There must be a solid reason for him to be fighting so hard to keep these states out of play in the race for the nomination.  Is the popular vote metric that much more important?

And I think it is far to late for Obama to heal any rifts in these states, especially FL.  There are protests all around the country going on (I think) tomorrow about the media sexism and about the situation with FL and MI.  Obama has let this problem sit out there so long that it's starting to be defined as another example of his sexism toward Clinton.

Remember, this man has never run a truly contested contest.  His method of winning is pretty much slash and burn, right down to having his opponents removed from the ballot.

I think he legitimately believes the outcome of those two primaries was not accurate (because no campaigning was permitted and he wasn't even on the ballot in Michigan), and therefore legitimately believes that seating those delegations in their entirety, based solely on those votes, would be unfair.  There were supporters of all three major candidates who stayed home because they were told it wouldn't count, Democrats and Dem-leaning independents in Michigan who voted in the Republican primary there to make a little mischief, and all of their preferences of course weren't reflected in the vote.

Having said that, I have no problem with seating all pledged delegates and superdelegates in their entirety, provided that Obama is assigned the bulk(if not all) of the uncommitted Michigan superdelegates, since exit polling suggests about 70% of the uncommitted voters would have supported him if his name were on the ballot.  That is the bare minimum "compromise" required to make such a seating legitimate in my eyes(and in the eyes of many Obama supporters).  Award Obama at least 70% of the 55, or at least 38.  That's it.  Then Clinton can get her 178 pledged delegates and Obama will get at least 105.

I'm not completely in the tank for her.  I know she's done that because she's been forced there by circumstance and history, but what matters to me now is not the why or the how, but the fact of it - as it makes her a very, very attractive general election candidate.  

The DNC has said that FL and MI delegates will be seated. Clinton needs the delegates from those states, and believes that those delegates would affect the outcome of the nomination in her favor.  That is why she wants them to be considered legitimate, as is, and that is why she is "fighting."

Obama is betting that no one will have the nerve to call him an illegitimate nominee if FL and MI are not counted properly. He also thinks he can distribute enough kool-aid to still win MI, and is convinced he does not need FL at all.  

He's not going to do anything but mouth platitudes about how he is sure the delegates will be seated at the convention. Of course they will, but they will not count.

who gives a darn about the outrageous, unfair and ridiculous Democratic nomination process which needs to be completely overhauled anyway?

That right there is why this conversation about what license those bad little state parties will do in 4 years is so ridiculous.  If the last 6 months have shown us anything, it's that the Democrats' current "system" of choosing a nominee needs a full-on overhaul.

Your quibble is that the delegations will not be seated exactly as the Clinton campaign wants them to be.  Namely 67 delegates for Obama out of the two states, and no more.