Good evening to all of you and forgive my technical failings -- I had a magnificent YouTube ready that I simply cannot get to post uptop, so I'll post it in the thread for your enjoyment.

It's a swell montage of Novakula's walkoff from the CNN set, but you'll see it soon, I promise. It's meant to go with his column from yesterday's Washington Post, in which he clarifies the establishment DeeCee Beltway view of 2008 PrezCandi John Edwards:

The dynamic performance by John Edwards in Sunday's Democratic presidential debate, assailing his competitors for the nomination, got high marks from political reporters, Republican politicians and left-wing activists. But not from the Democratic establishment. Once their great hope for the future, Edwards now is massively unpopular among party regulars, who neither like nor trust him.

The performances at the Goffstown, N.H., event by the two front-runners, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, were error-free if a little leaden. Edwards, the third man in the big presidential field, supplied the fireworks by taking on Clinton and Obama. On the surface, he seems a perfect candidate: eloquent, smart, handsome and shrewd. Is he reminiscent of the two slick Southerners who were the only Democrats elected president in the past 40 years? Yet the prospect of an Edwards-led ticket evokes deep apprehension inside the party that he would be another flawed nominee.

Oh.
My.
Gosh.

Deep apprehensions!? Another flawed nominee?! Who could our dear Robert Novak be speaking with about John Edwards?

Edwards has not worn well with party colleagues. Campaign consultant Bob Shrum was enthusiastic about Edwards after working on his 1998 Senate victory in North Carolina and unsuccessfully advised Gore to make him his 2000 running mate. But Shrum chose Kerry over Edwards as his 2004 presidential client. In his newly published memoir, "No Excuses: Concessions of a Serial Campaigner," Shrum explains: "I was coming to believe he wasn't ready; he was a Clinton who hadn't read the books."

But wait -- there's more!

During the 2004 primaries, Democratic activist James Carville was enchanted when Edwards shifted his centrist posture to a populist depiction of "Two Americas." Carville told me -- and then repeated it on CNN -- that Edwards was the best stump speaker he ever had seen. When I asked him this week whether he still thought that was true, Carville replied: "Maybe he's not as good now."

I don't know if you've chosen a Presidential candidate for 2008 (I have) but could you do worse than to choose the one opposed by Bob Shrum?

and James Carville?

and Robert Novak?

Discuss.