Freedom of the Press is under Attack

Amendment I – Freedom of religion, speech, press, assembly, and petition

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.

Press Reporters Imprisoned

The statement “Congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom … of the press” has been violated. Judges have hauled professional reporters into court attempting to force them to reveal their sources. When they refuse to comply in court, these judges have sent them to prison. No violation of the freedom of the press? Right!

The Press Goes Too Far

These days, the press has gone too far in exercising this freedom by:

• Creating news as they see it
• Becoming too opinionated, too political, and too arrogant
• Becoming the news itself
• Unduly influencing public opinion, sentiment, and reaction
• Falsifying or inaccurately reporting the news

The mainstream press (which is also called the lame-stream press or the fringe press) has become too biased, extremely liberal, and trashy. Hence, I do not read major newspapers anymore. I obtain my real news from Fox News, emails passed around by friends, conservative talk radio, and conservative online publications. What we need is freedom from the lame-stream press, not so much freedom of the lame-stream press. The lame-stream media is the lapdog of the Obama administration.

Govern Thyself

The press really needs to consider governing themselves, or they will write their own epitaph. If they keep up with what they are doing, they will create the fodder to give the federal government reasons to create laws to curtail them.

Freedom of [the] Press is limited to those who own one.– H. L. Menken, American journalist & satirist

Taking Control of the Internet

A United States Senate proposal could put heavy restrictions on Internet freedoms. The bill gives Obama widespread powers and even to shut down the Internet in the event of a cyber-attack. That would have sweeping implications on American’s civil liberties, thereby, scrapping freedom of speech.

John Edwards (2009) of Newsmax.com wrote that, until now, the Internet has been largely self-regulated, and the Federal Communications Committee (FCC) has taken a hands-off approach. However, that could soon change dramatically if the Obama administration has its way. Critics contend that the proposals are nothing more than a backdoor way for the FCC to tighten federal control over the Internet by beginning with the regulation of Internet service providers (ISPs). During the presidential campaign, Obama said he would embrace Net Neutrality – a cause championed by Google and other Silicon Valley companies that do not want large ISPs denying or controlling their access to Internet users. Republicans have largely opposed Net Neutrality, suggesting that self-regulation has worked well.

Edwards (2009) further wrote that Conservatives see Net Neutrality as a power grab that will benefit big Internet players such as Amazon and Google while stifling smaller competitors. The libertarian CATO Institute, in a 2004 policy analysis, concluded, “The regulatory regime envisioned by Net Neutrality mandates would also open the door to a great deal of potential ‘gaming’ of the regulatory system and allow firms to use the regulatory system to hobble competitors. Worse yet, it would encourage more FCC regulation of the Internet and broadband markets in general.” Republicans have warned of efforts to control the Internet.

Newsmax.com(2009) reported that U.S. Sen. John McCain has introduced legislation that would block the FCC from creating new net neutrality rules, on the same day that the FCC took the first step toward doing so. McCain on October 22, 2009, introduced the Internet Freedom Act, which would keep the FCC from enacting rules prohibiting broadband providers from selectively blocking or slowing Internet content and applications. Net neutrality rules would create “onerous federal regulation,” McCain said. The FCC voted on October 22, 2009, to begin a rulemaking process to formalize net neutrality rules. The rules, as proposed, would allow Internet users to run the legal applications and access the legal websites of their choice. Providers could use “reasonable” network management to reduce congestion and maintain quality of service, but the rules would require them to be transparent with consumers about their efforts.

Newsmax.com(2009) further reported that the new rules would formalize a set of net neutrality principles in place at the FCC since 2005. McCain, an Arizona Republican, called the proposed rules a “government takeover” of the Internet that will stifle innovation and depress an “already anemic” job market in the United States. McCain was the Republican challenger to President Barack Obama in the 2008 election, and Obama has said net neutrality rules are among his top tech priorities. McCain protested the FCC’s proposal that wireless broadband providers be included in the rules. The wireless industry has “exploded over the past 20 years due to limited government regulation,” McCain said.

Obama Declares War on Fox News

With every passing day, the Obama administration’s hidden agenda becomes more obvious. Obama has made another strategic error by violating the 1^st Amendment and going out to destroy Fox News – just because they oppose his policies. If you cannot beat your opponents in honest debate of ideas, destroy their right to free speech and free press. That will be the Obama legacy. No administration in the history of the United States ever before went after any media television station or press. The White House definitely will lose this war, for they are badly losing. This administration is not reputed to be very smart. They act very “stupidly.”

John Rossomando (2009) of Fox News wrote for Newsmax.com that Fox News seems to enjoy being on the White House’s enemies list. A festering enmity between the Obama administration and the cable network boiled over Sunday, October 11, 2009, when the liberal New York Times quoted White House communications director Anita Dunn as saying of Fox: “We’re going to treat them the way we would treat an opponent.” Fox Senior Vice President for News Michael Clemente fired back at what he called the White House’s “attack mentality.” “Perhaps the energy would be better spent on the critical issues we are worried about,” Clemente said in a statement the network issued.

