Busting the Myths of the Democratic Nominating Process

Mark Ambinder has up a good piece analyzing the myths and truths regarding the Democratic Party's process of nominating their presidential candidate. It cuts through many of the strange arguments coming from each side.

Myth: The Democratic primary process is supposed to be democratic.

Fact: With its mix of caucuses and primaries, proportional allocation and at-large bonus delegates, its racial and gender quotas, and its layer of superdelegates, the process is anything but democratic.
And that's the point of it, actually.
In cameral terms, the superdelegates are the Senate; the other delegates are the House. The supers exist to preserve the power of the party itself by taming the passions of the pledged delegates
Since the McGovern-Frasier reforms, the Democratic Party has cautiously backed away from the principle of deference to the majority and toward the countervailing principle of protecting the rights of the minority (who were, in many cases, ethnic minorities).
The nomination process is designed to ensure that the majority does not prevail without a fight in the event that the minority of the party objects. The downside risk is obvious: in the event that there is no consensus, there is no objective way to determine who the nominee should be.