This is where I do not agree with many conservatives, for which I am very unapologetic

When Reuters and the AP reported opposition from the Bush administration to additional protection of reporters, I was concerned. There is a reason the Founding Fathers of our country created the First Amendment.

So when I see this post by Jayson on PoliPundit, my blood boils just a little. So I'm going to break down his points and respond. I'll try to address this with the proper attention it deserves, but some of it just ticks me off.

The fact we’re even debating the concept of federal legislation to protect reporters truly demonstrates the media did a number on this country during their 60 years in power.

Go back and look at your history a little closer. Some of the Framers of the Constituion and the Declaration of Independence were invovled with newspapers and paphlet publishing, which were the only media in their time. All were familiar with the power media had in their day and how it could be used to further the political position of whoever controlled the press. So when it came to the Bill of Rights, the first guaranteed rights were:
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.
-Amendment I, U.S. Constitution [emphasis added]

The gentlemen who wrote and approved this knew that a free press was essential in order to keep a government accountable. This influence of the media and its affect on our government predate the Declaration of Independence, and is not isolated to even this century.

I mean, seriously, since when should graduating from journalism school put someone on the same legal plane as spouses or clergy?

It doesn't, it means you are now a part of the governing process of this great country. It is by no coincidence that reporters in the time of Theodore Roosevelt considered the title "mukrakers" a compliment. The press is supposed to go where the government might what it to go. The press is an ex officio branch of the goverment itself, the so called "Fourth Estate". It is not just a right of the press to look for the truth, it is a moral obligation! Though today's MSM does a piss poor job of this most the vast majority of the time, it is still a right and duty that we cannot take away without severly damaging one of the major freedoms upon which this country was founded.

“Freedom of the press” does not mean “above the law.”

I agree it most certainly does not. But just as there are times when the press oversteps its limits, there are times when the government does the same. That's where the papershield laws are supposed to come in. Just as the government must protect witnesses who put their lives or careers on the line to help a government investigation, the press must protect sources who do the same. And in a system where innocence is presummed until guilt is proven, reporters must protect their sources. The possibility of jail time for a reporter for protected sources has been and apparently will be a necessary risk for their profession.

You cannot simply single out the media and say they should not be protected. If the press loses its protection that allows it to do its job, it will not be long before we lose our right to openly criticize the government.

-the Progressive Conservative