The New York Times front-pages: "The Senate Judiciary Committee on Wednesday issued subpoenas to the White House, Vice President Dick Cheney's office and the Justice Department after what the panel's chairman called "stonewalling of the worst kind" of efforts to investigate the National Security Agency's policy of wiretapping without warrants."

From NBC's Domenico Montanaro
A day after his wife Elizabeth called in to MSNBC's "Hardball" to confront conservative commentator Ann Coulter, Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards made his own appearance on the show.

He dismissed Coulter, calling her "mean-spirited," having no shame and being "crazy." He defended his wife's efforts to ask Coulter to drop her personal attacks, saying, "You have to stand up to them."

"I don't think [Coulter] has any shame; there's no doubt about that," Edwards said. "I think that's just the way she behaves. That's who she is. And I think that's a lot of what we see from these people who are just -- that are crazy."

Below is the transcript from today's Hardball. Click here for video.:

CHRIS MATTHEWS: Last night, Ann Coulter responded to Elizabeth Edwards with a question.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
 
ELIZABETH EDWARDS, WIFE OF FORMER SEN. EDWARDS: It debases political dialogue. It drives people away from the process. We can't have a debate about issues if you're using this kind of language.

(AUDIENCE MEMBER SHOUTING)

ANN COULTER: Yes, why isn't John Edwards making this call?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MATTHEWS: Well, I guess the question last night was why didn't you make the call, rather than Elizabeth, to Ann Coulter on the "Hardball" set?

J. EDWARDS: Well, the simple answer to that is Elizabeth, I guess, heard her and knew she was on, and called in. So I thought it was appropriate that I come on today.

MATTHEWS: OK. Did you talk with your wife, Elizabeth, beforehand about this, her decision to call in to the program?

J. EDWARDS: Elizabeth made this decision on her own to call in, I guess based on what she was hearing from Ann Coulter and I think something Ann Coulter had said a couple of days before.

MATTHEWS: Right. Well, what is your reaction to what you heard last night and heard today about what happened last night?

J. EDWARDS: I applaud Elizabeth. I think that when people like Ann Coulter -- and it's not just her, unfortunately, it's her and people just like her, Karl Rove and all those people. I mean, when they engage us in this kind of hatemongering, you have to stand up to them. You have to stand up to them. They start this fight, but we have to be willing to be strong and to fight back. Because if we don't, Chris, what happens is all the important things: men and women dying in Iraq, those who don't have health insurance, et cetera, their issues don't get heard. Instead, it's this -- it's this low-level dialogue with this name-calling, which is what we see.
 
MATTHEWS: Well, what do you make of the role of trash talk in politics generally, this willingness on the part of partisans to enrage the other side by going over the top? I mean is that a smart tactic? Does it work? Does it debase the politics?

J. EDWARDS: Oh, it clearly debases the politics. There's no doubt about that. It makes it very difficult to talk about issues that affect people's day-to-day lives. And it's why when this kind of hatemongering and this hate language is used -- and I just, I feel the need to point out, this woman didn't just use it against me. I mean, the things she said about Senator Obama; the things she said about Senator Clinton -- they all fall in the same category. And they're calculated to create an emotional response. They're calculated to make people hate. And if you don't speak out against it, then that means you're tolerating this kind of language, and it means you think it's OK. It's not OK.

MATTHEWS: What do you make of someone who's a person who writes a column, went to Michigan Law School, has a fine education, apparently, from what I can tell, who is quite a writer, a good writer, uses comments like, "I hope that the terrorists kill this guy," things like that.
What do you make of that stuff? Where does it come from?
 
J. EDWARDS: Well, it means a couple things. Number one, she's smart enough to know better. She knows exactly what she's doing. She's not alone. I mean, if you look at what she's doing and you look at what's happened in the past; for example, the Swift Boating of Senator Kerry, I mean, I think a lot of this is very coordinated, very calculated. They intend to create a result. And what they hope is that we won't say anything; we'll just let them continue this hateful dialogue, and we'll try and hope that the country will hear us talk about important things, issues that affect the lives of Americans every single day. But we have to fight back, Chris. We have to be strong. We have to speak up. That's what Elizabeth did yesterday. And I'm proud of her for it.
 
MATTHEWS: Elizabeth had one -- I think Elizabeth may have made one strategic error last night. That's assuming that she could get Ann Coulter to express shame.

J. EDWARDS: I don't think she has any shame. There's no doubt about that. And her response to any effort to raise the dialogue, to talk about things that people care about, is to attack in a mean, hateful, mean-spirited way. I think that's just the way she behaves. That's who she is. And I think that's a lot of what we see from these people who are just -- that are crazy. I mean...

MATTHEWS: Yes.

J. EDWARDS: I mean, there's nothing remotely mainstream about them. And normal people are repelled by them.

MATTHEWS: Well, how do you explain that you see people with good educations walking around the streets of New York and Wall Street, people with big business jobs in equity firms -- hedge fund people -- all buying books by Ann Coulter? How do you explain the fact that even last night's fight involving your wife Elizabeth and Ann Coulter probably helped her sell some more books to these kind of guys?

J. EDWARDS: Because I think there is a segment of the population that responds to this sort of hateful craziness. It's always been true, Chris. It's been true my whole lifetime. When I was young, growing up in the South, people were very responsive to name-calling of African-Americans, prejudice and discrimination against African-Americans. And people would say the most outrageous, demeaning things about good human beings. And there would be a response.

And so there's always been hateful language, hate-mongering in this country. It's been true for as long as I've been alive and it's still true today. But that doesn't mean we have to tolerate it. We have to speak out about it. We have to stand up.

MATTHEWS: Can you dismiss this as hate speech and negativity and debasing of the political process and at the same time have your campaign use the comments made by Ann Coulter to raise money? It's clearly part of your Web site e-mail campaign solicitation effort now. Two e-mails have gone out now to raise money off of Ann Coulter's attacks on you and your family. Do you think you can do both, attack her and exploit her?

J. EDWARDS: Here's what I think. I think that we can say to America that we're not going to tolerate this kind of behavior, we're not going to tolerate this kind of hate language and we're going to stand up and we're going to fight. And if we ask Americans, other good Americans to join us in standing up and being strong, there's nothing wrong with that. And that's exactly what we're asking them to do. And I hope there'll be lots of people who will join us in standing up and doing the right thing.

