Personally, I have a rule I try to live by: I speak for nobody, and nobody speaks for me. This makes it a bit hard to get too involved in larger groups, but by that I mean that I am only answerable for my own words and actions.

Jay, what a freaking novel idea! To be responsible for ones own actions? Never work in today's society though, but a good thought!

If society truly wishes to stop crazy people from doing crazy things, then the only solution is that crazy people must be put to death as soon as it becomes clear they are insane. You can ban guns, and they'll use a knife. You ban knives, and they'll use a hammer. Ban hammers, and they'll use a screwdriver. The de-institutionalization of the seriously mentally ill has done nothing but turn our streets into open air insane asylums, with those mentally ill enough to commit serious crimes warehoused in our prisons instead.

Sorry Chip, I have to correct you. Jay's thought, holding people responsible for their own actions, in today's society qualifies as a "crazy" idea.

The main impediment to restoring personal responsibility to the individual is the number of people, businesses and government agencies that exist and/or make their living off holding individuals unaccountable. These days you pretty much have to demand that others allow you to accept responsibility for you own actions. At least here in the United States you do.

zipity,

The de-institutionalization of the seriously mentally ill has...led to the rise of the far left in the US that we all pay for today.

FIFY

-syb

Austin was an inside job. Obama knew about it ahead of time and had incendiary devices ready. Have you ever seen a building burn so fast just from a little Cessna? I don't think so. Google it people!

re: "The de-institutionalization of the seriously mentally ill has...led to the rise of the far left in the US that we all pay for today."

A good explanation as any, syb.

Dare I say that using 18th century scholars writings to validate flying an airplane into a building by a seriously insane individual, thereby endangering the lives of numerous innocent, non-involved human beings in the year 2010 is, by itself, CRAZY!

And just what is the "social contract that representative government is allegedly based on"

"Those who would pass laws in an attempt to keep Crazy People from Doing Crazy Things For Crazy Reasons are only slightly less crazy."

I doubt that I will get much opposition here if I state that blowing yourself up because you expect to be rewarded with 70 virgins in heaven, is doing a crazy thing for a crazy reason.

So are you saying that Homeland Security is a crazy idea?

"Crazy? No. Pissed, enraged, vengeful, Yes."

Obviously this first year into the reign of the Jug-Eared Douche (PBUH) shoved this guy over the edge.

I've built my entire career on the idea that the internet was an amazing tool for enlightenment. A tool that would do amazing things for the future of our species. I believe(d) it. I live it. I've worked my ass off to provide tools and tactics to help make this dream a reality. And I've been proud of that work.

Then I read comment threads like this.

Two people are dead. An office building is burned up. Terror (in a certain form) is real for people who were doing nothing other than going to work. And the best this readers of this site can come up with in response is enough to turn my stomach. I live 5 miles away from where two people died yesterday, so maybe this is a bit more real for me than the rest of you. But I don't think that when people die, the tone of this thread should be acceptable.

Jay, you do so well in this post calling out the truth - there are plenty of problems all over the political spectrum, and people on both sides that are nuts. Of course you couldn't just post about that... you had to throw in a partisan swipe at Obama's connections to Ayers. Just because you hid your swipe in the context of non-partisanship doesn't mean it didn't happen, or that it's not shameful.

Like Jeb Babbin, you guys should be ashamed of yourselves that you can't take 1 comment thread and just say that you're saddened that a nut job killed someone and spread a form of terror.

A family is grieving and some of your fellow citizens are shell shocked today. How about stowing your snipes for a day or two on the matter?

The other day the Republican candidate for Texas governor Debra Medina stated that she thought there were "some very good arguments" that the U.S. government was involved in bringing down the WTC on 9/11.

I wonder if they are behind this as well, in some meaningful way.

Pssst! Meet me on the grassy knoll and I'll tell you everything!

Jake, which do you object to -- my calling Ayers a terrorist, my citing Obama's very strong (but now severed) ties to Ayers at a crucial stage in his career, or my implied comparison of Ayers to the Kommie Kamikaze?

For the record, I'm perfectly comfortable with all three...

J.

Sure Jake, although I'm fairly sure these types of atrocities (not tragedy, a tragedy is an unintentional destructive event)is a Rorschach test, that reveal far more than those viewing it appreciate. I sincerely believe your anger is more likely tied to the fact that this is yet another incident that cannot be laid at the feet of the tea parties, and conservatives in general. Like Amy Bishop, or the census worker who committed suicide, and is yet ceaselessly referred to as right-wing incited violence by Lefty Libs.

Hmm... "Commiekaze?"

J.

Unknown caller.... "HELP"

911 operator... "Hello, what's your problem?"

Unknown caller.... "HELP, QUICK send a Whaaaambulance to comment No. 12"

Jake spare us your righteous indignation. I feel for the family of the victim in this. I even feel for the family of the man who perpetrated the act. But, as for feeling for the loss of the nutjob, no I don't feel anything but contempt. I feel the same for those that jumped on the "right wing teabaggers" as the root cause of this. I have prayed for the families that do grieve now because of this man's actions, but I don't feel I need to tell the world, much less you how I choose to show my respect for them. That is a private matter for me, so who do you think you are telling others what they need to put on an internet thread. Personally, you offend me with your self righteous attitude and you sir can take a flying leaping lip lock!

I choose to show my respect for them. That is a private matter for me, so who do you think you are telling others what they need to put on an internet thread. Personally, you offend me with your self righteous attitude and you sir can take a flying leaping lip lock!

Well, I think I'm an editor here, whose job it is to offer opinions and back them up with why I hold them.

You, you're a commenter who's entitled to say pretty much what you want, within the bounds of propriety and the Terms of Service here, and free to go elsewhere if you like, or start your own blog.

And you're more than entitled to start your own blog, if you like.

J.

Jay,

My comment was directed towards JAKE not you.

Chip, I would have sworn that your remark was addressed to "Jay," not "Jake." But dang it, I misread it. I apologize for snipping at you; you are absolutely right with your last remark, and I made a pretty stupid misread. Sorry.

J.

Jay,

No problem at all, it happens sometimes.