Sunday New York Times, A1, feature story on our 44th president: "Back on the Stump, a Chastened Obama Takes a Sharper Tone." One wonders if the headline writer bothered to read the article. To start, "Back on the Stump" is puzzling: when was Mr. Obama not on the stump? Talk about the endless campaign. And "chastened"? I read the piece in toto: not a scrap, a scintilla, an iota of evidence that the Organizer-in-Chief feels chastened. He did exhibit more self-pity, if that is possible, and a sharper tone - against the two women he was campaigning for. If the Times' ombudsman had a truth-in-headlines rule, this one would fail. The article gives precious little illumination on Mr. Obama's interior state. We do learn that after being cheered by his groupies at the University of Washington he chafed at not being the center of attention for a few minutes:He stood idly for 20 minutes. The rally, technically speaking, was not about him - it was for Senator Patty...(Read Full Post)