MATTHEWS: Have you raised a great deal of money? There was a report today that you've had your best, most successful e-mail hitting back at Ann Coulter that you've (inaudible) so far?

J. EDWARDS: We are raising money. I don't know the numbers. I hope they go up. I hope we get more and more people who join us in this cause, because this is important.

MATTHEWS: Do you think people should buy Ann Coulter's books?

J. EDWARDS: No.

MATTHEWS: OK. We'll be right back. That's a good answer. John Edwards. We'll be right back with John Edwards, who's coming on tonight to follow up on that incident here last night involving Ann Coulter and her very strong words, many people believe over the line, against the Edwards family. We'll be right back with John Edwards.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MATTHEWS: We're back with Senator John Edwards talking about what happened last night involving Elizabeth Edwards and Ann Coulter. How's Elizabeth doing?
 
J. EDWARDS: She's actually doing real well, Chris, but thanks -- first of all, thank you for asking. She's...

MATTHEWS: Well, you know we love her, or I love her personally, because she's the greatest person in the world and she battles with you as to who's the best of the two of you. She is a piece of greatness, I think. But that's my opinion.

J. EDWARDS: Well, I'm a little biased. I share your view. But she's doing real well. She's on her treatment. It seems to be going well. We're staying on top of it and monitoring her. She's out on the campaign trail, working hard.

MATTHEWS: Let me ask you about how you explain this kind of -- it wouldn't be a tit for a tat -- this nastiness the other night, to your older daughter, your college-age or actually law school-age daughter, Kate. How do you explain these kinds of things that happen in politics?

J. EDWARDS: You know, I think the truth is, Chris, I don't need to explain it to Kate. I mean, because I think she's extraordinarily mature for her age. She understands that these sort of things go on in politics, that you have to -- if you care about what we're doing -- as to what we've always -- Elizabeth and I have always taught our children: If you care about what you're doing, if you want to make the lives of other people better, sometimes, if you're going to do it politically, which is what we've chosen to do...

MATTHEWS: Yes.

J. EDWARDS: ... you're going to have to endure some attacks and be willing to stand up and fight back.

MATTHEWS: Yes. Have you heard from any of your colleagues? I mean, they're your colleagues, but they're also your rivals for the nomination. Has anybody stood up and said to you, "Don't let her get away with that," meaning Ann Coulter?

J. EDWARDS: No, but in fairness to them, I've been almost -- traveling almost nonstop since this happened yesterday. So I'm confident they will. I mean, as I said earlier in our discussion, the things that this woman has said about some of the others for the nomination are outrageous and have to be rejected.

MATTHEWS: Yes, what did you make of her attack on Hillary? She made fun of her build, her weight. She made fun of a couple of things. She made fun of Osama -- Osama, I'm sorry -- of Barack Obama's middle name, Hussein. What do you make of that, that sort of general invective you get from her now?
 
J. EDWARDS: Well, I think, first, as to Senator Clinton, this is demeaning and offensive to women at large. It's offensive to Senator Clinton, who's a terrific senator and a great leader in this country and a great role model for a lot of women. And for her to demean her that way is completely unacceptable. And Senator Obama -- I mean, here's an African-American man who's running for president of the United States who is in many ways a role model for a lot of young African-Americans in this country. And for her to make fun of -- first of all, it's something he has no control over, his name...

MATTHEWS: Right.

J. EDWARDS: And to make fun of and demean him in that way is just -- it's completely consistent with what we see from these crazies. And somebody has to speak out about it and stop it.

MATTHEWS: Yes. If we want everybody in the world whose name's Hussein to be our enemy, we are really stupid. Because there's millions of people with that name. Anyway, thank you. By the way, what's the reaction out on the road now? You've been campaigning, as you said. Are people rooting for you in this regard, are they mentioning it or what?

J. EDWARDS: Oh, yes. Yes. I've heard it a lot just since yesterday. People are very excited about the fact that we're standing up and speaking out about this hate-mongering. They want to see strength. They want to see us standing up and fighting back.
 
MATTHEWS: OK. Thank you very much. Senator John Edwards. Please come back. You're always welcome on "Hardball," as is the lovely Elizabeth. Thank you for joining us tonight.

J. EDWARDS: Thanks, Chris.

From NBC's Lauren Appelbaum

At the inaugural forum of the Center for a New American Security, Hillary Clinton gave a vast overview of her stances on international policy. In a speech that touched on numerous areas of her foreign policy experience and ideas, Clinton was critical of the Bush Administration's foreign policies, even making a joke at Vice President Cheney's expense. Her speech ranged from topics like Iraq and Afghanistan to China and Darfur.

She stated America must be the world's leader, but must restore its standing in the world in order to do so. She mentioned a big part in foreign policy is to renew alliances around the world and to work on the following issues: genocide, human rights, nuclear proliferation, and global warming.

On Iraq, she repeated her belief that it is time to bring the troops home. "Iraq continues to steal young American lives," Clinton said. She also said the president has been told by numerous generals and the Iraq Study Group there is no military solution to Iraq, only political, and said if the president does not change course, "any Iraqi government is condemned to failure."
 
The most significant threat, Clinton said, is nuclear proliferation. She said her administration would have a senior adviser to the president on this specific issue. And her speech also touched on Asia and Africa. In Asia, Clinton said its rising technological power may hurt America. In Africa, she called for a no-fly zone, and possible military action with NATO in Darfur if Sudan did not cooperate. She also said there are "good news stories in Africa."

From NBC's Jenny Anzelmo
Richardson

today spoke before the Center for National Policy in DC, where he outlined his views on Iran and the Middle East. His overall message was to engage Iran in direct talks with no preconditions and with no illusions. He believes that with the help of other nations -- especially Russia and China, which have more leverage with the country -- the US can begin to integrate Iran into the global community.

"In short the message to the Iranians must be clear: Work with the international community and you will be safe and prosperous. Continue to defy the international community and you will suffer." He also said that "no constructive dialogue with Iran is possible until we break the vicious cycle of suspicion and hostile, incendiary rhetoric. If we want Iran to improve its behavior, we would do well to stop threatening to attack them. And we should not fund Iranian émigré groups in the delusional expectation that they will somehow be able to topple the regime." 

