Posted on 09/12/2013 1:15:00 PM PDT by ColdOne
The vote was 13-5 for a compromise defining a "covered journalist" as an employee, independent contractor or agent of an entity that disseminates news or information. The individual would have been employed for one year within the last 20 or three months within the last five years.
It would apply to student journalists or someone with a considerable amount of freelance work in the last five years. A federal judge also would have the discretion to declare an individual a "covered journalist," who would be granted the privileges of the law.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
I've said nothing about "good intentions." All I've said is that, legally, all this bill would do is create a journalist-source privilege, and that the definition of "journalist" in the bill would apply ONLY to determining who is covered by the privilege. Just look at the language of the bill - technically, it is not defining "journalist," it is defining "covered journalist" (e.g., journalists who are COVERED by the privilege). It's not "optimism," it's reading the bill.
Sickening.
I actually agree with you. Well analyzed.
However, dial it forward: What follows from this? Well, OBVIOUSLY, the pols will clamor, "We need to LICENSE journalists so they can present credentials that they are, in fact, covered.... right?"
It's a trivial jump to that, when they are stirring around in this.
Next comes more strict and strident regulations -- perhaps an oversight board? -- that grants or revokes licenses.
And the final nail is, when legislation is crafted for Felony Journalism Without a License.
It's not at all farfetched; not when you see what the left -- and the RINO right -- have already done.
THIS IS THE FIRST STEP TOWARDS OUTLAWING ALL BUT STATE-SUPPORTED OPINION.
_____________________
Bingo!
It has. It happened November 4, 2008. Since that time and date, the Left has been consolidating their power. They have had a slowdowns here and there but they are still foraging ahead slowly but surely. The reason that they are moving slower than they would want is that they don’t want to upset the sheep until slaughter day.
How?
Add it to the list.
You are correct. That is its purpose.
Next thing they will propose is that we pass an exam and be certified with a government issued license to practice journalism.
You got it.
WTH!?
Freedom of the press shall not be infringed. FU&^* the commie rat bastards in government and the enemedia.
In the near future, Conservatives will be counted as 3/5ths of a Soylent Green cracker.
The first best practice in law writing is “generality”. Laws shouldn’t be specially carved out to benefit one group or to attack or harm a narrow group of individuals.
Ideally, lawmakers should never know in advance to whom the laws apply. The British lacked that when they targeted the American colonists for special taxes. When you see custom laws written for the benefit or detriment of a single narrow group, you know it’s a bad law. For a modern example see the Obamacare legislation’s exemptions for big donors, the well-connected, and Congress itself.
The next principle is prospectivity. This is the constraint on ex post facto laws. Laws should always apply in the future and never to the past. You cannot undo the past or change your behavior. The last thing a tyrant wants is to allow you to modify your behavior and escape sanction. They simply don’t like what you did and want you punished.
Publicity is the third principle of good law. Most laws are completely unknown to the general public. This is very bad policy. Governments usually publicly publish notices, but in obscure papers or at government offices. Yet, they’re willing to make massive changes in how people live. Think about it when you find out about a law by accident who would hide it, but someone who doesn’t want you to know about it. When government hides information, the purpose is always nefarious.
This brings us to consent. Consent is critical to law-writing in a free society. Laws must be generally acceptable to those who will live by them. That’s why elections are so important. It is also why judge-made law is so often bad, it goes against the public will and forces on people, laws that they wouldn’t place on themselves. Next time you hear about a law ask yourself if you’d consent to it willfully. If no, it is likely a bad law. It was the absence of consent that brought about the American Revolution.
The final item for good laws is proper due process. This is something that America has lost for a long time. Overcharging by prosecutors, plea bargaining, and prosecutorial whim have long destroyed the notion and respect for law. Due process means that the law is meted out equally and fairly with each similar crime being treated the same. Justice must be blind.
Our country, founded on Rule of Law, is headed for extinction. And it will do so because the majority of living Americans has been conditioned not to think morally, and not to respect our foundation.
We now have schoolchildren who get ‘free’ breakfast and lunch at government schools, while bringing their smartphones to the classroom. What does this tell them about their world!
They will continue on their course until stopped.
Hebrew schools teach adherence to Jewish teachings. Lutheran schools teach adherence to Lutheranism. Catholic schools the same. What do government schools teach?
Keep in mind that we’ve been losing the “Rule of Law” for nearly a century now. To outlaw alcohol took an amendment to the Constitution. Now they pass invasive laws as if they were printing paper.
Take a look at that list and share it with as many people as you like. That’s how you can judge good and bad laws. We’ve got to get the word out.
Why should ANY “journalist” have any rights that I don’t have?
A famous pamphleteer of the American Revolutionary War was Thomas Paine. He was a “blogger” of his era.
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.