After 2 months of tedious and completely ineffective articles attacking the temperament of Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito, today the Globe turns its front page focus to what it twice calls the President's "domestic spying program". The Globe editors apparently feel no higher calling than to act as enablers for the DNC. Like many Democratic Party activists, they are willing to suspend thought and simply repeat DNC talking points like "domestic spying program" without giving any ink to what the actual content of this program is.

Nowhere in today's story does the Globe explain exactly what types of communication were allowed to be intercepted by the government as part of this "domestic spying program". Why not? Because (I believe) the actual actions taken enjoy widespread public support, especially when the details are explained rather than just labeled with the bogeyman title of a "domestic spying program".

Two months of moaning about Alitio was a waste of breath and ink that ended up doing the Democrats harm by making them look like fools or tools of special interests. This dog will not hunt either. By escalating the issue to this degree, the Democrats will again give evidence that they remain out of touch with the mainstream voters they lost in the last election.

A former Reagan administration DOJ official suggests a tactic:

Fein, a conservative who backs the president's judicial nominations, said Bush should ask Congress to pass a law authorizing the spying program.

Exactly! The congressional leadership put Rep. Murtha's exact proposal for withdrawal from Iraq up to a quick vote (it received 1 vote). They should do exactly the same in this case. Let the cockroaches stand and vote on the issue rather than posture and weave on the Sunday vanity-talk TV shows. Any Dem who wants to be President will surely vote for it. I doubt that we will see Hillary bashing Bush for "domestic spying".

Karl Rove should listen to this guy.

This appallingly biased Globe story prompted me to write to the Globe Ombudsman (below). I'll post any response I get or see printed.

Sir,

Nowhere in today's story does the Globe explain what types of communication were allowed to be intercepted by the government as part of this alleged "domestic spying program". Why not?

How can you so confidently label the program as "domestic spying" in both your headline and lede, yet explain nothing to your readers about the criteria used by the government to select communication for interception?

People who were uncertain of your commitment to objective reporting might find this symptomatic of what is popularly called "liberal bias". Please explain.

Harry Forbes

UPDATE: Harry Reid seems to have fallen into this impending Rovian trap as well. Reuters quotes him as saying "If the president wanted to expand the authority he already has to wiretap anyone who might be communicating with terrorists then he should have come to the Congress to get that authority," [Reid said in a statement].

Be careful what you wish for, Senator.

From: Squaring the Boston Globe