Richardson applauded Condi Rice for "starting to break this ice." But he then went on to take a stab at the Bush Administration for calling Iran an "axis of evil" -- saying that would only continue to fuel hostility between the US and Iran. In order to move forward, Richardson said the US must "acknowledge this difficult shared history" with Iran, while encouraging the Iranians "to come out of the cold, and to build a more constructive relationships not just with the us, but also with the international community."

From NBC's Joel Seidman

Former GOP Tennessee Sen. Fred Thompson, speaking at a GOP gathering in South Carolina today, hit his usual core issues, tax cuts, and terrorism -- but also took an apparent shot at GOP front-runner Rudy Giuliani's checklist of things he says a president needs to do to be successful.Thompson, in what seemed to be a direct criticism of Giuliani, said, "The question is what are your underlying principles what do you believe in?" The still unannounced candidate went on to say, "Anybody can talk from a mental checklist of talking points. What do you really believe in? Where are you coming from?"

Giuliani in speeches has outlined six things he says a leader needs to be successful, and said he has identified 12 "commitments" to voters if elected president.

As you can probably tell, the enormous amount of traffic from the Edwards-Coulter post crashed our server a few times today. Most -- if not all -- of your comments should be posted by now. Thanks for your patience and understanding.

From NBC's Mike Viqueira

House Democrats are moving forward with a vote on de-funding the office of the vice president, even though it appears that Dick Cheney and his staff are backing off the claim that they are part of the legislative branch. Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D) says he will put forward an amendment tomorrow that would strip the $4.7 million funding Cheney's executive branch operations ($4.4 for the office of the VP, $300,000 for his residence at the Naval Observatory).

The vote comes on the annual bill that funds Treasury, the offices of the president and the vice president, and several other federal agencies.

As NBC's Kelly O'Donnell reported yesterday, Cheney's office has implied that they will no longer use the argument that they are part of the legislative branch as a means to avoid document security checks, owing to the veep's position as president of the Senate. Having said that, they are still stiffing the National Archives.

The veep's operations are also funded through the defense spending bill (Air Force II, etc.) and the legislative branch spending bill (president of the Senate). These streams will not be touched, for now. It's unclear whether Emanuel's measure will pass. It's still being written.

From NBC's Domenico Montanaro

Giuliani has a strong chance at the Republican nomination despite his social views, according to a new nationwide Fabrizio, McLaughlin & Associates poll, which challenges the conventional notions of conservatism.Giuliani not only leads the field among all Republicans, he also leads among what Tony Fabrizio calls "moralists," because they consider him a strong leader. And 60 percent of Republicans remarkably say they would vote for a candidate who is pro-choice if they agree with the candidate on other issues.

"Giuliani has an advantage in name ID," Fabrizio said as he delivered a Power Point presentation to unveil his group's findings among 2,000 Republicans in an effort to more clearly define the cross-section of Republican voters. "Twenty-nine percent of moralists say leadership qualities are more important than their issue positions. If he can hold 20 to 25 percent of the moralists, that will pose problems for someone who'll challenge him with that group."

Giuliani led the GOP field among all Republicans with 30 percent; McCain was next with 17 percent, then Thompson 15, Romney and Gingrich with 9.

"Moralists" were one of the seven segments Fabrizio separated out. The group constitutes about a quarter of all Republicans and focuses on issues like gay marriage, abortion, and prayer in schools. Giuliani is thought to have problems among this segment because he is pro-choice, has been married three times (once to his second cousin) and has dressed in drag.

But Giuliani led the field among moralists with 21 percent, McCain was next with 17, then Fred Thompson 13, Gingrich 11, and Romney 9. Eighteen percent though are still undecided.

"Many are still holding out their votes," Fabrizio said, "but I'm not sure the 21 percent know of his past or care. They see a guy who's a tough guy, who takes no crap. They say, 'That's my kind of guy,' and that's all they care about."

Fabrizio's poll challenges conventional wisdom on what "conservative" means by showing Republicans holding more liberal views than would be expected on everything from defense spending and social issues like abortion to gays in the military to whether or not Americans are entitled to universal health care. 

Even though 71 percent self-identified as "conservative" -- up from 51 percent when Fabrizio conducted a similar poll 10 years ago -- the majority of Republicans actually believe the party spends too much time on "moral issues" like abortion and gay marriage. In addition to the 60 percent who say they could look past the abortion issue, a third of moralists say they would as well.

On abortion
-Fifty-two percent believe abortions should be legal under certain circumstances.

On health care
-Fifty-one percent of Republicans agree that universal health care should be a right of all people. The moralists are also split on the issue.

On social welfare
-Half believe the government needs to provide a "helping hand" and safety net.

On gay rights
-Almost half of all Republicans favor gays serving openly in the military. Even four in 10 moralists think gays should be allowed to serve openly.

-Seventy-seven percent believe companies should not have the right to fire employees based on sexual orientation.

On global warming
-A third say the government isn't doing enough on global warming.

On defense spending
-Fifty-five percent say the government is spending enough or too much on defense.

On God and politics
-Fifty-two percent believe public policy should not contradict God's law, but moralists – who are overwhelmingly in favor of this -- drive this number.

From NBC's Mark Murray
Bill and Hillary Clinton aren't the only ones who will campaigning in Iowa over the July 4th holiday (July 2-4 to be exact). So will Barack Obama. His campaign just announced the Illinois senator will be in the Hawkeye State on July 3 -- as well as the next day, when his wife and daughters will join him.

From NBC's Shawna Thomas
First Read has written about Bill Clinton's fundraising email for his wife, as well as Elizabeth Edwards' newest one on Ann Coulter. Well, here are some of the other emails the campaigns are sending with the end of the second quarter rapidly approaching.

Huckabee's campaign has this: "Over the next weeks and months I will spend considerable amounts of time on the ground in Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina visiting with voters, listening to their hopes and concerns and sharing with them my vision for America," Huckabee says in the email. "You can be certain your contribution will be invested wisely to build a grassroots team in each state."

And since McCain doesn't rely on big money contributions from Washington lobbyist types, he's depending on you, the email states. "With your generous contribution today, we can thank John McCain for taking our side in the crusade against wasteful Washington. Your immediate support is needed to help us meet our goal of raising $3 million before midnight on Saturday."

