Edwards Gets Aggressive

Edwards is raising the Kerry factor. It's indelicate to put it that way, but we've seen it before. A national candidate that isn't welcome in certain districts and states. Edwards believes he's the answer and said so in Iowa. But he's bitten off a big chunk of national security territory, first by taking on the "global war on terror," then by taking on General Petraeus' comments yesterday. Edwards is making a move, which he'll have to continue to back up.

Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards Sunday warned Iowa voters about what he perceives as the perils of nominating a candidate who down-ticket Democrats in some parts of the nation may decline to appear with in their own campaign events.

Speaking in Carroll, Edwards made the observation after saying there are "three of us who are most likely to be the Democratic nominee."

"It's not just a question of who you like," Edwards said. "It's not just a question of whose vision you are impressed with. It's also a question of who is most likely to win the general election. It's a pretty simple thing. Who will be a stronger candidate in the general election here in the State of Iowa? Who can go to other parts of the country when we have swing candidates running for the Congress and the Senate? Is the candidate going to have to say, 'Don't come here. Down come here and campaign with me. I can't win if you campaign with me.'"

He added later, "I think it's just a reality that I can campaign anyplace in America." ... ..

Edwards Suggests Obama, Clinton Could Cost Swing States

Is this an attempt to pump up the volume on his campaign? The clear fact is that Iowa is a must for Edwards. He likely raised the issue because Clinton is rising and Obama and Edwards are falling in national polls. However, Edwards has one challenge, because of the courage of his "global war on terror" speeches. It's not unreasonable to think that some candidates will be afraid of Edwards because their districts and states aren't inclined to embrace the "bumper sticker" label to anything having to do with global jihadism, regardless that Edwards is right. But now he's taking it a step further. Edwards is taking on Petraeus. Good for him, because he's doing it on something specific Petreaus said yesterday on Fox "News" Sunday: Asked whether he thought the job assigned to an additional 30,000 troops deployed as the centerpiece of President Bush's new war strategy would be completed by then, Gen. David H. Petraeus replied: "I do not, no. I think that we have a lot of heavy lifting to do." However, that doesn't mean it will be popular or go down easy with the red state crowd. It will take a continual campaign on the part of Edwards, which seems to be exactly his plan.

"General Petraeus' comments are just the latest example of the Bush Administration's disconnect from the reality on the ground. In order to get the Iraqi people to take responsibility for their country, we must show them that we are serious about leaving, and the best way to do that is to actually start leaving. Instead of talking about keeping our troops in Iraq for another decade, the Administration should begin bringing our troops home to the hero's welcome they deserve." - John Edwards

If you're going to take on a general, this is the way to get the job done.

- Taylor Marsh LIVE! can be heard from 3-4 pm eastern - 12-1 p.m pacific, Mon.-Thurs, with podcasts available.

Follow Taylor Marsh on Twitter: www.twitter.com/taylormarsh