I’d love to see a return of the Kerry Spot, but I’m not counting on Kerry jumping back into the presidential race.

And yet… in today’s Boston Globe – Kerry’s hometown paper – there’s a column by Scott Lehigh that suggests some folks close to the former nominee may be eager to take the shine off John Edwards:

[Kerry’s] response was quickly seen as a lost opportunity. However, one man who had been adamant that Kerry shouldn’t disavow his vote was Edwards. Although Edwards wasn’t with Kerry that day, the two had been traveling by train together over the weekend. Once Bush issued his challenge, the campaign knew the press would soon put the question to the Democratic duo, and so, prior to an event on that Aug. 7 in La Junta, Colo., Kerry and Edwards and various aides huddled to discuss possible responses.
“I specifically remember Edwards having a very distinct take,” says one person in attendance, who paraphrases Edwards’s argument this way: “We need to stick to this. We should stand by our votes, say we would vote that way again. If you admit a mistake, it shows weakness in time of war. That’s what the Republicans want us to do.” Adds a senior adviser who was there: “There was a discussion about how to answer the question: ‘Was your vote on Iraq a mistake?’ John Edwards had a very strong opinion that we should not waver, and it would show a sign of weakness if we did.” A third source confirms those accounts. In late September, Kerry struck a different tone at New York University, calling the Iraq war a “profound diversion” from the war on terrorism and making it clear he would not have gone to war knowing Iraq had neither WMD nor ties to Al Qaeda. In campaign discussions preparatory to that speech, Edwards is said to have argued again for sticking by the war resolution votes. “His view was that we shouldn’t be having this debate, that we should stick by the vote, and more broadly attack the management of the war,” says the first person. Adds the second source: “He could tell the tide had shifted, but he made one more attempt at having us not change our position. He thought it would show weakness.” Asked about the difference between the advice Edwards was giving in fall 2004 and his stance now, campaign spokeswoman Kate Bedingfield would say only this: “John Edwards’s campaign is about looking forward and not backward and bringing about the kind of real change that we need in this country.”

The sources are described as “one person in attendance,” “a senior adviser”… Think these sources are Kerry’s people?

We know there have been continuing tensions between Kerry and Edwards…

McAuliffe recounts having dinner with Edwards after the 2004 election. He notes that Kerry sent Edwards to a lot of small markets, leading to criticism that Edwards was not visible enough.
“Terry, they wouldn’t let me,” Edwards told McAuliffe. “I wanted to go after the Swift Boat guys. I wanted to go after Bush. They wouldn’t let me.”
But when McAuliffe sat down with Kerry, the Massachusetts senator expressed frustration that Edwards did not campaign harder. “Kerry said that Edwards told him several times, ‘Watch the news tomorrow! I’m really going to go after Bush.’ Then Kerry would watch the news the next night, and Edwards was nowhere to be seen,” McAuliffe wrote.
“I also heard that Kerry believed Edwards had promised him that if Kerry wanted to run again in 2008, Edwards would sit the race out,” said McAuliffe, who is supporting New York Sen. Hillary Clinton for president.
“But if you asked the Edwards people about it, they said there was no way any such promise has been made.”

If Kerry were to jump back into the Democratic presidential primary, would his first order of business be to take down his former running mate?