From NBC's Lauren Appelbaum
After the Chicago Sun-Times earlier wrote about Obama's and Clinton's duel fundraisers in Chicago -- fewer than ten blocks away from each other -- the Clinton camp and the AP were all over Obama's comments first reported in the newspaper.

The comments that have remained in the news cycle still today are about Clinton's experience and fundraising, when Obama said "the only person who would probably be prepared to be president on Day One would be Bill Clinton, not Hillary Clinton," and that "the Clintons could raise much more money than us" because of their connections from when Bill was president.

But this was not all Obama had to say about the campaign, fundraising, and turf wars. Here, we'll provide you with the full context of Obama's statements.

On the issue of Clinton's experience, the Sun-Times also reported Obama said "we're all very qualified for the job," and then made a jab at Clinton by saying it was true in the '90's, like today, that the nation needs someone "to get beyond the politics that have bogged us down in the past." Obama went on to explain why he is the one qualified to do so. "I think that the message that we're delivering is that we can bridge some of the divides that have blocked progress on healthcare, have blocked progress on energy. That's what we're interested in. It's not repeating the same old fights but trying to bring about a new consensus that can move the country forward."

When asked if it is fair to say he questions Hillary Clinton's qualifications, Obama said no. "She's a very bright capable person. I'm sure she will be a fierce competitor throughout this primary process." Yet, he implied that even with these qualifications, she may not be the right person for the times. "We just think that we got a message of change that suits the times."

Obama did make it clear he did not mind Clinton's visits to his home turf in Chicago. "I was in New York last week, you know, so it's far play," Obama said. "If you tally what we've done in New York and what they've done in Chicago, I think we come out pretty well."

On the fundraising quote, Obama also said politicos and the media are making too much of both money and polls at this point. "It's very early and what really matters is the energy that's taking place on the ground," Obama said, referencing a walk for change where 10-thousand people volunteered to campaign door to door. "That's the kind of energy and enthusiasm that is measurable to us because that's going to translate into votes."

That evening, reporters also caught up with Clinton a few blocks away at Miller's Pub, greeting supporters, including a pregnant woman who had waited a few hours to shake the senator's hand. She worked the rope line, thanking the police officers, greeting them cheerfully. She did not give the media nearly as much time for questions as Obama did, but she said she really enjoyed being in Chicago. "It was wonderful being here, absolutely wonderful," Clinton said. "We had a great evening of events. It's just so upbeat and positive. I'm glad to be back."

Clinton was asked about Obama's response to home turf wars. Unlike Obama, she did not invoke her competitor's name but implied Chicago is not only Obama's home turf. "I think I'm running as a vigorous as campaign as I can, reaching out to as many people and of course, I have so many friends that I grew up here," Clinton replied. "They're still with me in every way, so it was great to see them."

From NBC's Mark Murray
As expected, we received this fundraising solicitation, via email, from the Edwards campaign regarding yesterday's Elizabeth Edwards vs. Ann Coulter showdown on Hardball.

The solicitation is from Elizabeth Edwards:"Dear Friend,last night I had an important talk with Ann Coulter and I want to tell you what happened. On Monday, Ann announced that instead of using more homophobic slurs to attack John, she will just wish that John had been 'killed in a terrorist assassination plot.'

"Where I am from, when someone does something that displeases you, you politely ask them to stop. So when I heard Ann was going to be on 'Hardball' last night, I decided to call in and ask her to engage on the issues and stop the personal attacks. I told her these kinds of personal attacks lower our political dialogue at precisely the time when we need to raise it, and set a bad example for our children. How did she respond? Sadly, perhaps predictably, with more personal attacks.

"John's campaign is about the issues-but pundits like Ann Coulter are trying to shout him down. If they will not stop, it is up to us cut through the noise. Help us fight back-please give what you can today. There are just over 3 days left to hit our $9 million goal for the end of the quarter. If we make it, we can directly reach voters in Iowa, New Hampshire, and all over the country with our detailed plans on the issues that matter. Please give what you can right now to help raise the dialogue and show that Ann Coulter-style politics will never carry the day.

"Why do Ann Coulter and other right-wing pundits keep attacking John? Because John's bold, specific plans hit them where it hurts: solving global warming, ending the war, building a fair economy -- John's agenda threatens everything these talking heads and their corporate cronies stand for. And they know John can win-just last week a new poll showed that John is the only Democratic candidate who beats all the possible Republican challengers-by an average of 13 points. So they are trying to take John down early. Their strategy is to sling mud and manufacture scandals-about houses, haircuts and anything else they can think of-to discredit John and take down our movement for change.

"The best way to beat them is also the right way-take our message of substance straight to the voters. And that is exactly what this campaign is all about. But we need your help to hit our goal. Please give what you can today.

"And thank you for all that you do to support this cause.
Sincerely,

- Elizabeth Edwards
Wednesday June 27, 2007"

From Chuck Todd, Mark Murray, Domenico Montanaro, and Carly Zakin
*** Squeezed: Anyone else sense that the walls are closing in on President Bush? Venerable Republican Sen. Dick Lugar, as well as fellow GOPer George Voinovich, is now calling for a change of course in Iraq; John Warner is close, too, apparently. While the Senate immigration bill Bush supports cleared an important hurdle yesterday, its passage is still in doubt, and the debate over it will only continue to alienate a large portion of his base. And even Cheney -- with his claim of not belonging to the executive branch -- is creating additional headaches for the White House. Of course, these three things (Iraq, immigration, and Cheney) have dogged Bush for most of his second term, and he continues to persevere, albeit with lower and lower poll numbers. But is this time different? Will we begin to see loyal Bush backers break away from Bush, like Matthew Dowd did back in April? Is this not just the "turning point" week on Iraq, but also the denouement of the Bush presidency?

VIDEO: Sen. Richard Lugar talks to TODAY's Matt Lauer after breaking ranks with the president on the Iraq war.

*** Lights, Camera, Action! Fred Thompson travels to Columbia, SC to speak at a state GOP event there, and he holds a media avail afterwards. His first three big events since he first began flirting with a presidential bid -- in Orange County, CA, at the Virginia GOP, and on Leno -- didn't exactly set the rooms on fire. Even at yesterday's appearance in Nashville, one supporter told the New York Times that he wasn't floored by Thompson. "It was the same thing he's said everywhere else, nothing new." Will today be different?

