Skip to comments.Dick Durbin: Are bloggers and tweeters entitled to constitutional protection?
Posted on 05/26/2013 4:57:16 PM PDT by Sub-Driver
click here to read article
all those little umpa lumpas were starting to piss me off when I was there with my son for a boxing fight.
Couldn;t go 100 yards with out an umpa lumpa trying to give me one of those flyers for an escort
I have a problem that those paid by us in the IRS, DOE, DOJ use the constitution to get out of their corruption while the same thugs tell us that maybe we shouldn’t have free speech, free media etc
The RATS despise the constitution as just as they would do away with the 2nd amendment, they would also tear down freedom of speech, religion and the press.
That jackass. The first amendment does not give freedom of the press only to specified people known as journalists. The press is not organized, and requires no membership. Every American is given freedom of the press as a God given right.
ANd they also posess the 2nd amendment to violently resist any government that actually moves to take away their first.
I suspect Durbins answer to his own question will be a”if they agree with liberals, they are journalists. If they are apolitical, lean right or are full on conservatives, they shouldn’t be considered journalists”
Or as freedom loving patriots call him....
Dick Durbin you miniscule dumbass, tweeters and bloggers are American citizens. It’s liberals like you who shouldn’t have constitutional protection since you are the very ones who attack the Constitution.
Of course not DICK. They DON’T need them!!! (Sarcasm)
In the new wonderful world of the Obamanation, we don’t need a First amendment any more than we need a Second or a Tenth or, as a matter of fact, the entire damn constitution.
Its a great thing for the US AG and the FBI to keep close tabs on people who have “dangerous” ideas like “freedom”, “constitution”, “rights” and “God”. Because they ARE serious threats to the Obamanation.
You bet your @$$, DICK!!!!
How I HATE these scumbags!!!
Only the legitimate press ie the main stream press (which can be counted on to be reliable) has constitutional protections. The other press (conservative) is really out of the mainstream and distorts the public discourse, it should be treated with the disdain. Of course have no protections should be provided to them since they aren’t legitimate news organizations. Didn’t our President say Fox news wasn’t a true news source compared to msnbc or current tv where you can receive accurate information vs right wing propaganda?
I think Senator Durbin is right,best the FCC decide what is a news organization that way we don’t get these IRS or Benghazi stories that cause over excitement and prevent the real news stories getting attention like disarming the citizenry or passing comprehensive immigration reform. The purpose of the news is to educate the public and guide them in the right direction if you don’t filter the news it could be too dangerous might cause to much independent thinking out there!
Thanks for posting that. 100% agreement.
......and heads on a pike.
You’ve just described the most important parts of L’il Dick Durbin’s entire constituency.
“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.
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)
Get my drift....???
If murdering a baby is a constitutional right, I’d say that blogging and tweeting are too. Just my humble opinion.
WE have rights. What we lack is representation.
"...and finally, that truth is great and will prevail if left to herself, that she is the proper and sufficient antagonist to error, and has nothing to fear from the conflict, unless by human interposition disarmed of her natural weapons, free argument and debate, errors ceasing to be dangerous when it is permitted freely to contradict them. ""I HAVE SWORN UPON THE ALTAR OF GOD ETERNAL HOSTILITY TO EVERY FORM OF TYRANNY OVER THE MIND OF MAN"--The Virginia Act For Establishing Religious Freedom
--Thomas Jefferson, 1786
Oh yes, let’s allow the Federal government to decide WHO is a journalist...that’ll work well.
Damn, Dick Turban...you’ve got 99.95% of the media already...
If “journalists” get shield laws, then we all do. There is no Constitutional role for a “journalist”, they are citizens like the rest of us and subject to the same laws.
The Constitution enumerates certain “jobs” in the Federal government and describes the duties and responsibilities of those jobs, including how a citizen gets one of these positions.
If journalists were that special then how to determine who is and is not a journalist would be spelled out. Instead journalists have invented a constitutionally protected role for themselves, starting with the assumption that the people have a “right to know” and the journalists’ job is to keep government honest.
Damn, Dick Turban...youve got 99.95% of the media already...
Thanks for that. Wow, a Jehovah’s Witness case from the middle of the FDR era. How were you ever made aware of it?
If they extend said rights to foreign terrorists, then they are by available to any foreign journalist.
Straw man argument as it is. Why even argue with this guy? Hes an abysmal tyrannical moron.
Should Senators and Congressmen be entitled to Constitutional rights?
Are you as a US Senator or as a US citizen entitled to constitutional protection, specifically the First Amendment?
So this media shield law is actually nonexistent?
The First Amendment cites both "freedom of speech" and "freedom of the press".
They are different sides of the same coin. Journalists have the same rights as citizens.
Perfect word to describe this... asshat.
When is this idiot up for election? He’s 68, time to retire and go someplace he views are more welcome. I hear Veneualeza is nice.
There’s a whole generation of congressmen who just need to go. For the good of the Republic, they must be retired.
My Lord, is he stupid.
but then so are 47% of the citizens...romney was sooo right!
Only properly licensed "reporters" would be protected by the Constitution.
Yeah but Dick is the chairmen of the constitution sub comittee
you know i got the new one for that barry obama before obama barries you—adjust spelling to fit the need
Deuschbag Durbin bump for later...
Excellent point. But how do we speed things up?
Zippy and Holder managed to subvert the election process and hide it until after the election. That was long enough to accomplish what they wanted: re-election.
They managed to stonewall on Benghazi until after the election. Same result.
The tactic is to operate covertly as much as possible. If something comes to light, then deny it. If no longer able to deny it, say there must be a thorough investigation so that we get all the facts and don’t jump to conclusions or make rash mistakes. Then after the (sham) investigation has dragged on, dismiss the whole thing as water under the bridge, ancient history, no longer relevant. (What difference at this point does it make?)
See how easy it is? And conservatives keep falling for it.
What are our options for fighting these tactics? Can we win when we follow the rules and the progressives break them? Can we win with one set of rules for us and a different set of rules for progressives? How far will conservatives be pushed? When will they say “enough?”
Swine. Let someone try to ban abortion and all of a sudden they wrap themselves in the constitution. But for everything else it’s a “200 year old document” that they eye with contempt.
And FR is a press too.
Well, lets look at what "the press" was 200 years ago. Back then, we didn't have industrialized mass communication. Back then, the "press" was any guy who had access to a printing press, and published his viewpoints, facts, and opinions to an audience outside his immediate circle of friends.
As such, any blogger is just as much "the press" as the alphabet networks are.
Just my humble opinion as a resident of this hell-hole called Illinois.
lets see benedict arnold died of dropsy maybe durbin will die of something similar caused by angry citizens you know another form of dropsy and they will laugh hahaha with gallows humor
Documentation File on The Curse of Obamanation.
It says Freedom of Speech, it does not say “Freedom of Speech EXCEPT in the case of...”
Durbin hadn’t really anything to say worth a damn so he took the opportunity to slam the work of old dead white men of 200 years ago. Democrats are relentless on this. They insist the Constitution is a living, breathing document for them to adjust as they see fit. This was his message. The message he wanted people to take away from this program he was on today. That the Constitution is outdated, and cannot be used to govern in today’s America. That the Constitution has to be rewritten to the Leftist’s perspective of a secular criteria.
Again as I said in another post on another thread yesterday it’s another slap at Christianity as our Constitution was written with Christian values, Christian mores as its basis.
Durbin is such a turd and an idiot.
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.