As far as Mrs. Clinton knows, Barack Obama is not a Muslim. As far as we know, no one has ever likened Rush Limbaugh or her to a butterfly, but the political butterfly effect produced by the Texas and Ohio votes on Tuesday has rained chaos down on the mighty powerful of the Democratic Party. Order will not soon emerge.

Oh my! Why, it’s a political Katrina, with almost 800 Mike Browns – Democrat superdelegates all – vying to manage the aftermath. Bring in the FEMA trailers, because Denver doesn’t have enough command posts (or bars or gentlemen’s clubs) for a real convention.

The exact extent to which Rush Limbaugh’s call – coupled with the natural fun-loving instincts of some Republican and Independent voters – to vote for Mrs. Clinton has not yet been pinned down. In both Texas and Ohio, Independent voters made up about 20 percent of the vote and Republicans approximately 10 percent, based on exit poll data. Given Mrs. Clinton’s narrow margin in Texas, the effect could have been significant.

Even if myth, it’s a great one, and far more likely than the 76 percent (if memory serves) of voters who said they were greatly affected by the last Clinton/Obama debate. MSNBC, which hosted the debate, liked that one a lot, but the percentage defies reality. Given any alternative, most voters are going to say something other than that they get their information from watching “Real Housewives of Punkin Creek.”

Likewise, media commentators have made far too much of the Clinton red telephone ad. Yes, they saw it. Political junkies saw it. But most real people only saw it on cable TV shows, and, in reality, the commercial had comparatively little paid air time in Texas, not all of Texas at that, and none in Ohio. Just ask an ad guy who has to sell soap or cars or cellphones for a living how many impressions it takes for an ad to get through the clutter to its intended audience.

The ad, as a visual aid, did enhance Mrs. Clinton’s so-called “kitchen sink” assault on Obama, which cumulatively aided her temporary “wins.”

But what did she really win? Here’s Karl Rove, who has, as some may remember, actually practiced politics, in the Wall Street Journal: “The Democrats saw Hillary Clinton come back from the abyss for the third time this year. What is it about the Clintons living life on the political edge? Mrs. Clinton was on the edge after Iowa but recovered in New Hampshire. She was falling after losing South Carolina but recovered on Super Tuesday. She then endured 11 straight defeats that threatened to end her candidacy but won three of Tuesday’s four contests. However, as of Wednesday night, her victories only closed Mr. Obama’s delegate lead by nine, from 110 to 101. As exciting as Tuesday night was, the Democratic contest has not shifted to advantage Mrs. Clinton. Mr. Obama still has a healthy advantage.”

The fact is, as many numbers crunchers are observing, the Democratic presidential campaign is now down to math, and daunting math it is for both candidates. It is so daunting, in fact, that people are adding two plus two and getting five. Both candidates may very soon regret their opposition to teaching to the test, as the math is going to test their mutually exclusive abilities to survive.

Without going through the arduous calculations that are being spreadsheeted almost everywhere, it seems now impossible for either Clinton or Obama to win elected delegates decidedly, so while the multimillion dollar state battles will continue (yeah!!!) for fractional returns, the real contest is for the true deciders – the superdelegates.

Party hacks and pooh-bas all, they are now where the smart action turns, and they’re a lot cheaper to buy than real votes of real people, or a $25 million redo of Florida. And just wait until rank-and-file Democrats view not-so-free trade for the party’s nominee up close and personal.

Whether he caused it or not, Rush has his chaos. And we’re seriously considering getting the gas mask concession for Denver. It’s beginning to look a lot like 1968.