*** I Want My MTV...:  A New York Times/CBS/MTV poll finds that Democrats appear to be sitting pretty with Americans ages 17-29. More than half of them said they'd vote for a Democrat in next year's presidential race, and they are more likely than the general population to support government-run health care and gay marriage. (Yet interestingly, they are more optimistic about the Iraq war.) But will young voters actually show up in 2008? This suggests they might: "Fifty-eight percent said they were paying attention to the campaign. By contrast, at this point in the 2004 presidential campaign, 35 percent of 18-to-29-year-olds said they were paying a lot or some attention to the campaign."

*** Ambushed: With Ann Coulter appearing on Hardball yesterday, Elizabeth Edwards called into the show to blast Coulter for personal attacks on her husband and family. As the end of the second quarter rapidly approaches, anyone want to bet we see a fundraising email from the Edwards camp that highlights yesterday's exchange -- which, by the way, got played on TODAY?

*** Meaty Foreign Policy Speech Day: Both Clinton and Hagel give speeches at the Center for a New American Security, a new DC-based nonpartisan research institute. Meanwhile, Richardson is also in DC, where he addresses the Center for National Policy. Per Richardson's camp, the speech will be on Iran and how to prevent the country from acquiring nuclear weapons.

*** On The Trail: Elsewhere, Edwards raises money in Houston; Giuliani is in Pittsburgh; McCain and Romney both fundraise in New York City; Paul continues his round of off-beat interviews -- this time with the radio show "Mancow in the Morning"; and Tommy Thompson is in Iowa.

Countdown to the Ames Straw Poll: 45 days
Countdown to MA-05 Special Election: 67 days
Countdown to LA GOV election: 115 days
Countdown to Election Day 2007: 132 days
Countdown to LA GOV run-off (if necessary): 143 days
Countdown to Iowa: 211 days
Countdown to Tsunami Tuesday: 222 days
Countdown to Election Day 2008: 496 days
Countdown to Inauguration Day 2009: 573 days

The Boston Globe writes that Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick (D) will introduce the Democratic candidates at the Howard University debate in DC tomorrow night.

CLINTON:

Last night's Warren Buffett event raised the campaign at least" $1 million, according to the Washington Post. Now Buffett has NOT endorsed Clinton. "But he has already donated the maximum $4,600 allowed by an individual to Clinton's presidential campaign. Buffett called Clinton 'the person to run the country.' He has not donated to any other candidate, according to public records, although he has said he would also support Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) in a similar event." NBC's Lauren Appelbaum adds that Buffett said the American public will make the choice between Clinton and Obama. "I don't want to turn my back on either one of them. I think they're both terrific people," Buffett said, "but I think Hillary would make a wonderful president of the United States." Buffett did not answer yes when asked if Clinton is good for business, but he didn't say no, either. "I think Hillary Clinton is good for America. Anybody that's good for America is good for business." He continued to talk about Clinton's assets. "I've known her for a long time. I've admired her brains. I've admired her energy. I've admired the way she has carried out her job in the Senate. I think she would make an absolutely first class president. When she asked me if I would participate in an event like this, I jumped at the chance."

Newsday has followed up on blog reports about supposed push-polling (more like message testing) from the Clinton campaign via pollster Mark Penn, noting examples in Iowa that tested negative messages against Obama and in New Hampshire that tested Edwards negatives.

A quick follow-up to a post yesterday about Bill Clinton's fundraising email on behalf of his wife: We observed how Bill mentioned that Hillary turned down high-paying jobs out of law school to help children, which we noted is similar to what Obama says in his new TV ads. The Clinton campaign points out to us that Bill had said this about his wife earlier this month.

EDWARDS: Here's the transcript of Elizabeth Edwards calling into Hardball yesterday to take on Ann Coulter.

After taking her star turn on Hardball, she campaigned and raised money in Portland, OR.

OBAMA: Michelle Obama addressed the experience issue yesterday -- a day after Barack Obama himself addressed it. "'For people who say that Barack Obama is not experienced … I can't wrap my head around that,' Michelle Obama told hundreds of people crowded into the offices of the nonprofit Our Children's Foundation in Harlem. 'Yes, he's ready to lead,' she said. 'The question is: Are you ready? … Will you move out of fear, or will you move out of possibility?'" Michelle Obama added, "'What they are counting on is for us not caring . . . [and that voters will] stay at home.'"

It looks like the Obama camp wants some help from Buffett, too: "Warren Buffett is a great friend and an important force in the global economic community. We look forward to him helping out our efforts," Obama spokesman Bill Burton told the New York Daily News.

The GOP state senator who appears in Obama's first TV ads is getting a cold reception from some Illinois GOPers, the Chicago Tribune reports. But Dillard said he's not bothered. "'My caucus should thank me,' [he] said, 'for the last 48 hours of media attention, whether they realize it or not.'"

By the way, Obama quietly revised one of his new TV ads because Chicago-based Tom Balanoff, the president of SEIU Local 1, was in the original version of the ad. But Balanoff was worried his presence implied a national endorsement of Obama by SEIU and asked to be taken out. The campaign complied. 
 

RICHARDSON: Here's an excerpt of the governor's speech today on Iran: "As we know from the Cold War, deterrence is above all a matter of clarity and credibility. We need to be absolutely clear that a nuclear Iran is unacceptable, and we need to be absolutely credible when we say what we will do about it if the Iranians continue to disregard the will of the international community. The clear message must be this: develop nukes and you will face devastating global sanctions. Desist from developing nukes and you will receive meaningful rewards, including robust security guarantees and guaranteed supplies of nuclear fuel from abroad."

Richardson held one of his "job interview" events in eastern Iowa yesterday. He outlined what he would do in his first six days in office. "From day one to day six, he vowed to introduce plans to remove troops from Iraq after de-authorizing the war, mandate a reduction in greenhouse-gas emissions, ensure universal health care, update education curricula, reinvigorate the U.S. economy, and recover the America he claims 'we've lost.'"

GINGRICH: First Read has confirmed that Gingrich gave $17,500 to the Iowa GOP to purchase a box at the Ames straw poll. Officially, this is part of Gingrich's series of workshops on "transformation, how to reach out to all elected officials, not just presidential," according to Rick Tyler, a Gingrich spokesman. "It's a solutions-based approach to government and politics."
 
