And after that, we’ll settle Luxembourg’s hash Virginia Postrel makes a radical observation:

Am I the only person who wants to know who likely killed Dutch politician Pim Fortuyn before drawing conclusions about the ramifications of his assassination? What if it was some nut who thought killing someone famous would impress his favorite actress? Assassinations are always politically traumatic, but they don’t always have deeper meaning. And even when political crime is politically motivated, the motives people expect are often not the ones at work.

Fair enough. But Postrel then goes on to undermine the entire basis of blogging:

Sometimes the best policy is to withhold comment until more facts are in97or at least to base the commentary on what’s known, not what’s interesting to imagine. Of course, that may presume that you’d rather be right than read.

I ask you, where would the Blogosphere be if we followed this, this, this stasist advice? If we were to “withhold comment until more facts are in”? Bloggers, to your stations! Defend your right to shoot off your mouth! On to Belgium! [08:40 AM]