Kansas Govenor disrespects First Amendment, tattles on high schooler

[06wildcat]

I understand law enforcement monitoring these things for security purposes and have no problem with that.  I have a huge problem with any government official hiring a civilian to monitor the internet for people saying mean things.  Now if we want to take this specific case we have a governor who is the only governor in the history of America to eliminate his state's arts council because he wants to eliminate government waste yet he's using our tax dollars to pay people to monitor twitter.  Sorry but this makes him a hypocritical bad person, I don't care who else does it, its wrong even more so if you are pulling basic social services by claiming poor.

LOL, you're really grasping at straws here and not getting the point. I am amused at how many words you use while grasping though.

I don't give a flying eff who else pays pays people to search the net for negative feedback, doesnt make it right. Succinct enough for you?

Why is it wrong? Is it wrong for politicians to also subscribe to clipping services?

[Rage Against the McKee]

I understand law enforcement monitoring these things for security purposes and have no problem with that.  I have a huge problem with any government official hiring a civilian to monitor the internet for people saying mean things.  Now if we want to take this specific case we have a governor who is the only governor in the history of America to eliminate his state's arts council because he wants to eliminate government waste yet he's using our tax dollars to pay people to monitor twitter.  Sorry but this makes him a hypocritical bad person, I don't care who else does it, its wrong even more so if you are pulling basic social services by claiming poor.

LOL, you're really grasping at straws here and not getting the point. I am amused at how many words you use while grasping though.

I don't give a flying eff who else pays pays people to search the net for negative feedback, doesnt make it right. Succinct enough for you?

Why is it wrong? Is it wrong for politicians to also subscribe to clipping services?

Unless he is paying for web searches out of his own pocket, it is very wrong.

[06wildcat]

I understand law enforcement monitoring these things for security purposes and have no problem with that.  I have a huge problem with any government official hiring a civilian to monitor the internet for people saying mean things.  Now if we want to take this specific case we have a governor who is the only governor in the history of America to eliminate his state's arts council because he wants to eliminate government waste yet he's using our tax dollars to pay people to monitor twitter.  Sorry but this makes him a hypocritical bad person, I don't care who else does it, its wrong even more so if you are pulling basic social services by claiming poor.

LOL, you're really grasping at straws here and not getting the point. I am amused at how many words you use while grasping though.

I don't give a flying eff who else pays pays people to search the net for negative feedback, doesnt make it right. Succinct enough for you?

Why is it wrong? Is it wrong for politicians to also subscribe to clipping services?

Unless he is paying for web searches out of his own pocket, it is very wrong.

So no government funds for a clipping service then?

[MakeItRain]

I understand law enforcement monitoring these things for security purposes and have no problem with that. 

why not?

Believe me I hate law enforcement as much as anyone, but I do think that certain government figures and employees should be protected from psychos.

[MakeItRain]

I understand law enforcement monitoring these things for security purposes and have no problem with that.  I have a huge problem with any government official hiring a civilian to monitor the internet for people saying mean things.  Now if we want to take this specific case we have a governor who is the only governor in the history of America to eliminate his state's arts council because he wants to eliminate government waste yet he's using our tax dollars to pay people to monitor twitter.  Sorry but this makes him a hypocritical bad person, I don't care who else does it, its wrong even more so if you are pulling basic social services by claiming poor.

LOL, you're really grasping at straws here and not getting the point. I am amused at how many words you use while grasping though.

I don't give a flying eff who else pays pays people to search the net for negative feedback, doesnt make it right. Succinct enough for you?

Why is it wrong? Is it wrong for politicians to also subscribe to clipping services?

Unless he is paying for web searches out of his own pocket, it is very wrong.

So no government funds for a clipping service then?

It's completely unnecessary.  It's not like clipping services and web monitoring are used to govern.  Not accepting the health insurance reform money, cutting the arts council, snitching on high schoolers, the voting reform, etc were all unpopular stances some of which were very unpopular didn't stop all of these things from happening.

[06wildcat]

I understand law enforcement monitoring these things for security purposes and have no problem with that.  I have a huge problem with any government official hiring a civilian to monitor the internet for people saying mean things.  Now if we want to take this specific case we have a governor who is the only governor in the history of America to eliminate his state's arts council because he wants to eliminate government waste yet he's using our tax dollars to pay people to monitor twitter.  Sorry but this makes him a hypocritical bad person, I don't care who else does it, its wrong even more so if you are pulling basic social services by claiming poor.

LOL, you're really grasping at straws here and not getting the point. I am amused at how many words you use while grasping though.