As far as whether or not this should be interpreted as Gingrich keeping his hat in the presidential ring, Tyler said, "Newt's been consistent and clear. He won't think about running until after September 29th. He's focusing on the early caucus and primary states, trying to shape the debate, and Ames is a great place to do it."

GIULIANI: One of the targets in Giuliani's speech at Regent University yesterday was Bill Clinton. Giuliani said "Clinton made a 'big mistake' when he failed to see the first World Trade Center attack as an act of terror rather than mere crime -- one that set the stage for even bigger and bolder attacks culminating with 9/11." At a later event yesterday, "Giuliani reiterated his criticism of Clinton over the first World Trade Center attack in 1993 and said Clinton's reaction was emblematic of a "decade of denial." But he also seemed to soften his criticism of Clinton, saying, "I'm not blaming anybody back then. What I am saying is, I do blame people after Sept. 11. Now you have to get it."

We received multiple copies of the following quotes from current and potential opponents of Giuliani. This is what Giuliani said in the fall of 2006: "The idea of trying to cast blame on President Clinton is just wrong for many, many reasons, not the least of which is I don't think he deserves it," Giuliani said in response to a question after an appearance with fellow Republican Charlie Crist, who is running for governor. "I don't think President Bush deserves it. The people who deserve blame for Sept. 11, I think we should remind ourselves, are the terrorists - the Islamic fanatics - who came here and killed us and want to come here again and do it."

The New York Daily News notes that Robertson was full of praise for Giuliani, stopping just short of endorsing.

The New York Sun: "The warm reception from a Christian conservative crowd signals an important benchmark for the Giuliani campaign, but, as the former mayor's critics are eager to point out, it does not necessarily translate into votes or indicate that social issues are receding in importance in the Republican primary."

NBC's Carrie Dann notes that during remarks at a Jewish temple in Rockville, MD later in the day, Giuliani criticized the inadequate international response to terrorism in the pre-9/11 world, saying that sluggish and soft responses to attacks around the world "reinforced the terrorist movement" through the 1990s. He again warned of a potential regional war in the Middle East if US troops draw down their presence in Iraq too soon, and he issued perhaps his gravest warning to date to Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.  "You are not going to be allowed to become a nuclear power. No how, no way," he said, adding that he would not fail to take the renegade leader's threats seriously.

Giuliani also sat down with CBN's David Brody for an interview that will appear on the "700 Club." Brody played a '93 clip for Giuliani from an interview he did with NBC's Tim Russert on Meet the Press.

RUSSERT: "Mayor-elect Giuliani will you press your party to change its platform to allow abortion rights and gay rights?"
GIULIANI: "Sure. I have already. (cut to ) I'd like to see the Republican Party have a broad base, reach out to everyone on the basis of equal rights."

Giuliani replied to Brody: "Right now, my view is the platform is the platform. A majority of the party gets to decide on that. I'm not going to interfere with that."

PAUL: NBC's Lauren Appelbaum says the Texas congressman appeared on G4 TV's "Attack of the Show" with host Kevin Piera on "The Loop" last night, taking live questions from the host and viewers -- who asked their questions via webcams. Paul addressed the impact the internet has had on his campaign, stating his lack of funds won't doom his presidential bid. "They say I don't have as much money but nobody has the spontaneity of the supporters that I have, which doesn't cost me very much."
 
Also yesterday, Paul compared two convicted New Hampshire tax evaders to Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr. The individuals are "holed up in their Plainfield, New Hampshire home and have threatened violence against federal officials if marshals come to arrest them," the AP reports. "They were convicted of an elaborate scheme to hide millions of dollars in income. Their protest has become a rallying cry for anti-tax activists and militia members."

ROMNEY: Today's installment of the Romney series in the Boston Globe focuses on Romney the family man. The piece opens with Romney as Chevy Chase, sort of. A sidebar focuses on the relationship Romney's father had with Nixon. Meanwhile, the campaign is sending out hints that instead of Romney authoring a presidential book, it may be his wife, Ann, who writes the campaign trail book.

There's a new YouTube floating around of Romney from '94, in which he apparently calls for the end of the U.S. Agriculture Department. Not surprisingly, this is something be spread around Iowa.

And the Florida Democratic Party passed around this email to reporters with Romney being in Florida yesterday. "The Florida Democratic Party today urges the state's political reporters who are covering former Governor Mitt Romney, Republican of Massachusetts, to be on the look out for paid campaign staff impersonating law enforcement officials who may try to inhibit your ability to cover Romney's frequent flip-flops."

F. THOMPSON: Did Thompson not act like enough of a candidate? Or is he simply trying to buy time? The New York Times writes, "Thompson, the potential candidate who lives in the Washington area, was characteristically coy as he touched down [in Nashville] for the first stop on a three-day tour that includes the critical early primary states of South Carolina and New Hampshire. Even as he looked every part the candidate — shaking hands, posing for pictures and signing autographs — he did not say as much, despite the day's agenda of scouting sites for a possible campaign headquarters and meeting privately with fund-raisers.

A who's who of Tennessee GOP politics showed up at the Thompson Nashville fundraiser yesterday.  The goal of $5 million by the end of the month is repeated in this clip.

Quinnipiac is out with its "swing state" polls (Florida, Ohio, and Pennsylvania). Giuliani leads in all three GOP primaries, but the lead is dwindling, with Fred Thompson now in second (or tied for second) in all three states. Clinton's lead over Obama is solid in all three, while both match up about the same in general election contests with Giuliani -- though the one state where Obama underperforms Clinton is in Florida.

Bloomberg's Salant examines the second quarter positioning and notes: "Thus far, the Darwinian money quest has divided the field into three main categories: leaders Obama, Clinton, Romney and Giuliani; laggards such as John McCain and John Edwards; and strivers including Bill Richardson, Chris Dodd and Joe Biden."

The New York Times: "By a vote of 64 to 35, the Senate decided on Tuesday to take up a revised version of a comprehensive immigration bill that was pulled from the Senate floor nearly three weeks ago." But: "The vote did not guarantee passage of the bill." The Washington Times adds that there are at least a dozen senators who have said that their 'Yes' vote yesterday was simply to begin the debate, and that they could vote to block the bill through a filibuster vote, or vote against it on final passage.

