Posted on 06/06/2013 6:43:32 AM PDT by cotton1706
OR IS THIS A POINTLESS DEBATE OVER A "SHIELD LAW?"
Are we starting to get under the skin of U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham (RINO-S.C.)?
At first glance it would appear that way …
Graham, a frequent target of this website’s criticism (due to his frequent awfulness), suggested this week that bloggers don’t deserve one of the most basic freedoms guaranteed to all Americans under the U.S. Bill of Rights.
“Who is a journalist is a question we need to ask ourselves,” Graham said earlier this week. “Is any blogger out there saying anything – do they deserve First Amendment protection? These are the issues of our times.”
Wait … what? Did this guy just imply that bloggers don’t deserve First Amendment protection? Because last time we checked that was a right guaranteed to everybody.
Graham was likely referring not to free speech, but to a proposed media shield law that’s currently being debated in Washington, D.C. Introduced (and promptly forgotten) in 2009, this bill was revived last month by the administration of U.S. President Barack Obama in a desperate attempt to counteract the damage done after his administration was busted snooping on mainstream media reporters.
Once again, Graham is doing his best to help bail Obama out of scandal.
So … should bloggers be allowed to avail themselves of a shield law (i.e. a law which keeps them from having to reveal their sources)?
Here’s a better question: If the federal government is permitted to steal phone records and emails from the biggest news outlets in the world and spy on the movements of their reporters – what’s the point of a “shield law” in the first place?
That’s the question we need to ask ourselves …
Yo Lindsey. Back in the day it was anyone who had paper and a quill pen.
Incredible. How in the Holy Hell do we get this jacka$$ and McLame the hell out of D.C.?
One thing Rush Limbaugh was talking about is the government looking into licensing journalism. That is, they decide who has the right to speak on public airwaves or post blogs on the internet. Democrats (and some Republicans) probably think they can get away with that because the drafters of the constitution didn’t have radio or internet, obviously. Therefore they can make a distinction between that and ordinary speech. Strange that they have no problem with pornography being disseminated in the same way.
I was born way back in ‘35, so I can recall something of the pre-WWII days, for instance.
Weirdos then were called bums, hoboes, etc. (still later, called beatniks, hippies, dopers, alcoholics, etc...then they all went further and wanted to be ufo abductees, and even weirder stuff...and you see where that has led to today...)
Anyway, b4 Pearl harbor the city parks were full of folks standing on actual soap boxes, whatever...attempting to gain attention for whatever their message was...religious, political, etc, etc !!!!
Those old folks would have been in their glory today as bloggers, freepers, etc.!!!
Semper Watching!
*****
Because Bloggers hate RINO Lindsey.
Lindsey must have been lurking here at FR.
When is this guy going to officially jump over and become a dimocrat?
Yes, in fact that is one of the issues of our times. And the answer is quite clear. Bloggers deserve First Amendment rights. (Something the anti-blog police around here would do well to consider.)
Bloggers are entitled to the protection of their free speech in exactly the same way that every other citizen is supposed to be protected. They are citizens and their rights to free speech are essential.
In addition (like any citizen who decides to start his or her own press) bloggers are journalists and are, therefore, entitled to freedom of the press. The word that describes their craft, blogging, had its origin in the shortening of two words "web" and "log." Blogs are exactly the same thing as the original sense of journalism, the practitioners of which maintained "personal, often daily, diaries" of things that happened to and around them, and commentaries on those events.
That someone who labels himself as a conservative could even question bloggers' rights says a lot about Lindsey Graham, but it also says a lot about how far we have strayed from any serious understanding of the values and principles of our founding.
Graham Must Go!
And...soldiers...AND bloggers do not lay aside the citizen...nuff said ‘bout dat !!!!!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
*****
“When we assumed the soldier we did not lay aside the citizen,” from then-Gen. George Washington’s June 26, 1775, letter to the Provincial Congress is inscribed inside the apse.
Ref
http://www.arlingtoncemetery.org/visitor_information/amphitheater.html
Note: The above quote was a favorite of Col David (Perfumed Princes) Hackworth USA (Ret.) (now deceased)
*****
“There ain’t no ticks like poly-ticks. Bloodsuckers all.”
-Davy Crockett (unsourced)
Ref
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Davy_Crockett
**********
Of course these a-holes want to ban bloggers, the “citizen media” shines the spotlight of truth on their devious antics. The pattern of the last several years is try and ban any and everything that threatens their power and agenda.
The MSM has to deal with in-the-loop editors, and their desire to kiss the asses of theses modern day despots, however, the citizen media can put out the truth, and broadcast not only the news, but what other like-thinking Americans think about the issues.
The Constitution and the Bill of Rights is an enemy only to those who are enemies to America. Outlaws don’t like a “snitch” because it exposes their crimes...same principle here.
Graham, if you can’t take the criticism, and don’t intend to alter your behavior, you don’t need to be in the public eye. If your fragile little ego can’t take it, move to Australia or somewhere.
The wisdom of the founders gave us these documents to inoculate us from the same type of tyrants left in Europe.
The difference is, there is no place left to go, so if its freedom and liberty we want, we’re going to have to take a stand. The redcoats are back.
“If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter.” – George Washington
“Without Freedom of thought, there can be no such Thing as Wisdom; and no such thing as public Liberty, without Freedom of speech.” – Benjamin Franklin
“In those wretched countries where a man cannot call his tongue his own, he can scarce call anything his own. Whoever would overthrow the liberty of a nation must begin by subduing the freeness of speech.” – Benjamin Franklin
The guy is no better than a fascist. The First Amendment protects INDIVIDUAL CITIZENS Linsey you brown shirted fool.
Being anonomous is nothing new. Especially in the press. Throughouth the revoulutionary period, opinions were expressed anonomously (to protect themselves from the British, or economic comeuppance, or whatever. Or just because they wanted to). Dickinson, Adams, Henry, Madison, Jay, Hamilton, etc. There’s any number of examples of “the government” not knowing who was publishing opinions. And there were printers and pennypapers everywhere.
Free speech and free press are exactly that. They do not need to be licensed or approved by anybody. Espeicially the government.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.