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 …