Dana Milbank, of all people, wrote an article for WaPo earlier this week, basically saying that not only is the Rosen scandal real, but that the admin has clearly crossed the line in its pursuit of journalists it deems disloyal.

You should see the comments…one big collection of idiots covering their ears and screaming, “LIES, LIES,LIES!!!! Faux News had it coming!”

Almost comical, were it not so fascist.

An analogy to this is when Augusta National let in two women as members earlier this year. As a private organization, if they desire to be men only, that is their prerogative. If they want to be coed, then that is also their right, WITHOUT government influence.

The USA needs a strong 4th estate to keep the sunlight on government actions.

Which of the following has stayed focused and reported, summarized and broken news regularly on Benghazi, the IRS scandal, and Obamacare (you may choose up to three):

MSNBC
CNN
ABC
CBS
NBC
FOXNews
The NYT
The WaPO
The Washington Examiner
NPR
Jon Stewart
Rush Limbaugh

Do you see any sort of a pattern?

Explain how a shield law would have helped the others strengthen their shining the light of the sun on the government.

Bonus points: What is Candy Crowley eating and who is feeding her?

Extra Credit: Write an essay of up to 500 words on whether looking the other way, shading the truth or flat out lying works best as a strategy for a bootlicking journalist in protecting the man he loves.

Meanwhile, MMFA, a clearly partisan group that, like the bootlicker, simply echoes the admistration’s talking points, never has its tax exempt status question.

Also, the “Shield Law” contains a natinal security exception; so President Mugabe and his corrupt regime would have just gone after Rosen and his family and co-workers on that basis.

20.Aww…………Free association/acceptance can not be achieved through “social engineering” by progressives. I expect a lawsuit any day to force inclusion of LGBT scoutmasters and who knows what other “problems” progressives will find down the road that will need to be “corrected”.

Of course. Rather than see the vote yesterday as a vote for tolerance, it will be seen as weakness and the progressive sharks will see blood in the water.

And the entire purpose of shield laws in the modern world is to enshrine that some press is more equal than others. If a ‘shield law’ protecting CBS and excluding LGF had been in place, would we have known that CBS was pimping forged documents?

http://commoncts.blogspot.com/2013/05/now-we-know-ten-leading-democrats-wrote.html

You’d get Bambi-in-the-headlamps stares. You’d get spluttering and red faces. You’d get insults one might expect from kids in the seventh grade. But you’d get no satisfactory answers.

I had a very interesting exchange with one statist lefty just the other day. I was told — for at least the thousandth time — that because I’m a libertarian, I’m a “conspiracy theorist.”

I explained that conspiracy theory assumes that grand ideas can be effectively implemented by a central elite, capable of marshaling the cooperation of a wide a diverse bunch of people. That libertarians don’t believe this can be done — which is exactly why we’re libertarians in the first place. And that, therefore, calling us “conspiracy theorists” makes no sense.

I got a stare, and spluttering. He didn’t know how to answer me, because his keepers hadn’t told him what to think about it.

The USA needs a strong 4th estate to keep the sunlight on government actions. Hopefully congress can pass a shield law to give protections to journalists and ensure they can continue to dig into the government actions.

Yet leftie orgs were also targeted.
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2013-05-14/irs-sent-same-letter-to-democrats-that-fed-tea-party-row-taxes

This is exactly like when conservatives railed against NGO’s and their non profit status and then organizations like Greenpeace were targeted in a blanket sweep.

The difference in this case is the IRS decided to organize by political affiliation and that is the problem. If they would have looked at all groups to see if they had the privileged of Tax Free donations in the same manner, it would be just fine. Its hard to say this is dem led program when we can see Several liberal groups denied in the same sweep, and I have seen no evidence that says this was a White House Led initiative.

We can’t always know what someone else’s motive was for committing a horrible act. We can enable other people to keep such an act from being committed against them.

Comment by Lori Heine — May 23, 2013 @ 2:13 pm – May 23, 2013

Perfectly put.

But the reason liberals push “hate crimes” has nothing to do with preventing such acts from being committed; it’s merely using such acts to impose speech codes.

Such as the screaming fit after the Giffords shooting about “civility” and how words were “causing” people to act violently.

Which of course magically vanished as a cause-effect relationship when the words of the LGBT community, Dan Savage, Joe Jervis, and the SPLC caused Floyd Corker to go on a shooting rampage.

Whenever liberals start ranting about “hate crimes”, ask them to affirm the following:

1) I am a bigot who can only be restrained from attacking or killing people I don’t like by stricter sentencing laws.

2) Certain words and statements must be banned because I am incapable of hearing them without flying into a violent murderous rage that will result in the death of people around me.

What you’ll find is that the “hate crimes” supporter, like all gun-grabbers and Obama DOJ/IRS supporters, does not believe the rationale for such laws applies to them — which demonstrates that their demands for “hate crimes” laws have nothing to do with society’s benefit and everything to do with their selfish fascist desire to use the force of law to criminalize and punish the behavior of others.

In follow-up to last week’s tragedy in Manhattan, I did find the time today to visit the site. It’s New York, so the scene is pretty much back to normal with no physical evidence in sight. Still, some of the locals have built a small shrine on the corner — mostly candles, a few poems and photos (interestingly, many spelled the victim’s name “Mark” rather than “Marc” as in most of the news stories). More than a few people were stopping to view or pay their respects.