> Isaac wrote: > This might be seen as a major boon to > people in power who are doing bad things since they'll have to worry a > lot less about the potential of whistle-blowers. >
How? In this case it's not a whistle blower that's being protected, it's an agent of the President. Put another way, the source was not revealing wrong doing by the President, the source WAS the wrong doer. Now if another source came along and said, "It was Cheney that leaked the Plame info", that would be a source worth protecting. In this case the person being protected is an agent of gov't either with or without Mr. Bush's knowledge, but acting on his behalf. Why should the constitution protect the federal gov't? The constitution is meant to protect the citizens which is why it protects freedom of the press. It encourages the press to challenge and investigate the gov't. In this case, however, the press was acting on behalf of the gov't. The constitution shouldn't protect that. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Discover CFTicket - The leading ColdFusion Help Desk and Trouble Ticket application http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=48 Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:162478 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
