Zach Vargo

Well the Obama Administration is at it again, trying to force their ways down your throat. With the newest czar, Cass Sunstein, the administration is preparing to shut down all the lies spread around by bloggers and online news organizations. You may be kissing some more of your First Amendment rights away.

Cass Sunstein, the Felix Frankfurter Professor of Law at Harvard Law School, has been appointed as the head of the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs. His claim to fame is his soon to be released book, “On Rumors: How Falsehoods Spread, Why We Believe Them, What Can Be Done.” His is also known, and possibly appointed, because of his book, “Nudge,” which encourages the government to gently force people to become human beings. In “On Rumors,” Sunstein wrote, “that we are headed for a future in which people’s beliefs are a product of social networks working as echo chambers in which false rumors spread like wildfire.” He also wrote, “We hardly need to imagine a world, however, in which people and institutions are being harmed by the rapid spread of damaging falsehoods via the Internet.” And continued with, “We live in that world. What might be done to reduce the harm?”

So what does this mean for the blogging world? It means that if you spread falsehoods about the government, you will be asked to remove your blog. You are also responsible for the comments that are posted on your article. However, if you refuse to take down your blog, you can expect to be taken to court, which will determine the fate of your blog.

The real question that is brought up is what determines a false statement?   I guess the internet regulators will decide, and you have a chance to prove them wrong in court.  But is a false statement only going to be anything that denounces Obama, his administration, or any other Liberal politician/ activist?  How about the Alaskan blogger would started the rumors of why Gov. Palin decided to leave office?  She was incorrect, but would Sunstein have deemed that a false statement?

Many people fear that this is another method to suppress the “Republican Attack Machine,” or in layman’s terms: anyone who opposes the Liberals.  Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but when the government is regulating that, then it has been taken too far.  How would you feel if you were only stating the facts, and the government deems it a lie because it made Obama look bad?  You better hope that the judge is on the same side as you. Conservatives may again be falling victim to the vicious attacks conducted by the Liberal “victims”.

Take my blog Sunstein, I DARE YOU.

For five straight weekends, Obama has been out on the golf course.  The media’s reaction? They love it.  When Bush was golfing in 2003, the media slammed him for golfing while the troops were fighting and dying for their country.  Obama is golfing when troops are dying in GWOT, Iran is murdering protestors, and North Korea is trying to wipe the United States off the face of the Earth.  Does anyone see the problem here?

I do not criticize Obama for golfing, there is only so much he can do with current events and golf is a relaxing sport.  However, when the media becomes hypocritical, then I have a serious problem.  The media pretty much forced Bush to lay down the clubs, but now seem to be encouraging Obama to play more often.

In August 2003, Bush gave up golfing after receiving word of the United Nations headquarters was bombed in Iraq.  The media had a field day criticizing Bush for making the “huge” sacrifice in support of the troops.  Bush said, “I don’t want some mom whose son may have recently died to see the commander in chief playing golf. I feel I owe it to the families to be in solidarity as best as I can with them. And I think playing golf during a war just sends the wrong signal.”  Veterans got angry over that statement, one even went as far as saying “Thousands of Americans have given up a lot more than golf for this war. For President Bush to imply that he somehow stands in solidarity with families of American soldiers by giving up golf is disgraceful. It’s an insult to all Americans and a slap in the face to our troops’ families.”  Honestly, what more could Bush do?  Did people expect Bush to pick up a weapon and fight on the front lines?  It was just another easy attack by the media, especially since Bush did not actually give up golfing until October 13, 2003.  It has been recorded that Bush only played 24 rounds of golf during his 8 year tenure.

As for Obama playing golf, he has gotten more than plenty of praises for it.  The Washington Post posted an article on June 9, 2009 with the headline that read “Just the Sport for A Leader Most Driven.”  Obama has played 11 rounds of golf since taking office 6 months ago.  Obama has more on his plate right now than Bush did 6 years ago.  With all the threats from Iran and North Korea along with the wars we are already fighting, he still finds time to grab his clubs and hit the course.  

