michigan and florida and democrats

The compromises over Democratic delegates for Florida and Michigan are about as fair as possible. Somebody please shut Harold Ickes up; may I suggest duct tape over his mouth for a week or two?

Ickes rants about the compromise that gave Obama delegates in Michigan based on the "uncommitted" vote there, saying "I am stunned that we have the gall and the chutzpah to substitute our judgment for 600,000 voters."

I am stunned that somebody working for Senator Clinton - a candidate who FAILED TO FOLLOW PARTY RULES and left her name ON THE BALLOT - would have the gall and the chutzpah to claim that the Michigan vote was in any way fair and representative. Not to mention the fact that many more Democrats would have voted in Michigan had the Party - with Hillary Clinton's full support and backing - stripped the state of its delegates for moving its vote up too close to New Hampshire/Iowa.

But if there is anything that the Clinton campaign has had no shortage of since its 12-state losing streak, it has bee gall and chutzpah.

Anyway, the compromise has been made. Let's see what Senator Clinton does after the last primaries on June 3. She can concede semi-graciously (the time for conceding graciously is long, long past) and give Barack Obama and the Democrats a chance to begin the tough task of winning in November.

Or she can keep up the fight and look forward to working with President McCain in January 2009.