Obama outraised Hillary by $10 million. Yes, $10 million. That's 50% more than she raised.

Wow. This is truly impressive:

Sen. Barack Obama outraised Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton by $10 million in second-quarter contributions that can be spent on the Democratic presidential primary contest, aided by the contributions of 154,000 individual donors.

Obama's campaign on Sunday reported raising at least $31 million for the primary contest and an extra $1.5 million for the general election from April through June, a record for a Democratic candidate.

Clinton's campaign announced late Sunday that she had raised $21 million for the primary. With general election contributions added, aides said her total sum would be "in the range" of $27 million. Candidates can only use general election money if they win their party's nomination.

Obama's whopping amount ensures his place as a top contender for the Democratic nomination. It steals the spotlight from Clinton, his main rival. And it establishes the two of them as the fundraising juggernauts of the entire presidential field.

Last week, the masters of spin at the Clinton campaign put out the word they had raised $27 million for the second quarter. They did. But -- and this is a big but -- what they neglected to mention was that $6 million of that was for the general election, not the primary. With all the resources Clinton has at her disposal (including Bill Clinton as we're so often reminded), Obama seriously outraised her for the quarter -- by 50%.

Clinton still has the lead in the national polls. She still has more name recognition -- and after 16+ years in the spotlight, that's undeniable. Name recognition matters in these early national polls, but I still maintain early national polls don't matter nearly as much as the early state-by-state polls. "Electability" questions continue to dog Clinton, no matter what Mark Penn says:

Earlier today, Howard Wolfson, the communications director for Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign, said in a memo: "As [Clinton strategist] Mark Penn likes to say, people always ask 'can Hillary win?' but he has never had this asked of someone who is already winning. This week's national polls underscore that observation."

But those polls only tell part of the story. According to a new Mason-Dixon survey, given exclusively to NBC/MSNBC and McClatchy newspapers, Clinton is the only major presidential candidate -- either Democrat and Republican -- for whom a majority of likely general election voters say they would not consider voting. In addition, she's the only candidate who registers with a net-unfavorable rating.

In the poll, 48% say they would consider voting for Clinton versus 52% who say they wouldn't.

The Democratic front runners have plenty of money. There's a long way to go til real voters actually make decisions. This could get ugly. It shouldn't, but it could. And who knows what's out there to shake it up. Plenty, I suspect. Read More......

Lugar's exact quote

"Withdrawal of the majority of American troops in a calm, orderly way over the next few months." Read More......

Lugar calls for withdrawal of majority of US troops from Iraq over the next few months

This is huge. And it's actually a hell of a lot more than Lugar called for only a few days ago when he gave his speech on the Senate floor. As we noted before, Lugar is probably the most learned Senate Republican on foreign affairs issues, and he is not one to challenge George Bush, or anyone else, publicly on anything. The fact that he is speaking up, loudly and repeatedly, means any support Bush has in Senate for his Iraq policy is fast crumbling. More from CBS.

UPDATE: You can watch video of Lugar's appearance here (click then scroll down to find the video). Read More......

Joe Lieberman caught lying about Iraq today

I was watching Lieberman go off on ABC's THIS WEEK about how successful the surge in Iraq has been, and I remembered a roundtable discussion 2 weeks ago on the same show in which ABC's Martha Raddatz obliterated the very arguments - the very Bush administration talking points - that Lieberman is now "coincidentally" using. Here's the side by the side of the two interviews (the entire video is under a minute).

Click To Play

It's clear to me, from Lieberman's interview, that in the long term he's not remaining in the Democratic party. (Yes, I know, he's an Independent and not a Democrat. But he caucuses with the Dems.) He was clearly briefed by Bush White House officials for today's ABC appearance, and he has no problem using their talking points - on the same show today he even accused the Democratic candidates of being bad on "national security," a classic Bush talking point: "I would say that Democratic candidates, in the larger questions of American security, have been disappointing." What Lieberman means, I think, is that the Democratic candidates aren't willing to give Israeli national security a higher priority than American national security.

This man has no intention of continuing to help the Dems. He's going to become a Republican, and we need to get more seats in the Senate so that we can afford to tell Lieberman to take a hike. (The only reason Lieberman doesn't walk now is because he's a committee chair on the Democratic side. On the Republican side, he'd be in the minority, and thus wouldn't chair anything.) Read More......

