The proposed press shield law
From a Chicago Tribune editorial:
But Obama’s endorsement is no reason to celebrate. It’s the equivalent of a guy sending roses to his girlfriend after he stole tulips from her garden.
I beg to differ. Actually, it’s the equivalent of a guy sending tulips to his girlfriend after he stole roses from her garden.
Any proposed press shield law has great potential for unintended consequences. Senator Dick Durbin recently questioned whether first amendment protections extended to bloggers and the rest of the Internet media…
Obama is for it. That’s a clear indication that there’s a snake hiding in the garden.
All O’s statements come with expiration dates, which are redacted.
This whole things stinks of misdirection. What’s wrong with the First Amendment and the body of common law including administrative law which needs a special privilege and protection for the press against a Whitehouse and DOJ so supposedly press friendly and whom we’ve all been assured are on our side and feel sorry for any misunderstandings and can’t we all, please, just get along and get back to fixing this country.
Anybody who wants to be is the press. By creating a “press shield” law, two presumptions present: there is an allowed and a disallowed press; the allowed press has “more” freedom of speech than a citizen.
These progressives are constantly laying the groundwork to nullify the US Constitution & Bill Of Rights.
Durbin, his remarks smack of
Lois Lerner going after Tea Party &
Constitution & Bill of Rights groups
Senator Durbin doesn’t understand that Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press.
My computer and a hosting site is more powerful than Ben Franklin’s press. I can reach further in a more timely manner. But if he were alive today, I suspect we’d be reading Poor Richard’s Blog.
The press doesn’t need a shield. It needs a stake in their heart, in order to liberate all those they have enslaved in the US.
It is the people that freedom of speech was reserved for, not the “press” owned solely by aristos.
The theory, which many Americans buy into, is that there is an elite that needs these rights and nobody else has them. The same for how police and military and armed guards of Hollywood aristos and political elites, have a right to guns. The rest of you don’t.
its all for me, & not for thee
Dovetails nicely with O speech to Ohio State grads
“Resist those voices you have heard about government tyranny.” We the *people are the government* ergo its *impossible* for us to be tyrants.
Instapundit* put it very succinctly:
* http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/
“We need protections for journalism, not journalists.”
Laws do not need to be “endorsed” if they are not followed. Barry and his bunch pay lip service to most of what Americans think as sacred; then just do whatever they want. It is all for the greater good. Any good leftist will solve anything with statistics, just ask them.
It is always beneficial to revisit this scene from the Man for All Seasons.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PDBiLT3LASk
We have reached a point where the rule of law is besieged by the highest office in the land. DC has become the epicenter of lawlessness. No one, including the messiah and his horde, will stand upright should the wall of law finally crumble. Everyman for himself, government against all is an invitation to a revolution of unintended consequences.
It’s all very simple. Holder, his boss, and his boss’s other rather blasé minions need a law, which they promise to obey, to help protect them from the consequences of not obeying other laws, which they promised to obey.
Or maybe it’s the equivalent of a guy asking the Homeowners Association to erect a little picket fence around his girlfriend’s garden to help deter his compulsion to steal even more of her roses and tulips.
Whatever.
No, whether they be tulips or roses, they’re attempting to send flowers as scandal damage control and to placate their number one mouthpiece.
Tulips are highly valued where I live because they bloom only once a year and only for a couple of weeks whereas roses are ubiquitous (I had one bloom right through the winter, snow and all). On a spring day a blooming tulip is more valuable.
The whole concept of a press shield law bewilders me. We already have one: it’s the First Amendment, part of the fundamental organizing structure that creates our government. This government despises the First Amendment and doesn’t comply with it. So why on earth does anybody think that it might comply with some statute?