Somewhere in New York, Rudy Giuliani is wailing, "Why didn't fear work for ME?"

Fear....for lack of a better word....is GOOD. Fear is right. Fear WORKS. Fear clarifies and cuts through and captures the essence of the evolutionary spirit. Fear, in all of its forms -- fear for one's life, fear of losing one's money, fear of losing one's loved ones, fear of knowledge -- has marked the upward surge of mankind, and fear -- you mark my words -- will save that malfunctioning corporation called the USA.

Isn't it funny how you need only change a few words from the infamous "Greed is good" speech from Wall Street, you can encapsulate the results of yesterday's Ohio and Texas primaries? The headlines this morning do everything but call Hillary Clinton "The Comeback Kid."

"BLOOD IN THE WATER" screams the New York Daily News. "HILL YEAH! Clinton Romps in Ohio and Lassos Texas" hollers the New York Post, owned by Hillary's BFF, Rupert Murdoch. Yee-hah indeed. Even the staid old Washington Post has an article titled "Tempers Flare as Contests Heat Up." The Boston Globe describes Hillary Clinton's campaign as "resurgent."

Obviously it's far better for Hillary Clinton today than it would have been had she lost either Ohio OR Texas. In the last few weeks, Obama closed a significant gap, though Clinton seemed to stabilize or pick up support in the last few days. There's going to be much speculation as to why Obama wasn't able to "close the deal", as Tweety put it last night, but I suspect that once again, going negative works, and playing on fear works.

I must confess that I had been lulled into a false sense of a return of American sanity after Rudy Giuliani's "noun, a verb, and 9/11" campaign imploded under its own ponderous fearmongering weight. But I think that despite Obama's calls to our better nature, the appeal to the reptilian brain of Hillary Clinton's "vote for me or your children will be killed by Scary Brown Muslim Men" (sic) ad worked. This clip from Sunday's 60 Minutes shows that the e-mail smears my friend had received and which concerned her are having an effect:

As much as we'd like to believe that Democrats Don't Do That Sort of Thing, unfortunately they do. More unfortunately is that they don't seem to want to do it against Republicans; only against other Democrats.

The Clinton campaign may not be responsible for the e-mail smears, but they are certainly not above exploiting them. The clip I ran yesterday in which Clinton leaves the door open for Obama to be lying about not being some kind of sinister Islamofascist™ mole demonstrated that very clearly. And if the Clintons are using the Scary Brown Men boogeyman, you can bet your life that the Republicans will use entire armies of them.

So Josh Marshall is right when he says:

A lot's getting said tonight. And a lot of it is baseless speculation. But the one thing that rings true to me is this: The Clinton campaign got rough and nasty over the last week-plus. And they got results. That may disgust you or it may inspire you with confidence in Hillary's abilities as a fighter. But wherever you come down on that question is secondary to the fact that that's how campaign's work. Opponents get nasty. And what we've seen over the last week is nothing compared to what Barack Obama would face this fall if he hangs on and wins the nomination.

So I think the big question is, can he fight back? Can he take this back to Hillary Clinton, demonstrate his ability to take punches and punch back? By this I don't mean that he's got to go ballistic on her or go after Bill's business deals or whatever else her vulnerabilities might be. Candidates fight in different ways and if they're good candidates in ways that play to their strengths and cohere with their broader message. But he's got to show he can take this back to Hillary and not get bloodied and battered when an opponent decides to lower the boom. That will obviously determine in a direct sense how he fares in the coming primaries and caucuses.

It's just not helpful to have Hillary Clinton doing the Republicans' advance work for them. Because when you look past the popular vote to the delegate count, Clinton's win is less significant. Chuck Todd explains:

So Clinton may have won Texas and Ohio last night, but she still isn't significantly ahead of where she was on Monday in terms of the delegate count. So it may still be too late for her to get the nomination. But with the help of Rush Limbaugh, who exhorted his mindless, grinning bulldog acolytes to vote for her in Texas' open primary, Clinton has succeeded in "bloodying" Barack Obama in the eyes of the media.

I just hope the Republicans are grateful to her for doing their work for them.