Rossomando (2009) stated that Anita Dunn resigned at the end of November 2009 and Dan Pheiffer had replaced her. Good riddance to that Mao Zedong (also Tse-tung) lover. Mao is her favorite philosopher and one of two people she turns to most. Mao is widely believed to have caused the deaths of between 50 to 70 million people. He is Dunn’s hero, and she quotes him frequently.

Rossomando (2009) wrote further that, if Fox’s ratings are any clue, the administration’s attacks seem to be having the opposite of their desired effects. As of the first week in October 2009, the network has averaged 1.2 million viewers throughout the year, up from around 1 million viewers a year ago. This surpasses the network’s previous viewership record of 1.1 million viewers, which was set in 2003, the year the war began in Iraq. In June, President Obama attacked Fox without mentioning it by name, saying it was devoted entirely to attacking his administration and that its coverage of his actions were all-negative. “Every time they [attack], our ratings go up,” Bill Shine, Fox’s senior vice president for programming, told the liberal New York Times. 

Michelle Malkin (2009) is the author of Culture of Corruption: Obama and his Team of Tax Cheats, Crooks & Cronies. Malkin (2009) reported that White House interim communications director Anita Dunn assumed the role of lead Fox News Channel-basher on the second weekend in October 2009. The attack was a dud. The left-leaning Nation magazine ridiculed President Obama’s press shop for turning him into the “whiner-in-chief.” AOL media columnist Jeff Bercovici called the war on Fox a “loser’s strategy” that “signals weakness.” Moreover, that is the friendly fire. Dunn found refuge in rival CNN’s green zone, where she blasted Fox News as a “research arm of the Republican Party.” Unhappy with headline-generating Fox News hosts who have wrested control of the news cycle from Team Obama, Dunn complained about “opinion journalism masquerading as news.”

Malkin (2009) asked, “Where are the seasoned press gurus to help Nobel Peace Prize-winner Barack Obama appear more presidential and less petty and thuggish? The corruptocratic affiliations of Obama’s communications team are illuminating. His press shop can’t rise above the fray because they’ve been entrenched in the Beltway fray for years. They can’t help themselves.” While conservatives revel in the left’s hysteria over Fox News Channel’s dominance, more of Obama’s friends hope he’ll wipe his nose and man up. Fat chance! As long as career flakes that demonize dissent to distract from the Beltway stench surround him, the White House will remain an all-whine zone.

Ronald Kessler (2009), Chief Washington correspondent of Newsmax.com, wrote that, if there is anything more bizarre than Obama receiving the Nobel Peace Prize, it was his administration’s decision to wage war on Fox News. The Obama administration has warned cable networks not to follow up on Fox News stories, which have included an exposé of ACORN and the radical backgrounds of some of Obama’s appointees. They even attempted to exclude Fox from network pool coverage. In so doing, Obama and his aides revealed the most telling weaknesses of his administration.

Kessler (2009) further reported that the Obama administration weaknesses include the following:

• Obama is a whiner.
• Obama is fixated on spin rather than substance.
• Obama is ineffective.
• Obama has no appreciation for the profit motive and its importance in America’s success.
• Obama is weak, thin-skinned, and fragile.
• Obama is the most partisan president in recent memory.
• Obama and his aides blatantly disregard the truth.

Obama’s outlandish attempt to muzzle Fox News and discourage others from picking up its stories vividly reveals Obama’s failings – and why he will prove to be a one-term president. As an observer, the White House appears to be badly losing the war that they unilaterally started on a weak first-strike attempt. Sad.

Let his days be few; and let another take his office.–Psalm 109:8, The Holy Bible

###

“If ever [a] time should come when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in Government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin.” ~ Samuel Adams

References

Edwards, J. O. (2009, September 20). Obama plans Internet grab: FCC to embrace ‘net neutrality.’ Newsmax.com. Retrieved from www.newsmax.com/headlines/obama_intenet_fcc/2009/09/20/262385.html?s+al&promo_code=8961-1. 

Anonymous. (2009, October 23). McCain moves to block FCC’s net neutrality. Newsmax.com. Retrieved from newsmax.com/insidecover/mccain_net_neutrality/2009/10/23/276246.html.

Rossomando, J. (2009, October 12, 2009). Obama aide: Fox News our ‘opponent.’ Newsmax.com. Retrieved from www.newsmax.com/insidecover/us_tv_obama_fox/2009/10/12/271219.html?s=al&promo_code=8BAE-1.

Malkin, M. (2009, October 14). Who’s behind the White House war on Fox News? GOPUSA. Retrieved from www.gopusa.com/commentary/mmalkin/2009/mm_1014p.shtml. 

Kessler, R. (2009, October 28). War on Fox News reveals Obama’s failings. Newsmax.com. Retrieved from www.newsmax.com/kessler/obama_fax_news/2009/10/28/278148.html.