While the Senate moved a tiny bit closer to passing an immigration bill, the House GOP caucus held a vote yesterday indicating that just 23 members could support the Senate legislation. That's at least 40 members short of Speaker Pelosi's demand of 60-70 GOP votes before she'll bring the immigration reform bill to the House floor.

And the Los Angeles Times points out that while more Republicans decided to vote for bringing the bill back to the Senate floor, a handful of Democrats actually voted against doing just that.

The Washington Post adds Sen. John Warner (who praised Lugar's speech) and even Senate GOP leader Mitch McConnell to the list of senators changing their tone on Iraq.

Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), a supporter of the troop surge and the war, said he would wait until the September report to reassess the Iraq situation. But he added that when Lugar speaks, "everybody tends to listen."

The New York Times also notes that Sen. George Voinovich "echoed Mr. Lugar's message in a letter to the president on Tuesday, a critique whose timing was coordinated to follow on the heels of Mr. Lugar's. 'I am also concerned that we are running out of time,' Mr. Voinovich wrote in the letter."

Today's installment of the Washington Post's Cheney series documents the vice president's role in various energy and environments issues. And it concludes with the news that, essentially, Cheney drove ex-EPA head Christie Whitman into resigning.

From NBC's Mark Murray and Domenico Montanaro
The wife of Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards called into MSNBC's "Hardball" on Tuesday to confront Ann Coulter on her personal attacks on her husband and family. 

Coulter, the controversial conservative commentator, appeared on an outdoor set with host Chris Matthews -- and also with dozens of supporters and detractors waiting to ask questions. But there was another person waiting to pose a question to Coulter: Elizabeth Edwards.
 
According to an Edwards campaign aide, Elizabeth Edwards wanted to call into the show when she heard that Coulter would be taking questions, and she called a Hardball producer to get the phone number needed to dial into the show. The result is the exchange below:

Chris Matthews: You know who's on the line? Somebody to respond to what you said Edwards yesterday morning -- Elizabeth Edwards. She wanted to call in today we said she could. Elizabeth Edwards go on the line you're on the line with Ann Coulter

Elizabeth Edwards: Hello, Chris.

CM: You wanna say something directly to the person who's with me?

EE: I'm calling you … in the south when we -- when someone does something that displeases us, we wanna ask them politely to stop doing it. Uh - I'd like to ask Ann Coulter -- if she wants to debate on issues, on positions -- we certainly disagree with nearly everything she said on your show today -- um but uh it's quite another matter for these personal attacks that the things she has said over the years not just about John but about other candidates -- it lowers our political dialogue precisely at the time that we need to raise it. So I want to use the opportunity … to ask her politely stop the personal attacks.

Ann Coulter: OK, so I made a joke -- let's see six months ago -- and as you point out they've been raising money off of it for six months since then.

CM: This is yesterday morning, what you said about him.

AC: I didn't say anything about him actually either time.

EE: Ann, you know that's not true. And once more its been going on for sometime.

AC: I don't mind you trying to raise money. I mean it's better this than giving $50,000 speeches to the poor.

EE: I'm asking you

AC: Just to use my name on the Web pages…

EE: I'm asking you politely…

AC: … but as for a debate with me, um yeah, sure. Yeah, we'll have a debate

EE: I'm asking you politely to stop personal attacks.

AC: How bout you stop raising money on the Web page then?

EE: It didn't start it did not

AC: No you don't have cause I don't mind

EE: It did not start with that you had a column a number of years ago

AC: OK, great the wife of a presidential candidate is calling in asking me to stop speaking

CM: Let her finish the point...

AC: You're asking me to stop speaking stop writing your columns, stop writing your books.

CM: OK, Ann. Please.

AC: OK

EE: You wrote a column a couple years ago which made fun of the moment of Charlie Dean's death, and suggested that my husband had a bumper sticker on the back of his car that said ask me about my dead son. This is not legitimate political dialogue.

AC: That's now three years ago

EE: It debases political dialogue. It drives people away from the process. We can't have a debate about issues if you're using this kind of language.

AC: Yeah why isn't John Edwards making this call?

CM: Well do you want to respond and we'll end this conversation?

EE: I haven't talked to John about his call.

AC: This is just another attempt for –

EE: I'm making this call as a mother. I'm the mother of that boy who died. My children participate -- these young people behind you are the age of my children. You're asking them to participate in a dialogue that's based on hatefulness and ugliness instead of on the issues and I don't think that's serving them or this country very well.

APPLAUSE

CM: Thank you very much Elizabeth Edwards. Do you want to -- you have all the time in the world to respond.

AC: I think we heard all we need to hear. The wife of a presidential candidate is asking me to stop speaking. No.

From NBC's Lauren Appelbaum

When Fred Thompson arrived in Nashville this morning, he had a warm homecoming. Supporters greeted him with loud cheers of "Run Fred, Run." At another point, supporters started to chant "Fred, Fred, Fred." Some held home-made signs saying, "I'm Proud to be a Fred Head, FDT '08." The TV star and former senator signed a few.
 
Thompson recounted his decision to run for the presidency. "I've never craved the office of the presidency," he said. "You all know me well enough to know that. I've always been a Tennessean; I've always run in Tennessee. But these times are different and to have the opportunity maybe to make a difference ... in the direction of your country, and to be able to provide some leadership, is something that you cannot turn your back on."
 
At this point, a supporter in the audience yelled, "Your country needs you Fred!" The rest of the supporters continued to cheer for Thompson, who kept the visit short.

From NBC's Mark Murray
The comprehensive immigration bill in the Senate cleared its first hurdle this week when the "motion to proceed" picked up 64 votes today (it needed 60 to move forward). However, as NBC's Ken Strickland has reported, the actual heavy lifting begins with votes on amendments that could affect the core elements in the bill -- and that could determine whether or not it eventually passes the Senate.

