Do the Michigan and Florida Primaries...

merely constitute those bumps in the road one so often encounters?

Is the absence of action in Michigan and Florida in fact paralysis? Is it simply doing nothing when doing almost anything would be better? Or is it some sort of strategy?

Is this situation an illness to which one randomly succumbs the day before vacation? Or self-sabotage?

Obama has not favored any particular resolution; pundits suggest he may enjoy at least short term benefit from the status quo. Clinton would appear to benefit from a re-vote, and seems to favors one.

It is hard to believe that this lapse will be consequence free for either candidate.

Democrats have to wonder why Howard Dean is the chair of anything. He either favors Obama or has no stature. Certainly the latter is true. Maybe both. What happened to his "fifty state" strategy? Democrats should hope they do not pay dearly in the general election for his many glaring inadequacies.

The argument in favor of a required "democratic" distribution of super delegates has proved to be specious and hollow. There can be no mandate for super delegates to adhere to the popular vote if Democrats cannot craft a solution to allow a popular vote in Michigan and Florida.

The Democratic Party would benefit greatly from a rapid resolution to the stalemate inherent in this primary: The stalemate that is become this primary. Near-term closure would be widely welcomed, regardless of the candidate chosen. This episode does not bring closure any closer.

Democrats will not benefit from the status quo in Michigan and Florida. They should try not to post their own eviction notice in those states before the general election.