Judith Miller is the New York Times reporter who is going to jail rather than reveal her source for her story about "Plame is a secret agent for the CIA." People are defending her for standing up for a free press. I like the idea of a free press, though several problems have cropped up recently. One, anonymous sources have been feeding incorrect information to journalists, screwing up their careers, like the Newsweek Gitmo thing, and the CBS docs, among others. Maybe it's time to realize that if someone isn't willing to have their name attached to their information, they might not be on the up and up. Two, if the person that told Miller that Plame is an agent broke the law, then didn't Miller break it too, by revealing such information in print? Protecting a source is one thing, but if you break the law, that's a whole different animal, journalist or not. Of course many people deny that it was a secret that Plame was a CIA agent. Her husband had no problem splashing it all over his book in the middle of his yellowcake tour before it was discovered that he was dead wrong about the yellowcake. Of course none of the talk shows he was on mentioned that, they just stopped talking about rather than admit to being wrong. Wouldn't want to discourage people from hating Bush, would they?