What about security at home?

The initial take on Sen. Edwards' speech was that it was rather hawkish.  And to me it's reassuring that at least the second name on the ticket understands that we are at war. . .

But does he remember exactly where we are at war?  He spoke at length about the actions in Iraq and Afghanistan, and even left the door open to hunt down Al Qaeda wherever they may be. . .

But what about domestic security?  That I recall--and I'm working from memory here--the only REMOTELY "domestic security" address he made was about reforming the intel services in something shorter than the three years he claims it's taken for this administration to do such.  Oh, and he pledged more something (support, money, whatever) for first responders--which isn't really a "security" issue, because by the time the responders are called into play, the security has already broken down. 

One would think from his comments--or lack of them--that the only plan his ticket has to secure our borders is to take the fight to the enemy in whatever lands they may lurk.  Odd, I thought that was (part of) the strategy that the President has chosen to follow.  Is Edwards saying that W is right on this issue?  Is this what Kerry thinks?

Either that, or Sen. Edwards doesn't think domestic security is an issue worthy of putting in his nomination speech.  And that's not super-reassuring to those that wonder if this guy can handle the second-highest office in the land.

Either way, it's not a winner for the Dems.  And to put it in Seinfeldian terms, that's an awfully big motsa ball to leave on the plate at the end of the National Convention.