[jsalcedo]

The embarrassing First Amendment

New York Times
Jayson Blair
NY Times impressive fiction writer who defended his actions with the
flippant remark "you can't believe everything you read in newspapers."

Washington Post
Janet Cooke
Wrote a story about an 8 year old heroin addict.
Cooke was awarded a Pulitzer Prize .... but the award was abruptly taken
away when it was discovered there was no 8 year old, no heroin and no
addict.

St. Petersburg Times
Tom Zucco
Wrote an article entitled "The Bambi Expressway."
Diparaging hunters and gun owners from a fake first person perspective.Tom probably hasn't been
seen in the state of Pennsylvania since writing that pathetic piece. His
former friends Buddy, Rick and Gary are still lookin' for him.

Dateline NBC
In an attempt to persuade viewers that the gas tanks in General Motors
trucks were unsafe, reporters rigged a truck to explode when struck in the
side by a car. NBC news president Michael Gartner resigned after
unsuccessfully trying to justify one of the biggest gaffes in the history of
broadcast journalism.

CNN NEWS
In an attempt to convince viewers that the assault weapons ban which will
sunset in 2004 should be reinstated by the U.S. Congress, CNN's John Zarella
faked a demonstration to show that the banned guns are more powerful than
the non-banned guns. The demonstration was rigged by having a deputy fire
bullets into concrete blocks to show the difference between the guns.
However, CNN later admitted the deputy fired into the ground when he was
supposed to be firing the non-banned gun at concrete blocks.

[Baba Louie]

jsalcedo,

Nowhere in the BOR's does it say anything about speaking, writing or publishing the truth or reality vs fiction, does it?

I guess the old caveat emptor applies here as well, neh?

Adios

[TallPine]

Well, don't you think that reporters should be licensed and registered by the government to protect against false reporting?

After all, the First Amendment is subject to "reasonable restrictions" and the media comes under the interstate commerce clause, etc blah blah blah

:neener:

[MarkDido]

... I think what we need is a ban against "assault journalists" like Geraldo Rivera, Peter Arnett, Tom Brokaw, et. al

[XLMiguel]

Seems like these people aren't really "journalists", i.e. one who actually just reports the news factually, checks facts, verifies sources, etc. They're all trying to either be the news or make the news, so I guess we need a better term, something along the lines of "agent provacateur", but simpler and more cynical. "Media 'ho" comes to mind, or perhaps "mediot". Suggestions?

[jsalcedo]

Its kind of a play on terms.

The media jumps all over every bad gun use and wallows in the blood of the victims as an excuse to call the Second Amendment an embarassment.

I don't think the First Amendment is an embarassment at all but it seems the left wing media doesn't hold it in any more esteem than the others. They use it like a shield to ward off critics then treat it like a 2 dollar w**re when it suits their agenda.

[Battler]

Ehh. . . there's the mistaken belief that socialists and US media like the first amendment.

They'd be the first calling for "hate speech" and "campaign finance reform" laws.

When they say first amendment they mean PC talk and porn. NOT political speech.

By definition, what mainstream media outlets say will ALWAYS be "good". It's small voices of opposition the 1st is needed for, even liars and idiots.

[Baba Louie]

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Hmmmm, I can see why liberal socialists wouldn't like that if it were proposed today and it would appear that such bills as campaign finance reform does kinda bend it a little... or a lot. But if we were to apply the twists that everyone and their mothers have put on the second article, its really about religion (militia) first and foremost... then, semicolon, speech and press, and finally, semicolon, peaceable assembly (keep those guns at home boys) and finally petition Uncle Sam for the setting right of grievances.

Hey, now that I re-read the darned thing ..."prohibiting the free exercise thereof"...???

And we can't have prayer in public schools (not that many kids would want to do so anyway)... but it says Congress shall make no laws... prohibiting. Oh, wait a minute. CONGRESS shall make no laws, it doesn't say a thing about the Supreme Court rulings becoming the law of the land in those 45 words. So I guess it is OK as is huh?

Never mind.

It is kind of embarrassing (Embarrass; to beset with difficulties; impede; from Italian imbarazzare) come to think of it.

Adios

http://earlyamerica.com/earlyamerica/freedom/bill/text.html

Read the link for the new Patriot Act financial disclosure thing as of 10/01/03

[Battler]

The current implementation of the first amendment clearly allows the govt to ban using public roads to get to churches. . . .

For government to use its funding to facilitate worship (through building a road to a church) being a first amendment violation.

[JimP]

If the pen is indeed truly more powerful than the sword, then there should be no problem banning "semi-automatic assault-presses". This will drive the libs nuts......:uhoh:

[Standing Wolf]

Only certain models of assault newspapers should be allowed, and no one should be able to buy them before passing a background inspection and waiting out a cooling off period.

[MarkDido]

I recently wrote a letter to my local liberal newspaper, the Orlando Sentinel (or as we like to refer to it, the "Slantinel")

Someone wrote in decrying the laws writen by "renegade legislators"

Like Baba Louie, I told him that the problem wasn't legislators, it was renegade judges who legislate from the bench.

Naturally, my rebuttal didn't appear in the paper.....