Sen. Feinstein Says That You Suck and She Hates You

First, let's get this out: The discussion is not about limiting the First Amendment. It's about enacting a Federal shield law to (mostly) prevent DasGov from forcing reporters to divulge their sources.[1] Feinstein wanted the definition of "journalist" to be limited to those who get paid by dead-tree, radio or television news outlets. Bloggers who promulgate news, even if they break stories, aren't journalists to the Mighty DiFi. So the bozos distinguished members of the Senate discussed the matter.

My gut feeling is to just go with this response:

(Disclamer:  She is far younger and prettier than me.)

Without looking at it, I'll bet that this proposed Federal shield law is rife with exceptions and other holes that any decent Federal prosecutor could drive a bus through. But the notion that the imbeciles who crayon out our laws lawmakers are now going to write into law a definition of what is a "journalist" troubles me.

Are we going to have a "First Amendment Enhanced" for Federally-approved reporters and a "First Amendment Lite" for the rest of us?

What happens if a number of people in a town were to get together and create an Internet news blog about their town? Contributors would go to different government hearings, attend trials and write about them. Wouldn't that be "journalism"?

My fear, though, is that this new shield law is going to be used to chip away at the First Amendment rights of everyone else. Which is probably what DiFi had in mind from the start.

Look I make no bones about considering myself to be a liberal. The description at the top of this blog is largely unchanged from when I started.

However, I am now at the point that whenever Dianne Feinstein is taking a position on anything, I have to wonder whether the other side of the argument has merit and I consider it.

____________________________
[1] Assuming that the reporter practices strict digital security.