A weekend later and the DoubleClick acquisition remains a top story in the blogosphere. Too many ideas are flying. Here's a summary.

• The New York Times is reporting that Microsoft thinks the deal will be anti-competitive and wants a government review.
• Richard Koman says Does GougleClick violate antitrust? Well, it's clearly anti-competitive but I think he was title hunting on this one. Although the deal has antitrust implications, it clearly does not violate any existing antitrust legislation.
• Rafat Ali points to a bunch of article on the anti-competitive nature of the deal and positial regulatory scrutiny.
• Nathan Weinberg asked if Google Crossed the Line? What line? Nathan also mentions that was recently taken private for $1.1B, sold off divisions for $540M. Google paid six times the remainder.
• Mary Jo Foley thinks that Microsoft was bluffing on its bid for DoubleClick in order to artificially inflate the price.
• Andy Beal brings down the house suggesting Yahoo! and AT&T don't like it either.

Beyond the anti-competive backlash, many are trying to analyze why Google did it.

• Many like Om Malik suggest that Google is after the graphical ad market.

IMHO, Google is after the traditional advertiser. Remember that most AdWords advertisers are low end advertisers. DoubleClick advertisers, on the other hand, are high end advertisers. This could be a great marriage.

Also, check out this cool DoubleGoo graphic.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/trotz/458211591/

Update: Microsoft statement on acquisition.