I'm a Texan, but how much?

'I'm from Texas, What Country are you from?'

I saw that quote on a T-shirt the other day.

I love Texas, there is no state like it (no, how dare you say I'm biased!), but I wonder how much of a Texan I am sometimes.
You see, I say Ya'll (actually, I find it hard to come up with an alternative phrase) quite frequently, and every now and then you hear Yonder come from my lips, but I don't ever say Twiced (twice) or Onced (once), and I only say Concreke (concrete, for those of you in Rio Lindo) sarcastically (sarcasm? me?). Also, I'm quite used to 100+ degree Summers in Texas - as long as I'm in the air conditioning, but I can't hardly stand talking about the weather, 'Is eet hawt enuff fer ya, son?', how in the name of Robert E. Lee (GOD rest his soul) am I supposed to respond to that? If the person that asked me that wasn't 305 years old, I'd have said, 'Do I have a choice? Why, you idiot, does it matter if it's hot enough for me, WHAT CAN I DO ABOUT IT?'. I guess that's a problem, to be a Texan that doesn't like 'small talk'.

Well, I don't remember if I had a point when I started this post, so, I guess I'm done for now.

If yer ever in the neighborhood, Ya'll come site a spell in Texas, you won't regret it (well, maybe if you come in august when it's 80,000 degrees, and you feel like one giant mosquito bite).

Blogs - Good, Bad or Worthless?

Check out this thought provoking CNN article on The Blogosphere, and the biggest problem with blogging, and any other internet soapbox (forums, chats, &c.)-namely, cowards hiding behind their computer screens and attacking (often threateningly) those they disagree with.

+ Is it time to crack down on the blogosphere?+

Terragen = sweet [free] landscape generator

I have had Terragen installed on my PC for quite some time, but yesterday was the first time I played with it. I found it pretty cool, and simple to use. Here's one that I made and use as a desktop background

[click the image to download the full size, high quality zipped version]:

I think that looks pretty cool.

My rating:

Guest Post ; Imus and the First Amendment - Doug Phillips.

This is the best response I have heard/read on the Don Imus issue, written by Mr. Doug Phillips, esq.

Imus has been fired. The world is a better place. There should be little debate when rascals, gossips, and foul-mouthed troublemakers come tumbling down.

And yet there always is debate.

At one level, the debate centers around the theory of some high profile bigots that certain people are allowed to be foul and racially derogatory, while others are not. This notion — all too popular in rap music circles — is nonsense. Those who ridicule and mock others on the basis of their skin color are a plague to civil, Christian discourse — and it does not matter whether such individuals are white, black, green, or polka dot.

At another level, the debate rages over the issue of free speech in the public square. The question: Shouldn’t journalists and shock jocks have the right to speak their mind? How about bloggers, authors, reporters, or even the “tattlers” and “busybody” women of 1 Timothy 5?

It never fails to amaze me how successful the ACLU has been in its efforts; not only has it done its best to convince the Supreme Court of a view of the First Amendment which would have been utterly foreign to the Founders, but it has trained scoundrels, rogues, and criminals of all stripes to invoke the First Amendment in defense of their bad behavior.

Once upon a time, I was a constitutional law student sitting under my professor, Judge Robert Bork. When we studied the free speech clause, Judge Bork would remind us that the constitutional issue is rather simple. The only type of speech protected under the First Amendment is political speech. That is it. Neither libel, nor profanity, nor obscenity, nor vulgarity are protected under the First Amendment.

This applies to radio, to television, to blogs, to newspapers, and even to conversations. It is not unconstitutional to make rules or pass laws which limit non-political speech. This does not mean that such rules or laws are always wise or advisable, but unless they are examples of the federal government restricting political speech, they are not unconstitutional.

But the fact remains — people may not say, write, or communicate to others whatever is on their mind. They may not shout fire in a crowded theater and then claim a First Amendment Free Speech right. Of course, the American law (both common law and statutory) has always recognized this principle. (Note that until well into the 20th century, certain jurisdictions actually made it unlawful to curse or swear in front of women and children.) The narrow focus of the First Amendment is such that some types of speech are not only tortious (thus civilly actionable) but specifically criminal in nature, and thus prosecutable under federal and state law.

The point is this: The American War of Independence was not fought to give people legal sanction to lie, harass, profane, blaspheme, or slander. Nor was it fought to give unscrupulous men the right to be crude on the public airwaves. It was fought to give people the right to hold their government accountable, and to use speech as one means to accomplish this end.

In my view there is a fair amount of hypocrisy surrounding the firing of Imus. People will let shock jocks like Imus rant and rave in the most indelicate, foul, and offensive manner, but if these radio commentators touch on a politically sensitive subject — they are out. My view is this — don’t wait for the politically insensitive subject — kick ‘em out if they are crass, crude, and foul. Period. By this standard Imus should have gotten the boot a long time ago.

I could not agree with Mr. Phillips more.

+Mr Phillips' Blog+