In this article from WND, Dirty Dick says:
Durbin said he supported a “media shield law,” but wasn’t sure if such a measure would protect bloggers or “someone who is tweeting.”
“You’ve raised an important point and I heard Sen. Graham call for special counsel,” Durbin said. “I’m not ready to do this at this moment. I would like to know if Holder has any conflict in here beyond what we heard when it comes to the Fox case.”
“But here is the bottom line – the media shield law, which I am prepared to support, and I know Sen. Graham supports, still leaves an unanswered question, which I have raised many times: What is a journalist today in 2013? We know it’s someone that works for Fox or AP, but does it include a blogger? Does it include someone who is tweeting? Are these people journalists and entitled to constitutional protection? We need to ask 21st century questions about a provision that was written over 200 years ago.”
“You see what they want to do, folks?” noted Limbaugh on his national radio program Tuesday. “That’s right, they want to set up licensing of journalists. That’s where the Democrats are headed on this. ‘You tweeters, you bloggers, you’re not journalists. We are going to determine who is a journalist and who isn’t. We are going to license journalists. I mean that Constitution’s 200-plus years old. It’s no longer relevant,’ is what he means.”Who's going to determine who is eligible to be a journalist? The IRS?
Also, note he didn't miss this chance to reiterate the liberal mantra that the Constitution is no longer relevant.