While candidates and supporters scramble to determine how to resolve the problem of Michigan and Florida, there still remains only one solution. That solution was made by the DNC when it decided to strip both states of their delegates and agreed to by the candidates when they pledged not to campaign nor participate in those illegal primaries. The DNC decision was known to the legislators of both states before they decided to change the dates of their primaries and the voters knew that their votes would not count. Many voters decided not to participate in that primary. So the voters were already disenfranchised by their legislators - not by the DNC and not by the Democratic candidates.
At this point the best we can say about the Michigan and Florida primaries is that the results are tainted. The only reasonable solution would have been to hold new primaries with the expense being borne by the states that opted to change the primary dates in the first place. I would have liked that expense to be taken out of the salaries and pensions of the very same legislators who caused the problem, but then my expectations often run high.
At this point, the only logical solution is to abide by the DNC rules and the candidates' original agreements. There is only one candidate who finds a problem with this. It is unfortunate that the voters of Florida and Michigan did not get to properly vote in this primary, but the fault lies with their state legislatures and no one else.
There is no reason to seat any delegates from either state and there is definitely no reason to involve the candidates in any decision to stick to the rules or to come up with a compromise solution that would seat those delegates in full or in part. The decision must be made by the DNC itself and the best decision would be to abide by the agreed upon rules.
If Obama agrees to seat any of these delegates he will be accused of showing weakness in the face of Clinton's relentless, but baseless, onslaught. If he does not make any concessions, he will be accused of disenfranchising voters and stealing delegates from Clinton. He should only say that he has abided by the original agreement and that he will abide by any decision that the DNC makes. He can still speak about the problems of excluding or including those votes in a way that does not lend support to either choice. But he should also point out that his vested interest in the outcome renders him ineligible to make a choice that would not be seen as self-serving by the public. He should then say that leaving the decision in the hands of the DNC would be the best solution.
The DNC needs to show some leadership on this issue and take whatever flak comes from the Clinton campaign, its surrogates, the Republicans, and the public. It is important that the party nominee not be seen as bearing any responsibility for that decison, which would become a liability in November. The DNC must do what is best for the eventual nominee. The best solution is to abide by the agreed upon rules and to promise to revisit the issue of the whole primary schedule after the election.