I wrote yesterday about a couple of Times staffers who cheered in the news meeting when it was announced that Karl Rove was resigning. Times editor Dave Boardman was unhappy with the outburst and wrote a note to the staff reminding them to keep their political views to themselves.

At The Stranger, editor Dan Savage says Boardman has it all wrong.

Well, gee. Maybe the reporters cheered because they, of all people, are in the best position to recognize Rove's departure as a positive development for the nation — and for the ideal that all journalists everywhere honor the most: the truth.

In fact, Savage writes:

Any reporter that didn't cheer Rove's departure shouldn't be a reporter.

Savage has it wrong on several fronts. First, does he really think that Rove leaving in the final throes of the Bush administration is really some "positive development for the nation"? He's not that naive.

But more importantly, reporters should not be cheering. I have zero doubt about that. When you become cheerleaders for the Democrats, as an example, you will soon find yourself only talking to people who agree with you. That's something The Stranger knows well.

Last month I talked to the Republicans in the congressional delegation about where they stood on the Iraq war. That prompted this from Stranger news editor Josh Feit:

p.s. Good on Postman. I know you're all gonna holler about how the GOP frames the debate, but seriously, I don't think reporters talk to Republicans enough. I try to as often as I can, which is difficult at a partisan paper like The Stranger.

Also: There is some interest in who the guest was in the news meeting where the cheering took place. A Republican operative maybe, sent to give us our marching orders and to make sure no one smiled at the news of Rove's departure? No, it was a job candidate.