FOD Saying of the Day
Bad officials are the ones elected by good citizens who did not vote. – George Nathan
FOD Trivia Question of the Day
What group of islands, consisting of Pinta, Pinzon, Santa Cruz and Isabella were made famous by Charles Darwin’s expedition on the Beagle?
Previous FOD Trivia Answer
Which is the only mammal that can’t jump? Answer – Elephants
Fireball Editorial of the Day
Respect for the free press in under ever increasing parochialism from our President, it would be good to review another time when the freedom of the press was challenged by another president, Richard Nixon. In reviewing the request from then Assistant U.S. Attorney General William Rehnquist for an injunction against The Washington Post to prevent them from publishing the Pentagon Papers U.S. District Court Judge Murray Gurfein declined to issue such an injunction, writing that “[t]he security of the Nation is not at the ramparts alone. Security also lies in the value of our free institutions. A cantankerous press, an obstinate press, a ubiquitous press must be suffered by those in authority to preserve the even greater values of freedom of expression and the right of the people to know.” The case New York Times Co. v. United States (403 U.S. 713) quickly rose rapidly through the U.S. legal system to the Supreme Court. Justice Hugo Black wrote a majority opinion that elaborated on his view of the absolute superiority of the First Amendment: “…The press was to serve the governed, not the governors. The Government’s power to censor the press was abolished so that the press would remain forever free to censure the Government. The press was protected so that it could bare the secrets of government and inform the people. Only a free and unrestrained press can effectively expose deception in government. And paramount among the responsibilities of a free press is the duty to prevent any part of the government from deceiving the people and sending them off to distant lands to die of foreign fevers and foreign shot and shell. … [W]e are asked to hold that…the Executive Branch, the Congress, and the Judiciary can make laws…abridging freedom of the press in the name of ‘national security.’ … To find that the President has ‘inherent power’ to halt the publication of news…would wipe out the First Amendment and destroy the fundamental liberty and security of the very people the Government hopes to make ‘secure.’ … The word ‘security’ is a broad, vague generality whose contours should not be invoked to abrogate the fundamental law embodied in the First Amendment. The guarding of military and diplomatic secrets at the expense of informed representative government provides no real security… . The Framers of the First Amendment, fully aware of both the need to defend a new nation and the abuses of the English and Colonial governments, sought to give this new society strength and security by providing that freedom of speech, press, religion, and assembly should not be abridged.” Some good thoughts don’t you think? Contributions and comments sought and appreciated.