Here are some interesting tidbits from today's 64-35 vote in the Senate:
-- All presidential candidates, Democrat and Republican, voted for the motion to proceed (Biden, Brownback, Clinton, Dodd, McCain, Obama)
-- 24 Republicans voted for it (Bennett, Bond, Brownback, Burr, Coleman, Collins, Craig, Domenici, Ensign, Graham, Gregg, Hagel, Kyl, Lott, Lugar, Martinez, McCain, McConnell, Murkowski, Snowe, Specter, Stevens, Voinovich, Warner)
-- 9 Democrats voted against it (Baucus, Bayh, Byrd, Dorgan, Landrieu, McCaskill, Rockefeller, Stabenow, Tester)
-- the independents were split: Lieberman voted for it, while Sanders voted against it.

From NBC's Mark Murray and Domenico Montanaro

Bill Clinton won't hit the campaign trail for his wife until next week, but he's already pitching in -- at least electronically -- to help boost Hillary's second quarter fundraising numbers. In an email solicitation that just arrived in our inboxes, Clinton says 1) that Hillary's opponents might outraise her; 2) that she won't let Swift Boat-like attacks go unanswered; and 3) that she turned down high-paying jobs out of law school to help children -- which is similar to the message that Obama tries to get across in his first TV ads.

"Come June 30, all the campaigns will be measured on what they raised in the last three months. We have to raise more online before then to show her strength and keep her campaign going," Bill says. "The fact is, our opponents may very well outraise us -- and we can't afford to lose momentum now."
 
More: "She's also the best candidate to beat the Republican machine. You know Hillary will never let a swift boat-style attack go unanswered. Even when they outspent her two-to-one in her Senate campaign, she still came out on top -- in a landslide. And when she ran for reelection, she won almost 60 percent of the votes in New York counties that went for President Bush in 2004. When Republicans saw what she did, instead of what her opponents said about her, they voted for her too."

And: 'When I met her more than 35 years ago, I thought Hillary had the best combination of mind and heart I'd ever seen -- and I still do. But it's going to take every dollar to make sure that Americans get to know the real Hillary, like I do."

From NBC's Domenico Montanaro

The Edwards campaign said they originally planned to go on the air the week after July 4th, but "we're running ahead of our budget plan, so we decided to get on the air," Deputy Campaign Manager Jonathan Prince said on a conference call with reporters. They call this a "strong buy," but did not elaborate except to say, "You're going to see it a lot if you're in New Hampshire," Prince said.

Edwards raised $14 million in the first quarter -- third in the Democratic race behind Clinton ($26 million) and Obama ($25.7 million). The campaign says their goal for this quarter is $9 million, which would again be behind Clinton and Obama, who are widely expected to raise upwards of $20 million each. Edwards could potentially find himself doubled in campaign cash, but his campaign says the goal all along has been to raise $22 million by the end of the second quarter and $40 million by the end of the year.

But Edwards has been consistently third in national and most New Hampshire polls. So, the question becomes, is being ahead of their budget enough?

"It's pointless to worry about who's in the lead" in June, said Edwards adviser Joe Trippi, who was Howard Dean's campaign manager in 2003-2004. "We know what our message is. We want to start getting that message out in a powerful way. In New Hampshire, look, we don't want to be third. We want to start making our case on television. We've made it on the ground, and we're taking the next step."

From NBC's Carrie Dann
Sportswriting legend Grantland Rice once famously opened his story about a 1924 football game with the line, "Outlined against a blue-gray October sky, the Four Horsemen rode again."
 
He was definitely not describing any members of Congress.
 
Last night's annual Congressional baseball game -- won by the Republicans (for the seventh straight year) 5-2 -- definitely didn't feature any athletic performances of Horsemen-like proportions.

After all, Washingtonians don't pile in to DC's RFK stadium -- the temporary home of the washout Washington Nationals -- because they expect no-hitters or grand slams from their elected officials. There's a certain undeniable fun to be had in watching our nation's revered officeholders drop a pop-up fly or wildly overthrow to second base.  With apologies to MLB Hall-of-Famer Sen. Jim Bunning (R-KY-3.27 ERA), we didn't elect them because they can play baseball.

The Dems actually had a 1-0 lead, but it all went south for the Donkeys in the third inning. They committed five errrors in the inning -- three by shortstop Rep. Adam Smith (WA) -- which led to four GOP runs. Rep. John Shimkus (IL) then shut down the Democrats, tossing a complete-game, five-hitter. He struck out four and walked just two. Zach Wamp (R-TN), who was solid at shortstop, was tough to stop at the plate, going 2-for-3.

Although he wouldn't have been wowed by the athleticism on the field, however, the notoriously literary Rice would have been floored by the game's metaphorical undertones.

Wonky sports analogies flowed as freely as Miller Lite into the cups of the young Hill-types who came to cheer on their party-of-choice. The Democrats sported impressive new talent and a meticulous game plan, but suffered embarrassing individual errors and disorganization on the field. The Republicans, for their part, sustained their early victories with tough defense and a deep team-wide understanding of the rules of the game. Runners frequently got burned when they tried to steal a base. And so on, and so on...

(For those gleefully imagining the likes of Ted Kennedy and Hillary Clinton at the plate, a clarification: with the exception of Sen. John Ensign (R-NV) and frosh Sherrod Brown (D-OH), the rosters of both teams were filled out entirely by House members. So if you want to see highly recognizable "heavy-hitters" who "go to bat" for their "base" you'll have to settle for First Read's analogy-laced coverage of today's immigration debate.)
 
Even more than the knickerbocker-clad members of Congress on the diamond, the fans provided plenty of fodder for metaphor-lovers. With the trash-talking GOPers crowded along the first-base line, and the vengeful Dems packed on the left-field side, only a sliver of seats remained behind home plate for the few clusters of bipartisan colleagues.

When a Democratic loss began to look inevitable, more moderate fans quietly left to beat the rush back to their home districts -- uh -- Metro stops. Dueling choruses of cheers and profanity erupted when the Jumbotron zoomed in on Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who appeared in the stands mid-game to observe her team.

"Wow," observed one Republican staffer. "We can't even get The Wave to go across the aisle."
 
Republicans have been dominant ever since Hill rag Roll Call started the annual tradition in 1962. But compared to the double-digit routs during their years in the majority, a game that looked dicey after a line drive by the diminutive Rep. Linda Sanchez (D-CA) might have come a little too close for comfort for the GOP.

Pelosi, for her part, appeared smilingly unfazed by a Republican victory. Perhaps she was busy wondering who will be the victors outlined against a blue-gray November sky next year.