The NY Times front page links to Charles Blow's column exhorting Obama to be more visibly emotional and empathetic. OK, the notion is ghastly enough, but the Times link justifies the subscription price:
Blow: Obama, Give Them Something They Can Feel
Hmm, does the Times want a President who feels our pain or... oh, I am moving on.
BUT SERIOUSLY: Blow, who is the Times other race-grievance columnist, exhorts Obama to be more visibly angry. But I bet if I reprised the campaign coverage I could find many articles noting that Obama had a special burden to stay cool and avoid the unfortunate Angry Black Man stereotype that lurks in our collective conscious.
So which is it - should Obama be cool, or angry? Beats me (although I Boldly Bet that "calm and effective" would trump "angry and impotent"). But I am disappointed that Blow missed this obvious opportunity to blame Obama's seeming detachment on the prejudices of white America. What kind of race grievance columnists is the Times running out there these days, anyway? Oh, well - Frank Rich can pick up this slack tomorrow.