Our media should be fair and balanced, but of course they give all of their efforts to praise Obama.  The hypocrisy is becoming even more sickening.  I honestly do not think that a President playing golf should even be considered as a media topic.  I am sure that being our nation’s leader is a pretty stressful and hectic job, and they should be allowed to take a vacation or time out of their busy schedules to relax and clear their heads.  Constantly being under stress starts clouding your judgement and we do not need a leader who breaks downs during a critical time.  It is good that the media stands behind our president, but shouldn’t it stand behind ALL of our presidents? I am also curious as to why Obama gets a lot of credit?  

http://thenationalscene.com/media-critical-obamas-golf-trips-par/comment-page-1/#comment-76

http://www.newjerseynewsroom.com/nation/media-cheers-obamas-golf-outings-but-used-to-criticized-bushs-trips-to-the-course

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/may/15/georgebush.usa

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/05/13/bush-i-gave-up-golf-for-t_n_101595.html

http://forthardknox.com/2009/06/25/golf-obama-vs-bush/

So Jon and Kate are making a huge announcement on Monday’s show.  Although TLC is not commenting on this announcement, so they don’t spoil anything, they are encouraging viewers to make their own hypothesis.  Since the fifth season premier, viewers witnessed Kate stating that their love for each other had been growing more distant.  That show attracted 10 million viewers, but the shows since the premier dropped viewership by more than half.  Currently the show is under fire due to violations of child labor laws according to the Pennsylvania’s Labor Department. 

My hypothesis for the announcement is that they are ending the show and attempting damage control on their sinking ship of a marriage.  At least that is what I hope.  Trying to raise 8 children, all of whom are not old enough to take care of themselves, is hard enough, but imagine trying to do it when you’re separated.  Are they going to live near each other, in the same house, or are they just going to divide the kids up?  I really do not see that as a possibility.  I really am rooting for this family to stay together since the way I see it, nobody wins in a divorce, especially with children in the equation.  So I am actually going to watch this episode.  I’ve seen episodes from the first couple of seasons and thought it was a cute and humorous show.  

I know TLC is sweating this because the show is the most popular one on their network.  We will see what happens come Monday between 9 and 10 pm.  Also, why is the Pennsylvania Labor Department just now starting to investigate child labor violations after 6 seasons? Someone explain that to me.

In recent news,  the Obama Administration is offering the Miranda Rights to the detainees.  The FBI has already started giving the rights to detainees captured and held in Afghanistan.  But should we really be allowing suspected terrorists have the same rights as American citizens?

I am sure that everyone has heard the Miranda Rights at least once in their life, since every movie or show involving the police arresting a criminal end up reading them. But if you don’t know what it is, the Miranda Rights are: “You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. You have the right to an attorney present during questioning. If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed for you. Do you understand these rights?”  

Back in a March 22nd interview with CBS “60 Minutes,” Obama made the remark that detainees should not be giving the Miranda Rights by saying: “Do these folks deserve Miranda Rights? Do they deserve to be treated like a shoplifter down the block? Of course not.” Now is he just flip-flopping on his own views?

I know these are changing times and we may have to take a different approach to handling detainees, but this is one issue that every American should be against.  I feel as though my rights do not matter and we are spending too much time catering to suspected terrorists.  Do other countries treat us as one of their own when we get captured? No.  Look at the 2 reporters in North Korea.  They got accused of spying, whether or not they did it, and now they have to serve 12 years in hard labor camps where life expectancy is only months.  I feel that we are nice enough as it is to the detainees and the last thing we need to do is hold hands with those who want to see this great nation destroyed.  

Anyway, enough ranting and raving.  Let me know your opinion on the issue.

Hearing on the news about North Korea launching these missiles is really bothering me. I honestly think we should be doing a little bit more than saying that the United States is ready to fight North Korea if necessary.  I sure hope so, we are the greatest military in the world and we should be ready to take on any country that threatens us.  There are much better alternatives than stating the obvious.

I’m sure President Obama is a very busy person, especially with Iran making its own claims and the economic situation.  However, he has people who know how to deal with it.  As a concerned citizen of this proud nation, I am offering my personal opinion, although they that they probably thought of this idea already, but shot it down for a better alternative that I have yet to learn of.

This is what we should do.  Our intelligence obviously knows that there is more activity that is suggestion more launches, so that is a start.  Since we know that they are launching it, we put Patriot missiles along the DMZ and place a couple of warships off the coast (I think they have done this already once before).  When North Korea launches their missile, we launch one of our own to shoot it down.  The advantages of this plan are: North Korea has one less nuclear ballistic missile; we are reinforcing that we think Kim Jong Il’s  actions are unacceptable; and we provide some live fire training for our military.

Am I just rambling senselessly or does anyone else feel the same way?

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/05/29/says-north-korea-plan-long-range-missle-test/