Last week, 18-year-old Emma Sullivan was attending a youth in government conference with her fellow classmates at a Topeka high school when she submitted the tweet that would draw the ire of government and school officials and gain her a few thousand new followers.

At what point do you think it is reasonable to limit speech on social media? Let us know in the comments.

As Kansas Governor and former U.S. Senator Sam Brownback (R) was speaking at the conference, Sullivan decided to tweet this during the address:

Apparently, Sullivan didn’t actually say anything to the Governor, and was really just joking around with her friends.

While the tweet might not be the most eloquent expression of political frustration, it’s pretty innocuous. But it was enough to catch the attention of the Governor’s office, who spotted the tweet in question during routine social media monitoring.

Presumably a tad perturbed, Brownback’s people contacted Sullivan’s high school principal. Sullivan was then asked to apologize for her tweet, and according to Politico, the principal even instructed her to use certain talking points in the apology letter.

Sullivan refused the request to apologize, tweeting this late Sunday:

“I don’t think I should write the letter, and I don’t think it would be the best move for me,” she said. “At this time, I do not think an apology would be a sincere thing for me to do.”

She also said that she would do it again.

Why does she think Governor Brownback blows a lot anyways? Apparently, she disapproves of his decision to get rid of the entire Kansas Arts Commission budget.

Some Twitter users have jumped on the #heblowsalot hashtag to express their disappointment of Brownback and other officials involved:

So, is young miss Sullivan taking a stand to become a model of free speech in social media? Before her semi-political tweet, her Twitter feed was mostly crowded with Justin Bieber and Twilight. But her refusal to apologize has gained her a whole new following, as she has gained a few thousand followers in just a few days.

Let’s face it: her tweet regarding Governor Brownback doesn’t exactly amount to astute political commentary. I mean, she did use the hashtag #heblowsalot. But Sullivan’s lack of eloquence is really beside the point. That point being – why did Governor Brownback’s team get their panties in a wad over this tweet?

Sure, social media monitoring can be a useful tool for someone in office. It allows them to gauge public sentiment on a variety of issues and also receive live feedback on decisions they make that affect their constituents.

But contacting a girl’s school to complain about a critical tweet is not the type of monitoring that politicians should be engaged in. Do these people really have nothing better to do than troll Twitter looking for dissenting viewpoints….from high schoolers? Come on guys, thicken up the skin a little bit.

Honestly, there is no room in a free society for the mere suggestion that someone should apologize for expressing their opinions on social media. There are situations where free speech on social media sites might not cover certain content. Take for example the head of the College Republicans at UT Austin, who made headlines when she tweeted, “Y’all as tempting as it may be, don’t shoot Obama. We need him to go down in history as the WORST president we’ve EVER had! #2012.”

Sure, that’s in poor taste. But even with a tweet like that, there is a debate as to whether or not that speech is dangerous enough to warrant restriction.

But there is one thing I am sure of, no debate necessary: the hashtag #heblowsalot does not deserve a governmental reprimand and it sure as hell doesn’t warrant an apology letter.

Late Monday, Governor Brownback and his team came to their senses and apologized to the student, saying that his staff overreacted and emphasizing that he cares greatly for freedom of speech. Here’s the statement, which he posted as a note on Facebook:

“My staff over-reacted to this tweet, and for that I apologize. Freedom of speech is among our most treasured freedoms. I enjoyed speaking to the more than 100 students who participated in the Youth in Government Program at the Kansas Capitol. They are our future. I also want to thank the thousands of Kansas educators who remind us daily of our liberties, as well as the values of civility and decorum. Again, I apologize for our over-reaction.”

The school district also weighed in on Monday, saying that Sullivan did not have to apologize for her tweet.

What do you think about the Governor’s actions? Is there any situation where an elected official should scold a constituent for a disparaging tweet? Did the school have a right to initially demand an apology from Sullivan? Or do you think that all of this is a ridiculous misuse of authority? Let us know in the comments.

China is forcing foreign-owned hotels to install monitoring equipment on their network to allow the Chinese Public Security Bureau to access electronic information of people staying in these hotels.

"The Chinese government has put in place a system to spy on and gather information about every guest at hotels where Olympic visitors are staying," the Republican senator said. "This means journalists, athletes’ families and other visitors will be subjected to invasive intelligence gathering by the Chinese Public Security Bureau."

The Chinese government has demanded that foreign owned hotels allow the PSB to install software and hardware to aid the group in its efforts to spy on the Internet activities of guests and collect records of their online activity.

A number of international hotel chains have confirmed China’s demand to monitor guests Internet activity. Brownback has received a copy of the order translated from Chinese. The text refers to harsh punishment for failure to comply with the order.

"The hotels have asked us to preserve their anonymity; in order to protect their safety, and in return for their courage in coming forward, I cannot divulge their identities," said Brownback.

"These hotel chains have invested millions of dollars in their Chinese properties, and while they wish to find a way to reverse this order, if they are specifically identified, they could face severe retaliation by the Communist government." 

Three Candidates Sign On To Google Government

The Reason Foundation, a libertarian think tank, says that candidates Barack Obama, Sam Brownback, and Ron Paul have all agreed that "should they win the presidency in 2008, they will issue an executive order during their first month in office instructing the entire executive branch to put into practice the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006, a Google-like search tool will allow you to see how your tax dollars are being spent on federal contracts, grants and earmarks."

The FFATA has a deadline of January 1st, 2008, which means there’s not a lot of time left for the searchable website to come into being. You may also remember from last year, Senators Ted Stevens and Robert Byrd putting a "secret hold" on the legislation, trying to keep it from passing.

Bloggers put a stop to that pretty fast. Stevens, by the way, just had his house in Alaska raided by the feds, in case you might have wondered why he’d be against such a thing.

But anyway, the FFATA has been lauded by fans of a more transparent government, especially in the wake of a government increasingly more clandestine and wasteful, and has been called the first step towards a "Google Government," a phrase that could be both fascinating and chilling.

All three of the aforementioned candidates signed onto extending the FFATA to the executive branch. Critics will believe it when they see it, though, as they’ve accused the present government of dragging their feet on creating it.

That probably means the site will go live at 12:01 a.m. January 1st, and we won’t know who’s been paid and how much to build it until then.

But most interesting is that only those three have committed so far to more transparent governing, perhaps meaning the remaining candidates like things just as murky as unaccountable as they’ve always been, $200 hammers and all.

What I find neat about Reason.org’s presentation is that they’ve provided the text of the oaths taken and candidate signatures. You can judge for yourself which one looks more presidential by comparing them to the signatures that came before them.

(From an amateur graphologist’s standpoint, you might say Obama’s got the winning autograph – egotistic, confident, energetic, optimistic, a visionary’s handwriting; Brownback’s is a bit angular, which could mean extreme rationality, even to the point sadism; Paul’s is friendly, tired, and trailing, almost like a kid that’s about to fall asleep; both Brownback and Paul have open "o’s" and "a’s" which could mean poor secret keeping. Anyway, just guessing and I in no way stand by my own remarks there.)