I don't give a flying eff who else pays pays people to search the net for negative feedback, doesnt make it right. Succinct enough for you?

Why is it wrong? Is it wrong for politicians to also subscribe to clipping services?

Unless he is paying for web searches out of his own pocket, it is very wrong.

So no government funds for a clipping service then?

It's completely unnecessary.  It's not like clipping services and web monitoring are used to govern.  Not accepting the health insurance reform money, cutting the arts council, snitching on high schoolers, the voting reform, etc were all unpopular stances some of which were very unpopular didn't stop all of these things from happening.

So you know for certain that none of this monitoring or clipping service information was used in making decision based on a handful of mildly unpopular decisions.

None of those issues were very unpopular. For very unpopular issues see Wisconsin, Ohio. This is still Kansas, and Brownback would win an election tomorrow despite all those issues.

I'm no fan of Brownback, but the mere fact that he's monitoring social media isn't wrong. What he chooses to do with that information is incredibly wrong.

I'm sure you'd like a law passed to make it illegal to monitor social networks in the future because Browback is terrible at using an otherwise benign tool.

[Rage Against the McKee]

I understand law enforcement monitoring these things for security purposes and have no problem with that.  I have a huge problem with any government official hiring a civilian to monitor the internet for people saying mean things.  Now if we want to take this specific case we have a governor who is the only governor in the history of America to eliminate his state's arts council because he wants to eliminate government waste yet he's using our tax dollars to pay people to monitor twitter.  Sorry but this makes him a hypocritical bad person, I don't care who else does it, its wrong even more so if you are pulling basic social services by claiming poor.

LOL, you're really grasping at straws here and not getting the point. I am amused at how many words you use while grasping though.

I don't give a flying eff who else pays pays people to search the net for negative feedback, doesnt make it right. Succinct enough for you?

Why is it wrong? Is it wrong for politicians to also subscribe to clipping services?

Unless he is paying for web searches out of his own pocket, it is very wrong.

So no government funds for a clipping service then?

Yes, no government funds for a clipping service.

[Rage Against the McKee]

I understand law enforcement monitoring these things for security purposes and have no problem with that.  I have a huge problem with any government official hiring a civilian to monitor the internet for people saying mean things.  Now if we want to take this specific case we have a governor who is the only governor in the history of America to eliminate his state's arts council because he wants to eliminate government waste yet he's using our tax dollars to pay people to monitor twitter.  Sorry but this makes him a hypocritical bad person, I don't care who else does it, its wrong even more so if you are pulling basic social services by claiming poor.

LOL, you're really grasping at straws here and not getting the point. I am amused at how many words you use while grasping though.

I don't give a flying eff who else pays pays people to search the net for negative feedback, doesnt make it right. Succinct enough for you?

Why is it wrong? Is it wrong for politicians to also subscribe to clipping services?

Unless he is paying for web searches out of his own pocket, it is very wrong.

So no government funds for a clipping service then?

It's completely unnecessary.  It's not like clipping services and web monitoring are used to govern.  Not accepting the health insurance reform money, cutting the arts council, snitching on high schoolers, the voting reform, etc were all unpopular stances some of which were very unpopular didn't stop all of these things from happening.

So you know for certain that none of this monitoring or clipping service information was used in making decision based on a handful of mildly unpopular decisions.

None of those issues were very unpopular. For very unpopular issues see Wisconsin, Ohio. This is still Kansas, and Brownback would win an election tomorrow despite all those issues.

I'm no fan of Brownback, but the mere fact that he's monitoring social media isn't wrong. What he chooses to do with that information is incredibly wrong.

I'm sure you'd like a law passed to make it illegal to monitor social networks in the future because Browback is terrible at using an otherwise benign tool.

He absolutely should not be making any decisions based upon information returned by a clipping service.

[AbeFroman]

I'm surprised GLAAD isn't calling her out for using gay references as insults. I can't stand Brownback either, but #heblowsalot is pretty lame.

[MakeItRain]

I understand law enforcement monitoring these things for security purposes and have no problem with that.  I have a huge problem with any government official hiring a civilian to monitor the internet for people saying mean things.  Now if we want to take this specific case we have a governor who is the only governor in the history of America to eliminate his state's arts council because he wants to eliminate government waste yet he's using our tax dollars to pay people to monitor twitter.  Sorry but this makes him a hypocritical bad person, I don't care who else does it, its wrong even more so if you are pulling basic social services by claiming poor.

LOL, you're really grasping at straws here and not getting the point. I am amused at how many words you use while grasping though.

I don't give a flying eff who else pays pays people to search the net for negative feedback, doesnt make it right. Succinct enough for you?

