I don't have the time or inclination anymore to get into everything you're wrong and/or cherry-picking about these days. So I'll just pick one: Obama's record in the Illinois legislature.

I did a google search for Obama and "taking a powder" -- guess what came up? Your Salon posts, not any remarks by Illinois State Senators. The guy you seem to be citing is Dan Cronin, a GOP state legislator there, and even he gives Obama a mixed record:

http://abcnews.go.com/Nightline/Vote2008/story?id=4339659

In fact, members of the Illinois State Senate and Illinois observers have said over and over again that voting "present" is a viable third option there according to state law, and those who use it to denigrate Obama's record have no understanding of politics in Illinois.

http://www.stateline.org/live/details/story?contentId=274863

http://www.prospect.org/csnc/blogs/tapped_archive?month=12&year=2007&base_name=present#102958

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=18348437

Now, regarding Obama's state Senate record, he's received wide acclaim from both sides of the aisle for his guiding of the first comprehensive campaign finance law in Illinois in a generation, his managing to get the cops to sign off on videotaped interrogations, and his championing of a controversial death penalty overhaul that he managed to get passed unanimously. See, for example:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/08/AR2007020802262.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/03/AR2008010303303.html

If anything, the crack on Obama's state senate record is that he made a lot of controversial votes, not that he ducked them:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/01/17/politics/main2369157.shtml

The ducking-the-vote charge you bring up stems mainly from one incident when he was on vacation during a gun bill that failed by four votes -- see the 2/7/07 WP article above. There are also six votes where Obama said he "goofed."

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-obamavotes24jan24,0,713086.story

Otherwise, there's no there there. Here's a NYT graphic covering Obama's more important votes in the Illinois Senate:

http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2007/07/29/us/politics/20070730_OBAMA_GRAPHIC.html

So, in short, saying Obama's state senate record is flimsy and insubstantial is not borne out at all by the facts. So, basically, you're either wrong or you're being intellectually dishonest. And, frankly, this goes for all too many of your numbered points in your last post.

Also, just to stay on message of late, it's over.

Don't feed the deadenders, y'all. It does no good. Most of the hardcore Clinton folk around here left the reality-based community sometime after Wisconsin.

The good news is the press is finally starting to catch up. It took 3-4 weeks, but, hey, math is hard!

Looks like Joan has moved to the concern troll phase of Clinton denial.

My Salon membership can't expire soon enough at this point.

Good of the press to finally figure it out, three weeks after it became patently obvious

And, note that when they do, the coverage isn't "It's over," but "Hey, look, we in the media are covering it like it's not over."

Stop the interminable navel-gazing and do your effing job, people.

By the way, Clinton dead-enders: Don't say I didn't warn ya.

Nice first post. You really got the concern troll vibe down.

How goes the dKos strike, by the way?

Your thoughtcrime will not be countenanced. Please report to the Ministry of Love. Mark Penn will see to you from there.

To everyone else, breaking news! Sen. Clinton has won glorious victories in Michigan and Florida! And Chocorations are going up 10%! Doubleplusgood.

They're not going to be any worse than Clinton. And, once Clinton is treated like the no-chance dead-ender she in fact is and is shuttled off the national stage, the focus will be rightfully on the general election, and issues like McCain's woeful misunderstanding of Iran and Al Qaeda today will resonate that much more.

Maureen, you just proved tom's point. There's a lot more to Paul Robeson than being "a great singer." Perhaps you should read up on him too, before being so resolutely flabbergasted by Wright.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Robeson

"It is unthinkable that American Negroes will go to war on behalf of those who have oppressed us for generations... against a country [the Soviet Union] which in one generation has raised our people to the full dignity of mankind. -- Paul Robeson

Tom Payne's already responded much as I would, so I'll just add this:

"This man, Obama, has rejected his white American mother when it suited him for political purposes and that disloyalty, far more deep-rooted than your political expediency, sticks in my craw."

What on Earth are you talking about? Please find me the links to evidence where Obama ever disavowed his mother, before, during, or after South Carolina. That's complete horsepuckey. Even when in Selma, Alabama, one of the touchstones of the civil rights movement, he reminded the crowd that his mother was white.

Do you mean because his first book is entitled Dreams from My Father? If you'd read it, you'd know his mother and grandparents loom large in his life, and he honors all of them.

Also, with all due respect, maureen, based on this comment, your remarks on Hawaii earlier, and others you have made, it would seem you have very little understanding of race in America, either throughout our history or on the ground today. But, hey, at least you're not openly aggressive about it like ShawnWM, so that's good for something.

"Disloyalty is a strong word to throw around, but it's a far easier thing to stick by one's principles than by a given man or woman."

Correction: That should read:

"Disloyalty is a strong word to throw around, but it's a far harder thing to stick by one's principles than by a given man or woman."

Mistyped.

(Salon, how 'bout an edit function to go along with the inclusion of href tags? Sigh.)