Citizen journalists are under attack by Chuck Schumer, Lindsey Graham, and other members of the Senate Judiciary Committee. The dynamic duo of progressivism has attached an amendment to Senate Bill 987, which would give the Department of Justice power to determine who qualifies for protection as a journalist under the First Amendment.

In every one of these situations: the push to attack Syria, the NSA spying on citizens, funding and implementation of Obamacare; proponents want to allow the government to do something it should not do, but claim we will be able to stop it if it goes any further. That thinking is backwards. The way to stop the NSA from gathering citizens' data, to keep the attack on Syria from escalating, and to stop Obamacare, is not to allow them to get started (funded) in the first place.  

Nothing is safe from the scrutiny of the surveillance state, not even your Facebook likes. Especially if you're under investigation by any national government.

With Congress attempting to define journalism again, it seems like a good time to revisit the whole "free press" thing. Understanding why the founders thought a free press was essential ultimately helps us determine whether federal overreach into protected liberties is appropriate.In 1799, James Madison explained:

Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. -C.S. Lewis News breaks this morning that the NSA has the ability to monitor 75% of the nation's internet traffic at once. They can watch what 75% of Americans are doing at any one time online. Think on that for a moment.

Earlier this summer, Senator Durbin made news when he introduced the Free Flow of Information Act or 'Shield Law'.  The bill's intention is to protect journalists from disclosing their confidential sources. A lesser known fact is that Senator Graham was a co-sponsor of this bill. Although it's a sad indicator that legislation like this is even being discusssed, the original bill appeared on the surface to be a legitimate attempt to provide protection for a journalist's sources.

Yesterday, U.S. District Judge Shira Scheindlin ruled the New York Police Department's "stop and frisk" procedure unconstitutional, indicating it amounted to "racial profiling." Sounds like a solid win for the Fourth Amendment, right? Maybe not.As Mayor Bloomberg explained:As recently as 1990, New York City averaged more than six murders a day. Today, we’ve driven that down to less than one murder a day. If murder rates over the last 11 years had been the same as the previous 11 years, more than 7,300 people who today are alive would be dead.