I've often thought during this campaign between Clinton and Obama that they're doing the Repubs more good than they are themselves. The comments in this report by E.J. Dionne seem to be right on target:
The Democrats’ Fairness Doctrine
There they go again. Democrats have contrived a nominating contest that even Rube Goldberg would have considered too convoluted, too dysfunctional and too improbable to name as his own.
The happiest people in the country right now are Hillary Clinton and Rush Limbaugh—Clinton, because she has survived, and Limbaugh, because he’s eager for the contest to go on so Barack Obama can be “bloodied up.” Talk about a vast and unexpected conspiracy.
Oh, yes, and John McCain is chuckling, too. His obligatory meeting with President Bush on Wednesday produced videotape far more likely to be used by Democrats than by Republicans, given Bush’s standing as this era’s Herbert Hoover.
But the McCain news was eclipsed by stories about Democratic hand-wringing, learned explanations of the Democrats’ exquisitely intricate “nominating process,” and speculation about what nasty things Obama would need to say about Clinton to counteract the nasty things she’s saying about him.
The quotation of the week came from Clinton adviser Harold Ickes. “Too much is yet unknown about Sen. Obama,” he said during a Clinton campaign conference call on Wednesday. Now that raises fascinating philosophical issues we have not pondered since the philosopher Donald Rumsfeld instructed us that while there are “known knowns,” there are also “unknown unknowns,” those we “do not know we don’t know.”