The left seems desperate to have someone, anyone, challenge Hillary Clinton in the Democratic primary. The Boston Globe published no fewer than four op-eds in the same Sunday edition clamoring for Sen. Elizabeth Warren to challenge Hillary for the 2016 nomination.

The paper’s editorial board floated a piece, entitled “Democrats need Elizabeth Warren’s voice in 2016 presidential race,” that began by straight out saying that allowing Hillary to run for the Democratic nomination unopposed would be a mistake.

The paper says that there are “serious divides” in the Democratic Party that should be settled by the voters and a lone Hillary run does a disservice to party members.

A major difference, the paper notes, is the issue of income inequality, one of Warren’s favorite issues. The Globe insists that, “the big-picture debate on financial regulation and income inequality is what s most at peril if the Democratic primaries come and go without top-notch opponents for Clinton.”

Clinton, the editorial board claims, will be too cautions on these issues.

Other issues are raised in the op ed, but what is missing is any discussion of Clinton’s many scandals. Not a single word is wasted on Hillary’s likely illegal use of private email systems when she was Secretary os State. Nothing was said about her taking foreign donations for her foundation. No word about Benghazi. Nothing about her long history of troubles that have weakened her standing with voters.

But this piece from the paper’s editorial board was followed by three other opinion editorials by Globe columnists.

In one of those op-eds, Joshua Green asserted that Warren would be a credible threat to Clinton in the primaries.

Green said that if Warren doesn’t run for president it will be “a big loss for Democrats.”

“Warren,” Green said, “is the Democrat best positioned to draw out Clinton” on the issues important to the country.

But at least Green noted a major Hillary weakness.

“As the recent controversy over Clinton s private e-mail account demonstrates,” Green wrote, “her instinct is to do everything in her power to avoid exposing herself to scrutiny. That instinct will undoubtedly carry over to the primaries–unless someone like Warren forces her hand.”

A second-op ed by Anna Galland was no less a plaintive plea for Warren to run against Hillary.

After praising the far left-wing Senator from Massachusetts, Galland reported that some voices are saying that Warren should not run for president in order to continue to push her left-wing ideals in the Senate. To Galland, that is a mistaken idea.

“I’d argue they are wrong. Warren should run,” Galland wrote. “Our country will be better off if she does. She would be a strong candidate–one who injects valuable ideas into the conversation and ensures the kind of debate our country needs. And she could win.”

In fact, says Galland, “this moment was made for Elizabeth Warren.” And after a series of compliments, Galland ends her piece pleading, “Senator Warren, we hope you re reading this. Our country needs you. Please run.”

Finally, in yet another editorial pushing Warren’s candidacy, Robert Kuttnter joins his colleagues in the attempt to get Warren to run.

Kuttner starts off his piece bashing Clinton. “Rather than generating the excitement of an epic breakthrough–the first woman president!–Clinton frequently comes across as yesterday s news rather than tomorrow’s,” he complains.

The columnist also slams Hillary for taking foreign donations for her Clinton Foundation when she was Secretary of State.

Kuttner also charges that Hillary is too conservative for the Democrat Party, saying, “Clinton is to the right of the Democratic Party base.”

But Warren, Kuttner says, is the right candidate at the right time.

“If Warren did join the race,” Kuttner said, “she would take the party rank-and-file by storm. There is a hunger for a candidate who can articulate all the frustrations felt by middle- and working-class people, and especially by the young. The Republican Tea Party types get to play that role only because of the vacuum on the Democratic side.”

It appears that The Boston Globe is all in for Warren and that they just aren’t “ready for Hillary.”

Follow Warner Todd Huston on Twitter: @warnerthuston. Email the author at igcolonel@hotmail.com.