I heard from several readers over the weekend who thought Sunday's A-1 centerpiece story about Bill Clinton's effect on the Democratic presidential campaign was misplaced effort.

"Shouldn't Senator Obama's win in the SC primary have been the lead story?" wrote one. "That's the news, not an analysis of the former president's role in the overall campaign."

"What does Obama have to do to get out from under the shadow of both of the Clintons?" asked another.

Coverage of Clinton vs. Obama has been the biggest generator of reader comments so far this election.

UPDATE: The Star's editor Mark Zieman agrees with the critics on this one. He copied me on e-mail to one reader who wrote us both about it Sunday. His reply, in part:

"Actually, I agree with you. We certainly have been covering the historic Obama campaign vigorously, as well as the other election news. And there was nothing wrong with the Clinton story, which is a topic that many in the Democratic party are discussing. But I believe the play on Sunday should have featured Obama's victory most prominently, and I have passed that along to my editors in charge of creating the front page."