The mainstream media, and even many semi-mainstream publications such as Salon.com, ignore Edwards because they are afraid of him. He is not of or from the establishment. He is a warrior who really does want to wage war against corporate greed on behalf of ordinary citizens. That makes people with money and people with positions (important journalists, to take one example) very, very nervous.

John Edwards has led the Democratic field with specifics.

See: http://www.johnedwards.com/issues/plan-to-build-one-america.pdf

As for the question of how change can occur without negotiations, the fact is that it cannot. But Edwards background as a trial lawyer will serve him well in negotiations, too. The first rule is that you negotiate from a position of strength. You don't go in saying, let's negotiate. You lead with the realistic threat of legislation and you use structural change to reduce the leverage of your opponents. And the larger his mandate, the greater his position of strength. And, as noted earlier, if he is successful with his efforts to diminish corporations lobbying influence, you also diminish their strength at the negotiating table.

Re: Edwards as VP.

Why wouldn't Obama offer the VP spot to Edwards if he gets the nomination? Edwards presents exactly what he needs. A change candidate who is from the South and who, if unshackled from inept Kerry handlers, is an excellent communicator. He has be most Independent and cross appeal of any of the remaining candidates. Who on earth would be better?

As for whether John would accept the post, who knows. But as LBJ learned, it is a hard job to turn down no matter what you say before the convention.

As for his chances to do something than "die another day," I agree with you to the extent that he is following the only strategy available to him now. As for how he does beyond N.H., don't forget Nevada. Also, much depends on what Hillary does. If she finished third in N.H., as I think is really possible, she has no choice but to rev up the attack machine of Obama. Edwards could be the biggest beneficiary of that.

I thought that Obama did what he needed to do, avoid a mistake.

I thought that John Edwards had his best debate to date. (Disclaimer: I'm a big Edwards supporter.) He was passionate, he was emotional, and he was convincing. But I thought that in making the case that this was a two way race between the two candidates for change versus Hillary as a defender of the status quo, he make it stick. He did a great job of positioning himself as the alternative to Obama. he can move into second in N.H. remains to be seen, but if he can, it's a huge victory for him and a tremendous blow to HRC. Edwards is undermanned and both of his opponent have enough money to burn a wet mule. But if he can pull this off and come in second in N.H., he'll take the "come back kid" title away from Bill Clinton.

Hillary did nothing to distinguish herself tonight. She needed to attach Obama and make some thing stick. She attacked weakly and her attack ended up blowing up in her face. She needed a big win and got only a competent performance.

Maybe you should buy yourself a book:

http://www.amazon.com/Gas-We-Pass-Story-Science/dp/1929132158/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1199674316&sr=1-1

It explains that passing gas is natural, harmless, and that the amount we pass varies from person to person depending on out gut's chemical composition and what we eat.

Politics is a tough business. Harry Truman, as usual said it best: "If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen." If anything, I thought Edwards was relatively gentle. Look what happened to Ed Muskie in the same situation.

And most amazingly, HRC wasn't crying about the death of a soldier, or some horrible missed policy opportunity, but over her own electoral fate. And if you listen carefully to the quote, she says, "some of us are ready, some of us aren't; some of us know what we want to do on day one, some of us don't . . . ." Apparently she truly in her heart believes that Obama and Edwards aren't qualified. Not that she's more qualified, but that they are not qualified. What a load of arrogant, self-centered bullshit.

I see nothing wrong with what John Edwards said. Politics is a tough business. As is often the case, Harry Truman said it best: "If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen." Part of the reason for a grueling primary contest is to see how candidates for public office behave under all kinds of conditions -- tired, emotional worn down, adversity, what have your. Frankly, I'd rather have a person as President who is still sharp and on their feet when the chips are down that one who is self pitying.

And note, that HRC was not emotional about the death of a soldier or a missed national opportunity, but over a "poor, poor, pitiful me" question about how she held up and her declining chances of winning. I can't imagine anything worse to get upset about.