Is the following headline wishful thinking on the part of a media outlet hoping for unity at this week's Democratic National Convention, or good journalistic inquisitiveness: "Are Clintons Leaving the National Scene?"
Now, as conservatives, we mightn't care which, for whatever the reason, they'd be "melted," and we'd be doing a jig around a puddle in the middle of a castle floor while carrying a partially burned broom.
With that delicious image in your head, you decide whether this Reuters piece is advocacy or good journalism (emphasis added):
This week at Barack Obama's big party in Denver, Americans are watching Democrats Bill and Hillary Clinton pass from the national stage, at least for now, and all indications are that it is a difficult departure. [...]
They are receding from the limelight to give way to Obama's historic run for president, but they are not going quietly. [...]
Some Clinton believers think that should Obama stumble in November, then maybe she could again rise as the go-to Democrat to run in 2012, when she would be 64.
"You can just never count these two out," said a former Clinton White House official, who spoke on condition of anonymity.
Nonetheless, this Democrat said, their back-to-back appearances this week has the feel of "sort of a capstone" on the Clinton era, a passing of the torch to Obama.
What do you think? Is this author sacrificing the Clintons at the altar of the Obamessiah, or doing a good job of asking a serious question about this couple's political future?