Why is it wrong? Is it wrong for politicians to also subscribe to clipping services?

Unless he is paying for web searches out of his own pocket, it is very wrong.

So no government funds for a clipping service then?

It's completely unnecessary.  It's not like clipping services and web monitoring are used to govern.  Not accepting the health insurance reform money, cutting the arts council, snitching on high schoolers, the voting reform, etc were all unpopular stances some of which were very unpopular didn't stop all of these things from happening.

So you know for certain that none of this monitoring or clipping service information was used in making decision based on a handful of mildly unpopular decisions.

None of those issues were very unpopular. For very unpopular issues see Wisconsin, Ohio. This is still Kansas, and Brownback would win an election tomorrow despite all those issues.

I'm no fan of Brownback, but the mere fact that he's monitoring social media isn't wrong. What he chooses to do with that information is incredibly wrong.

I'm sure you'd like a law passed to make it illegal to monitor social networks in the future because Browback is terrible at using an otherwise benign tool.

Are you intentionally ignoring obvious the point?  It's wrong of him to pay people to monitor this crap because he rants about government waste has cut basic services under this premise.  You want to eliminate government waste you should start with people who get paid to read newspapers, Facebook, & Twitter.  He has a secretary to the secretary who does his scheduling, her job is to play on the internet.  Not wasteful at all, perfectly reasonable.  Is your last name Burget by chance?

[yoga-like_abana]

Guys this is Farmageddon week. FOCUS!

[MakeItRain]

Gov

“My staff over-reacted to this tweet, and for that I apologize,” he said. “Freedom of speech is among our most treasured freedoms.”

So good for him for actually apologizing even though it took a week.  I bet he would have rather done what K-S-U Wildcats! suggested he should do and just ignore it and hope it went away, but I'm sure Niomi Burget saw the thread and told him the right thing to do.  Now he just needs to fire the people he's paying to monitor the internet and this situation would work out perfectly.  Pretty sure Niomi won't tell Sam about the last part of this plan.

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

MIR,

Don't you think you're overreacting, just a little?

The guy looks like a jackass.  He's not quite the SS.

[Paul Moscow]

MIR,

Don't you think you're overreacting, just a little?

The guy looks like a jackass.  He's not quite the SS.

Conspiring to oppress, threaten or intimidate the speech of a single individual? Sounds like Heinrich Himmler

[KSUBrian]

Now if we want to take this specific case we have a governor who is the only governor in the history of America to eliminate his state's arts council because he wants to eliminate government waste yet he's using our tax dollars to pay people to monitor twitter.  Sorry but this makes him a hypocritical bad person, I don't care who else does it, its wrong even more so if you are pulling basic social services by claiming poor.

So let me get this straight.  Your saying an arts council is a basic social service?  Isn't giving a low paying job to a person needing a job more of a social service than an arts council?  Please explain so I can fully understand you political views.  Thanks!!

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

How does this foot with the "report people misrepresenting the healthcare bill to the DHHS" Obama administration snafu?  Worse?  Better?

[MakeItRain]

Now if we want to take this specific case we have a governor who is the only governor in the history of America to eliminate his state's arts council because he wants to eliminate government waste yet he's using our tax dollars to pay people to monitor twitter.  Sorry but this makes him a hypocritical bad person, I don't care who else does it, its wrong even more so if you are pulling basic social services by claiming poor.

So let me get this straight.  Your saying an arts council is a basic social service?  Isn't giving a low paying job to a person needing a job more of a social service than an arts council?  Please explain so I can fully understand you political views.  Thanks!!

Why discuss political views, it isn't a political issue?  An Arts Council is a basic social service in 49 out of 50 states and has been for as long as anyone can remember.  It also was one in Kansas until about 4 months ago, even the very Republican, very conservative Kansas state house thought it was.  The second part of your question is too moronic to address, so I won't.

[Saulbadguy]

I understand law enforcement monitoring these things for security purposes and have no problem with that.  I have a huge problem with any government official hiring a civilian to monitor the internet for people saying mean things.  Now if we want to take this specific case we have a governor who is the only governor in the history of America to eliminate his state's arts council because he wants to eliminate government waste yet he's using our tax dollars to pay people to monitor twitter.  Sorry but this makes him a hypocritical bad person, I don't care who else does it, its wrong even more so if you are pulling basic social services by claiming poor.

LOL, you're really grasping at straws here and not getting the point. I am amused at how many words you use while grasping though.

I don't give a flying eff who else pays pays people to search the net for negative feedback, doesnt make it right. Succinct enough for you?

