Who wins from the Ferraro remarks? Obama.

Here's a post by Johnathan Kay:

I just got this message from a friend. I think he's got it bangon:

Ferraro just resigned from the Clinton campaign. Ferraro stuck to her guns, but in the end Hillary had to give her the axe. For Hillary, forcing Ferraro to step down after a day or so elapsed was a win-win-win, since (i) Hillary appears to be tough on those who lay “low blows” on Obama (not that I think that it was a low blow, but many in the media obviously did), (ii) it forces the media to rehash the “Obama-wouldn’t-even-be-running-if-he-weren’t-a-black-male” argument one more time, making sure that more people hear it, and (iii) the Spitzer thingy is no longer the most recent political story, and Hillary would obviously welcome anything that reduces the prominence of the Spitzer story (and the unavoidable mention of Spitzer supporting Hillary).

I think that's wrong. Obama's team make this into a big story for a reason, and that reason is that A) it feeds into the narrative of Hillary as a desperate, dirty campaigner B) shows that anyone mentioning the idea that Obama's race has something to do with his rise to the top, despite his inexperience, gets their head cut off, making sure no one else will say it, and C) portrays Obama as a victim of dirty campaigning who can rise above it and unite a divided party and country. I think this whole thing is a disaster for Hillary.