Durbin’s first amendment comment
Dick needs to be retired quickly.
Anyone else remember Durbin blubbering over the purported violations of terrorists’ “rights” when he compared our troops to Nazi and Khmer Rouge guards?
This is why the second amendment is so important. Without the second, we lose the first.
Well, the Dems are so used to the “news” media working for the DNC, they do tend to forget that the rest of us have free speech rights, too. Since there are “so many” bloggers and radio people who tend to “go Right”, Dems do not (will not) consider them the same as the “real” media, and so, not entitled to the same “rights” as those “journalists” who worship at the feet of the Dems (ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, WaPo, LAT, NYT, etc).
Once again, Dick Durban illustrates what a complete ignoramus he is.
There is no such thing as THE PRESS in the sense that term is used by elitist Progressives today — some sort of elite group whose members are allowed preferential treatment under law. In the Constitutional sense, “the press” is a technological device for disseminating information.
One cannot be a “member” of the press. One can only have access to a press.
Any device which enables one to state and publicize one’s views is a “press,” whether it be moveable type, offset, TV, radio, or the Internet. We all have free access to “the press,” meaning we have the right to pay any provider who wishes to sell us access to publicize our ideas.
In this regard, no CBS anchor has anymore claim to special treatment for being part of “the press” than does any blogger.
All one has to do is something that the liberals never, ever want to; refer to the original intent of the framers of the Constitution. What would they have considered to be “press”? At that time, there were no established “mainstream media” organizations. Anyone (given that they had the financial means to do so) could start a newspaper. The “press”, then, to the framers was anyone who cared to publish a newspaper. There were no special qualifications, no licenses, and no college degrees necessary for one to qualify as a journalist; all you had to do was start a newspaper.
Extending that to modern technology, then, obviously internet bloggers would qualify as “press” under the First Ammendment. The basic principal is the same; no special qualifications, no licenses, and no degrees are necessary to become a journalist; one must only be willing to publish his or her writing. The only real difference between now and then is that the financial means necessary to establish oneself as a member of the press is much lower now than it was then.
Of course, even under a more restrictive definition of “press”, internet blogging certainly should fall under the realm of “free speech” and be protected anyway.
Dems have been thinking this way since the day Matt Drudge blew thru the spiking of the Lewinsky story.
Since Benjamin Franklin self-published his little work called “Poor Richard’s Almanack”, I would consider him “The First American Blogger”.
It is interesting to note, that those who wish to control “the media”, in ALL of its aspects, now mumble among themselves, as to how to approach the problem of “sanctifying” those that use and contribute, to “the media”!
I am a self-produced writer and author.
To define “self-produced”, look inside any of the ‘writer’s magazines’, and you will find advertisements as to where you may apply to acquire your Masters in Fine Arts, in order to be a more pedigreed writer. (Which in the eyes of those publishing the magazines, that you have already acquired a degree in literature!)
I have been using The King’s English, and sometimes The Queen’s, too, in my writings, since I was attending junior high school. My literary background showed enough that, as a reward during my stay as an employee of D.o.D., it was mine to write federal procedural manuals from scratch for the various contractors. From 2006 to 2012, I was a guest columnist for the regional newspaper on various issues, all on ‘payment by publication, only’, until I retired. I have done all of this WITHOUT A COLLEGE DEGREE!!
Now, let us return to those, including Mr. Durbin, who are considering the “sanctification” of those who they might call “journalists”, or “bloggers”, and which they may, in time, “allow or disallow” to hold that title.
Webster’s Collegiate Edition, Fourth Publication, states: 1./ that a “journalist” is: a person whose occupation is journalism; reporter, news editor. “Journalism” is: the work of gathering, writing, editing, and publishing or disseminating news, as through newspapersand magazines or by radio and television.
2./ As opposed to “Blog”: a journal or diary written for public viewing on a website and consisting typically of personal reflections, commentary on current events, arranged chronologically; to maintain or contribute to a blog.
Congress, I believe, will consider the “sanctification” of what a “journalist” is (although true journalists do NOT exist in either the major newshouses or broadcast televisions, anymore, they are all apparatchiks of the State), and attempt to relegate anyone that does not fit their self-defined and twisted pigeonhole to be deemed illegal, unauthentic, and therefore, to be ignored, or silenced!
I would rather silence Mr. Durbin, through the violence of the ballot box!!!