The long ordeal is finally over.  Well, maybe not.  ABC News has the story, but they've now changed it from the original.  Gist is about the same, just in less specific terms.

This diary is now linked from the front page.  Here's the New York Times link with the headline "Clinton Moving to Suspend Campaign and Endorse Obama Friday"

NOTE: Let me start out by apologizing for posting this thing a few days after the fact.  Thursday through Sunday was a crazy time for me, and I only just now had the chance to sit and relax - and write up a report.

It's an exciting time to be a student here at the University of Oregon.  Two months ago, I posted a diary that was chock-full of pictures of Senator Obama's visit to Eugene - a rally that saw ten thousand people pack into Mac Court, excited to see a presidential candidate come to our forgotten corner of the world for the first time in years.  I got to write about my thoughts on the rally, and of course pass on my favorite picture, of me shaking Senator Obama's hand:

I've almost broken my mouse button hitting "reload" on my browser, but this time it finally happened:  Senator Obama's campaign hit its goal of 1,500,000 INDIVIDUAL DONORS to his presidential campaign - AND it happened by the May 6th deadline that the campaign set for its goal!

Think about that.  It's the most people that have ever donated to a Presidential primary campaign in the history of American politics.  Rather than appealing to lobbyists, Senator Obama has tapped into the largest flow of money out there - committed Americans who believe that we can do better.  

Thanks to LizardBox for the screenshot:

Take a few breaths.  Wait a few seconds before writing out a "We're doomed" comment that everyone makes fun of.

Taegan Goddard's Political Wire just linked to this story:

My question to Senator Clinton made headlines around the country on Saturday.  

The Senator came to my town of Eugene, Oregon, and delivered a wonderful stump speech about her qualifications for President and her plan for America.  As Meteor Blades said in his front page story today, she said a lot of things that I liked - REALLY liked, in fact - and some things I disagreed with.  It was a treat to get to hear her speak.

After her speech, she took questions from the audience.  The second question she took was mine.  Her response was emphatic, passionate, and articulate. I've seen it discussed by CBS News, NBC News, NPR and every local media outlet's coverage of the event.  Look up "Hillary Clinton Eugene" on Google News, and most of the news stories will describe the tough question from the "young man describing himself as an Obama supporter" and how she fielded it.

I am that young man.  And this is my response to her.

I shook Barack Obama's hand. [UPDATE:  Scroll down to see it!]

Twice.

I was an enthusiast that became a volunteer.  I was a volunteer that became an usher.  I was an usher that became a human arrow.  And I was a human arrow that returned to being an usher.

At the end of the night, I was the fanboy in the front row of Mac Court, attending his first Presidential political rally, shaking the hand of the next commander-in-chief - not once, but TWICE!

This is my story.

As I was reading the comment's from kos' great front-page story today, I stumbled across a quote from "He Who Still Must Not Be Named" in the comments that struck me:

See, this is what fundamentally upsets me about the Obama campaign.  They cannot fathom, even in the remotest depths of their imagination, that someone can legitimately disagree with them -- that reasonable people can sometimes come to contrary conclusions and still be reasonable.

Todd Beeton over at MyDD had this to say about the decision by Florida's Congressional delegation to not support any kind of re-vote in their own state (emphasis mine):

Senator Clinton wants the delegates seated according to the vote in January; kos thinks it should be a 50-50 split. I'm not a fan of either. Look, it's no accident that Florida and Michigan are the only states in which Republican turnout exceeded Democratic turnout. Those were not real representations of the Democratic primary electorate and for state representatives to keep the will of their own constituents from counting in this historic election when the will of every other state in the country, even Puerto Rico and Guam, will, would be a true shame, especially when the dis-enfranchisement was a result of a scheme perpetrated by the Republican-led state legislature.

Oh, by the way?  Almost every single Florida DEMOCRAT voted to move the date forward.  Just look at the bill.

It's one of my favorite quotes of the entire nomination process.  After Clinton came in third in Iowa, Harold Ickes tried to spin spin spin why Obama's victory in Iowa didn't matter:

"It's useful to win states, but states don't vote -- delegates do," said Harold Ickes, who is heading up the delegate operation for New York Sen. Hillary Clinton.

"This is very much a race for delegates at this point," said Ickes, a longtime Clinton insider and aide to President Bill Clinton.

It's hilarious that everyone talks about "media bias" in favor of Obama, when Hillary gets positive news stories just by virtue of being Hillary.

When New Hampshire, which was supposed to be a heavy Hillary lean, ended up being a small percentage victory, everyone talked about how "she fought back" and "rose from the dead".  When she lost 11 (then 12) straight contests, no one talked about the insurmountable delegate lead or the lack of planning it demonstrated, but instead how "Super Tuesday II" was the "BIGGEST DAY EVER".

Now comes the news that Barack Obama will most likely win more delegates than Hillary did in Texas - a state that was "MUST-WIN" for Hillary.  And the silence is deafening.

This diary's inspired by nolalily's diary, posted at http://www.dailykos.com/... and also by a front-page post on MyDD by Todd Beeton.  As you can see here, some state senator from Texas got interviewed by Chris Matthews tonight and made an idiot out of himself when asked about Barack Obama's "legislative accomplishments".

Obama's legislative record should be scrutinized.  If he was a governor, we'd look to the successes and failures that he had as the leader of his state.  As a Senator, his viability as a candidate is instead tested by the work he's done as a legislator.

But for all the kerfuffle about Obama's perceived lack of substance, what about Hillary's record in the Senate?