Your kids grew up... you never did
Only little time will tell
I'll see you bastards all in hell...hell...hell...hell

Lets roll on world war III
Were burning the scum of society
Roll on world war III   
Your gonna burn with me...

Burn rubbish...burn rubbish...burn...burn...burn...burn

(Then cut to the "I'm Rudy and I approve this message" portion.)

I must start off by saying that I fully respect the private property rights of Red State.  They are well within their rights to make their property as hypocritical as they like.  I think that they are showing their true colors.  They shy away from the debate, if most of the country thought you were crazy you would too.  Red State was never an important blog.  There was not much value to come from it.  Red State like Hotair, with their strict registration and enforcement policies don't want to debate.  Before they were explicit about it they still kicked people out because they disagreed with the party line.  They pretend like everyone who doesn't agree with them is liberal, you tell me who is the kook?  Seventy percent of the public is not liberal you fools.  You know what is liberal?  Bloated budgets are liberal, runaway government spending by a President, who had to dust off his veto pen before the stem cell bill came to his desk, is liberal.  Sticking up for and backing the people who stood silent while government expansion got out of control is liberal to me.  Not realizing that Bush, with much help from his people, snookered you into a war is just plain foolish to me.  Thinking people want to kill us for our "freedoms" is pretty damn foolish as well.  I can understand why you guys would not want opposing viewpoints, who would want to attempt to make reasoned arguments for these foolish viewpoints?  How could one call themselves competent, let alone conservative?  It would come off sounding like Strepsiades.

That is what happens to your reasoning skills when you shy away from debate, blind allegiance is never good, and it is very evident with all political factions, the Paulites possess those as well but it is harder to gauge because Paul is consistent and thus an anomaly in politics.  But I think that in your case the Busheviks are an overwhelming majority.  They have been exiled to threads where there is nothing but "at-a-boys" down the line.  It is rather pathetic if you ask me.

Now I am not saying that everyone who possesses Neoconservative or Pro War beliefs are crazy, just that the crazies have now become the majority group in your political faction.  I invite all Townhall readers to go to Hotair and Redstate and see what you're missing.  It is not much, Townhall does not possess such Bushevik registration and enforcement policies and the debate on its site has flourished.  I can tell you that there are many well read and better representatives of the Neoconservative view on this site, even though I disagree.  Also it should be taken into account the freedom of speech at Townhall.  For I could not discuss issues in the same manner that I would be allowed to on Red State and that means the debate would suffer and my ability to debate would be restricted.  You could even say that it is similar to Persecution.  Restrictions on speech can be seen on many of the greatest works of our time, those you read from cover to back cover, as I alluded to in the Dennis Praeger's thread yesterday:


Alright, I already alluded to this but it is time to discuss why Ron Paul is such a burden to Red State.  I think that the subject matter could best be discovered if one were to look to classical political philosophy.  One could say that vast majority of people are constantly moving, especially if their world view is pegged to someone else's whim.  If you are a Clintonista, Clinton determined your beliefs, the way you framed your arguments, and with the Busheviks it is the same.  As I stated earlier the same could be said for some Paulites.  That is why the Busheviks cannot be conservative, because conservatism does not do a one hundred and eighty degree turn in twenty years.  You cannot support a Federal Democracy versus a Limited Republic and be conservative.  Now while the Busheviks have been constantly moving, Ron Paul has stayed the same.  Busheviks cry and whine that he is a libertarian and not a conservative despite his positions on abortion and immigration, but Libertarianism for the most part is absolute conservatism, on the Federal Level for those that understand jurisdiction, it is guaranteed Federalism.   Government would still exist if Ron was elected because you still have local and state governments, and are free to exercise your perverse collectivist delusions in those jurisdictions, just give us reasonable people a chance to opt out.  But back to the subject matter, Ron's near absolute conservatism has threatened many Busheviks because he is a living example of their flipping and flopping, their irrational incoherent ramblings that they try to pass off as conservative dogma.  Because he has been right and they have been wrong, and most importantly now because people are realizing this and rejecting the party line.   I can see it on many sites, I remember right here on Townhall when there was one Ron Paul supporter and now there are many, people are getting excited about the political process and the polling companies don't understand who they even are.  Other people seem scared, scared enough to close their websites. 

Fear breeds cowardice, and cowardice is what Red State has resorted to.  So they lock themselves in their "private property" and shut out the rest of the world, they need to feel that they are normal and reasonable but that cannot be achieved in a free debate.  Red State needs to get out more.