What we need is a shield from your fear-based initiatives and criminal acts.

Kudos to Safire for his stance on this. The Bush admin is playing the Terror Card in their opposition when they cite invisible threats that have never happened and likely never will.

The bill defines journalism as “gathering, preparing, collecting, photographing, recording, writing, editing, reporting or publishing of news or information that concerns local, national or international events or other matters of public interest for dissemination to the public.”

The bill’s authors are “not attempting to extend this privilege to everyone in our society,” Boucher told CNET News.com. The bill’s language, however, does not actually require that a covered person do journalism as an occupation or even on a regular basis. When asked how precise distinctions would be made, Boucher said it will ultimately be up to the courts to interpret and refine the bill’s definition.

“I think what we have written in that definition is a good direction to the courts to make those kinds of practical determinations based on the facts in individual cases,” the Virginia congressman said.

The proposal reflects an evolving legal debate over the parameters of the category of “journalist.” Some courts have already ventured into that territory. A California appeals court ruled last May that an Apple enthusiast blogger accused of product leaks did not have to reveal his sources under a state shield law that covered those connected with newspapers, magazines and other more traditional media.

Most states have some form of reporter’s shield law on their books, but there is still no equivalent federal law. Supporters say such laws are necessary to protect would-be whistle-blowers and others who wish to share secrets of vital importance to the general public.

And the bill has caveats already built in:

Although the bill would generally require that federal authorities exhaust all “reasonable” alternative sources before compelling a journalist to provide information, the privilege is far from absolute. The bill lays out a number of situations in which people covered by the shield would be forced to give up their sources, including situations in which it’s clear that crimes have been committed, national security is at stake, or trade secrets are compromised in violation of existing laws.

To the Bush administration: stop playing stupid games. There’s real serious dangers in the world, like Bin Laden and Zawahiri. We’ve waited for 6 years for you to handle that and you’ve failed miserably. Instead you promote nonsense about the threats of Democrats, bloggers and others who’ve damaged no one at all.

Quit promoting your transparent bullshit and do your fucking job. So far, the biggest threat I’ve seen to our national security has been your incompetence and dishonesty and the greatest organized crime threat emanates from your staff and your corporate cronies profiting from your illegal little war.