Technology has changed, and changed us and our times with it. Do journalists have new and more powerful investigative methods? Can journalists tap anonymous sources and both remain hidden better than ever before? Yes on all counts.

Yet we remain committed to the First Amendment while under murderous attack from individuals and small groups, some of whom are our own citizens. Our wars are no longer against governments on whom we spy, but against lone individuals domestic and foreign. The First Amendment was never intended to protect those bent on armed insurrection, even while the Second Amendment assures a well-regulated militia for that purpose.

In such a world, how are we to protect ourselves? Can we keep government open to inspection to assure that we watch its behavior and our tax dollars? Yes, we must.

But can we also withhold information when that knowledge might be used to physically attack and maim us? Yes, we can. And do.

Where AP-gate is concerned, I don’t know if the President or his administration is guilty of anything. But I do know that the administration is under multiple attacks, perhaps unprecedented in number, from political opponents. This begs us to at least wonder about the motives behind these and other charges.

The current volume of political confrontations lends credence to the suspicion that they’re a deliberate shoal of red herrings released to divert us from the economy, the debt, the unemployment rate, the tax code, and the environment. Alternatively, perhaps the re-elected administration is just incompetent and corrupt, but that’s a stretch even Republican’s.

In any event, it seems information was shared that threatened national security and that news people were complicit. Initially, Republicans attacked Obama for grandstanding for political gain. Now, with the election over, their focus has shifted from why the leaks occurred to the methods used to discover their source.

Motives behind nascent Republican passions for the First Amendment indeed deserve investigation, although it’s good to know they support it. One wonders if their interests are the public’s–or their own.