Still On The Edwards Bandwagon
By: Mark W Adams

I'm feeling a bit more confident that this thing isn't over since watching the Iowa Caucus numbers come in and Obama's extraordinary speech, especially after watching the debate Saturday night. It was indeed the forum I've been waiting to see them in. Plenty of time to make their case, sitting down and having a discussion instead of mouthing talking points, raising their hands to inane questions and looking for the one 10 second sound byte to define a two hour joint appearance.

Hat's off to ABC and Charlie Gibson. Well done.

Edwards hit the only strategy that can win for him, make Hillary lose -- and she did in this last debate before New Hampshire. I can actually say with confidence that he's still alive if he can manage to "tie" Hillary Tuesday, and she's done if he beats her by more than a couple of points.

It's still a monumental task, and with her war chest she's not going anywhere soon, even with a string of third place finishes. But the more she's third, the more this becomes a contest between the law professor and the litigator. I like the litigator's chances. He's been in more situations where it's not enough just to pontificate, but where you have to dig in and win something.

In Cleveland there are two law schools, Case-Western Reserve and Cleveland-Marshall where I went. Marshall was part of Cleveland State University and cost about a fourth as much to attend. The saying went that Case taught you the philosophy and theory of jurisprudence while Marshall taught you how to earn a living practicing law. Some fine professors graduated from Case, but more Ohio Judges went to Marshall than any other law school.

You can see the difference in style between the two types of professionals in Obama and Edwards. Call it a difference in fighting attitude. The professorial type like Obama can articulate exactly how things should be and communicate an ideal world where abstract problems are solved by applying the proper solution after analyzing the possible consequences of various choices. The litigator just fights for what is right and keeps fighting until he wins, cuz that's how he pays the bills.

Both types have their advantages, and as long as they are fundamentally working towards the same ends, we would be well served by either.

However, once this is over and a winner declared, we will have one if not two sitting senators who will be needed to lead the fight for the next president's agenda. (Contemplating another GOP president is simply ridiculous.) If Edwards wins it all, considering putting either Obama or Hillary in his cabinet would not be something I would recommend and I believe the nation would better served with them taking over the fight to bring about the changes everybody craves in the Senate -- although an Edwards/Obama ticket (or visa-versa) would be unstoppable.

But if Edwards loses I don't think he'd want to run as VP again. although he'd be an excellent choice to be sure. I just don't think that's in the cards. But if he isn't begged to become the next Attorney General by the next president, then we will have elected a fool. John Edwards would be the best Attorney General this nation has ever known.

Think about it. He wouldn't be bending over backwards to grant the Telecoms immunity, he'd prosecute them and then hunt down and shackle every Son-of-a-Loyal-Bushie that ever attended a GOP fund raiser.

I don't care what it takes. One way or another I want John Edwards in charge of the Justice Department, either running it from the Oval Office or from the Hoover Building -- and while we're at it, change the name of that ugly monstrosity.