The new york times top right front page headline today reads "Bush Opens lead Despiote Unease Voiced in Survey." However vague we might take the word "opens" to be, all should note the fine print, a story which is buried in page A10: "Varying Polls Reflect Volaltility, Experts Say." Of course, the New York Times should be prominently reporting the results of its OWN poll, the original polling deserves some prominence. But is this responsible journalism? To run an article that certainly will influence the tone for the race for the NYT's readers, claiming a strong lead that it then questions as "volatile" in a page-A10 article, explaining how polls differing in just a few days in their timespan have recorded results ranging from a strong Bush lead to absolutely no Bush lead? NYT readers should not have to dig that hard for the full pictur