What he said.

Hot Air has the footage of Bush's response to the latest example of the New York Times national security policy, which is essentially, "we don't believe in it".

I say it's about time although he's a lot calmer than I would be in a similar circumstance.

Freedom of the press is a vital right that is necessary in any truly representative government system. Without it, the government could forcefeed people whatever they wanted and thereby manipulate elections. But as Uncle Ben said, "With great power comes great responsibility." The New York Times seems to have forgotten that.

Defenders of papers like the Times and others who repeatedly take it upon themselves to disclose covert programs used to ferret out terrorists and their enablers just simply can't come up with any valid reasons to expose such programs. Especially since every certified case thus far, has been shown to be perfectly legal under the US Constitution. In the latest case, even the Times does not question the legality of the bank record searches while at the same time they do acknowledge their usefulness in tracking down terrorists.

So the question remains, what public good does it serve to expose this type of program? The answer; none, unless you view the terrorists as part of the public you serve. And while I know circulation numbers are falling through the floor, I can't believe that even the Times would be desperate enough to try and steak out that market.