(Bumped to top)

I've been thinking, friends -- there are lots of good carnivals out there.

But one seems missing to me.

A Carnival as big as Texas.

More to the point, a Carnival featuring bloggers from Texas.

So here is my idea -- a weekly round up of the best Lone Star Blogosphere.

What do you folks think? Any interest?

Answer me in the comments section -- and be so kind as to pass the word about the proposal.

Posted by: Greg at 05:59 PM | Comments (7) | Add Comment
Post contains 94 words, total size 1 kb.

Good grief! Chris Elam has been contacted by the Lawyer for Dummies.

Say Goodbye to Safety For Dummies

Yes, its true. It looks like Safety For Dummies is going the way of the dodo bird.

The name, that is.

Earlier this afternoon, I received a “cease and desist” e-mail from some lawyer from Hoboken, NJ representing the company that publishes all those goofy “______ for Dummies” books, telling me that I have 10 days to change the name of this blog... or.... something. She didn't exactly say what the risk would be if I don't.

Of all the absurdities I've encountered of late, this takes the cake! I guess they've copyrighted the two-word "for Dummies" combination?

Posted by: Greg at 12:33 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 126 words, total size 1 kb.

From Michelle Malkin.

An aside: If only these Dems were 1/100th as interested in digging into Sen. Bobby Byrd's proud membership and leadership position in the real KKK as they were into Alito's membership in CAP...

Or Ted Kennedy's driving record.

Posted by: Greg at 11:56 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 51 words, total size 1 kb.

I wonder, after President Bush signed this stupid bit into law.

Annoying someone via the Internet is now a federal crime.
It's no joke. Last Thursday, President Bush signed into law a prohibition on posting annoying Web messages or sending annoying e-mail messages without disclosing your true identity.

In other words, it's OK to flame someone on a mailing list or in a blog as long as you do it under your real name. Thank Congress for small favors, I guess.

This ridiculous prohibition, which would likely imperil much of Usenet, is buried in the so-called Violence Against Women and Department of Justice Reauthorization Act. Criminal penalties include stiff fines and two years in prison.

"The use of the word 'annoy' is particularly problematic," says Marv Johnson, legislative counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union. "What's annoying to one person may not be annoying to someone else."

Buried deep in the new law is Sec. 113, an innocuously titled bit called "Preventing Cyberstalking." It rewrites existing telephone harassment law to prohibit anyone from using the Internet "without disclosing his identity and with intent to annoy."

Who is responsible for this little atrocity? Arlen Specter, of course. It may well be that the provision has outlawed anonymous blogging, if taken at face value.

And I may be in danger of prosecution.

After all, I intend to annoy stupid politicians, arrogant journalists, and other buffoons. Never have I fully identified myself (though certain recent posts make discerning my identity quite easy).

Am I now a criminal?

What happened to the First Amendment?

Posted by: Greg at 10:49 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 264 words, total size 2 kb.

Want a legitimate reason to hate Microsoft? Try this one on for size.

Microsoft Corp. has shut down the Internet journal of a Chinese blogger that discussed politically sensitive issues including a recent strike at a Beijing newspaper.

The action came amid criticism by free-speech activists of foreign technology companies that help the communist government enforce censorship or silence dissent in order to be allowed into China's market.

Microsoft's China-based Web log-hosting service shut down the blog at the Chinese government's request, said Brooke Richardson, group product manager with Microsoft's MSN online division at the company headquarters in Redmond, Washington.

Though Beijing has supported Internet use for education and business, it fiercely polices content. Filters block objectionable foreign Web sites and regulations ban subversive and pornographic content and require service providers to enforce censorship rules.

"When we operate in markets around the world we have to ensure that our service complies with global laws as well as local laws and norms," Richardson said.

Which means, of course, that the company caters to the oppressive policies of the tyrranical Red Chinese government.

And also that they would have gladly cracked down on any German who dared hint at the evils of the Final Solution.

After all, Microsoft complies with all local laws and norms -- even those which are morally repugnant.

Posted by: Greg at 08:47 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 236 words, total size 2 kb.