Why is it wrong? Is it wrong for politicians to also subscribe to clipping services?

Unless he is paying for web searches out of his own pocket, it is very wrong.

So no government funds for a clipping service then?

It's completely unnecessary.  It's not like clipping services and web monitoring are used to govern.  Not accepting the health insurance reform money, cutting the arts council, snitching on high schoolers, the voting reform, etc were all unpopular stances some of which were very unpopular didn't stop all of these things from happening.

So you know for certain that none of this monitoring or clipping service information was used in making decision based on a handful of mildly unpopular decisions.

None of those issues were very unpopular. For very unpopular issues see Wisconsin, Ohio. This is still Kansas, and Brownback would win an election tomorrow despite all those issues.

I'm no fan of Brownback, but the mere fact that he's monitoring social media isn't wrong. What he chooses to do with that information is incredibly wrong.

I'm sure you'd like a law passed to make it illegal to monitor social networks in the future because Browback is terrible at using an otherwise benign tool.

Are you intentionally ignoring obvious the point?  It's wrong of him to pay people to monitor this crap because he rants about government waste has cut basic services under this premise.  You want to eliminate government waste you should start with people who get paid to read newspapers, Facebook, & Twitter.  He has a secretary to the secretary who does his scheduling, her job is to play on the internet.  Not wasteful at all, perfectly reasonable.  Is your last name Burget by chance?

In addition to my job responsibilities, I also monitor the internet for all @KansasSports activity. It can consume a good portion of my day.

[john "teach me how to" dougie]

I understand law enforcement monitoring these things for security purposes and have no problem with that.  I have a huge problem with any government official hiring a civilian to monitor the internet for people saying mean things.  Now if we want to take this specific case we have a governor who is the only governor in the history of America to eliminate his state's arts council because he wants to eliminate government waste yet he's using our tax dollars to pay people to monitor twitter.  Sorry but this makes him a hypocritical bad person, I don't care who else does it, its wrong even more so if you are pulling basic social services by claiming poor.

LOL, you're really grasping at straws here and not getting the point. I am amused at how many words you use while grasping though.

I don't give a flying eff who else pays pays people to search the net for negative feedback, doesnt make it right. Succinct enough for you?

Why is it wrong? Is it wrong for politicians to also subscribe to clipping services?

Unless he is paying for web searches out of his own pocket, it is very wrong.

So no government funds for a clipping service then?

It's completely unnecessary.  It's not like clipping services and web monitoring are used to govern.  Not accepting the health insurance reform money, cutting the arts council, snitching on high schoolers, the voting reform, etc were all unpopular stances some of which were very unpopular didn't stop all of these things from happening.

So you know for certain that none of this monitoring or clipping service information was used in making decision based on a handful of mildly unpopular decisions.

None of those issues were very unpopular. For very unpopular issues see Wisconsin, Ohio. This is still Kansas, and Brownback would win an election tomorrow despite all those issues.

I'm no fan of Brownback, but the mere fact that he's monitoring social media isn't wrong. What he chooses to do with that information is incredibly wrong.

I'm sure you'd like a law passed to make it illegal to monitor social networks in the future because Browback is terrible at using an otherwise benign tool.

Are you intentionally ignoring obvious the point?  It's wrong of him to pay people to monitor this crap because he rants about government waste has cut basic services under this premise.  You want to eliminate government waste you should start with people who get paid to read newspapers, Facebook, & Twitter.  He has a secretary to the secretary who does his scheduling, her job is to play on the internet.  Not wasteful at all, perfectly reasonable.  Is your last name Burget by chance?

In addition to my job responsibilities, I also monitor the internet for all @KansasSports activity. It can consume a good portion of my day.

I monitor the internet for stories and any mention about me.  Only takes a few minutes.

[_33]

MiR gets mad about such weird things.

[CNS]

FWIW, a friend of mine tweeted negative stuff about Lynn Jenkins at some point and was told by his employer, who had been contacted by Lynn Jenkins' staff, to take it down.

Great example of why personal twitter handle shouldn't be so easy to track down.

Also, eff Lynn Jenkins.  She had no comment to me when I gave her crap before Thanksgiving.  Coulda at least RT'ed me or insulted me.  eff her.

[Saulbadguy]

"take your tweet down", LOL

Like that means anything.

[MakeItRain]

MiR gets mad about such weird things.

iknowrite very few people across the country have expressed shock, outrage, or embarrassment about this.  I'm completely on an island.

[_33]

MiR gets mad about such weird things.

iknowrite very few people across the country have expressed shock, outrage, or embarrassment about this.  I'm completely on an island.

ya