Obama tops $30 million in second quarter

From ABC

ABC News' George Stephanopoulos Reports: A source close to Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., says his presidential campaign raised more than $30 million during the second quarter, which ended yesterday.

That figure tops Obama's haul during the first quarter of the year, when he reported raising $25.8 million.

Official figures have not yet been released by Obama's rivals for the Democratic nomination, although the campaign of Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., had said it expected to raise about $27 million during the quarter, and the campaign of former Sen. John Edwards, D-N.C., had publicly set a goal of $9 million.

Read More......

Sunday Talk Shows Open Thread

The themes today look like the out-of-control U.S Attorneys scandal, the out-of-control Dick Cheney, the out-of-control war in Iraq and the loss of the immigration bill. In other words, it's the usual discussion about the abject failure of the Bush presidency. The usual issues, the usual players. Heavy representation of Repubs., including Lieberman, to defend Bush's record:

ABC's "This Week" - Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff; Sen. Joe
Lieberman, I-Conn.

---

CBS' "Face the Nation" - Sen. Richard Lugar, R-Ind.

---

NBC's "Meet the Press" - Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt.

---

CNN's "Late Edition" - Chertoff; House Majority Whip James Clyburn, D-S.C., and Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y.; Lanny Davis, former Clinton special counsel; Ben Ginsberg, former counsel to the Republican National Committee; former national security adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski; former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger.

---

"Fox News Sunday" - Chertoff; Michael Gallagher, conservative talk radio host; Mark Green of Air America Radio.

I trust there will be plenty of fodder. So be ready. Read More......

Big Food thinks it might be a good idea to test products from China

I don't know, do they really think it's necessary to sell food and worry about what they are including on the box? Profit is profit and paying attention to the potentially deadly chemicals might negatively impact the bottom line and then what happens? Consumers are so fussy these days, wanting un-tainted food that doesn't include banned chemicals and wondering if their dog or cat might die if it eats some high priced pet food. C'mon people, their are executive bonus' to think about here.

With everyone complaining about wanting safe food, Big Food says they are now testing. Aren't we all lucky to have such thoughtful companies on our side? What would we do without them? Read More......

UK police detain 2 more in Glasgow incident, raise alert

Counter-terror forces in UK are linking the Glasgow incident with the car bombs in London but few details so far. Meanwhile UK terror alert raised to highest possible level, critical, suggesting imminent attack. Unlike the infamous DHS/Tom Ridge pre-election alerts that brought fear to Americans and votes for the GOP, this is probably legitimate. Read More......

New Middle East peace envoy, Blair, rips UK Muslims

The man who has struggled to win support among UK Muslims, who is now the Middle East peace envoy continued on his path to alienate the remaining Muslim supporters back home. Blair is ill equipped for this new role and is only complicating the situation. He manages to wrap nonsense and distortion around some valid points. The interview is chock full of classic Blair, with attacks on the big bad meanies who take exception to his half-truths.

The 800 pound gorilla in the room that Blair completely skips by is the racist tendencies in the UK that contribute to these problems. There's plenty of blame to spread around in all communities, but how can you fix a problem if you can't even admit a core factor in the problem? Admittedly the UK does a better job than most in Europe with integration but that's not saying much considering the racial strife and the "they should be happy with the two day old crust of bread that we give them" attitude across Europe. The strangest part of the interview is when Blair criticizes his own programs.

'The reason we are finding it hard to win this battle is that we're not actually fighting it properly. We're not actually standing up to these people and saying, "It's not just your methods that are wrong, your ideas are absurd. Nobody is oppressing you. Your sense of grievance isn't justified."'

Hmm, so he was PM for 10 years yet he "didn't fight it properly"? Huh? Well, why not? If he botched all efforts so badly for 10 years as PM, how does he intend to be successful now when he has no firm position other than a coalition and consensus builder as peace envoy? Sheesh, I hope he stands down today so we can find someone who might actually have a clue because he's going in circles. Blair wants to remove the "peace" aspect of being a peace envoy.

Blair finishes the interview by pushing back on critics of the police state apparatus that he has launched during his term, linking those programs to deporting terrorists, which of course is not the issue that has infuriated people. The issue has been his trashing of civil liberties for an entire nation, policing their every move, law abiding citizen and terrorist alike.

The UK has a very difficult problem that needs to be addressed collectively so verbal attacks - shocking for a peace envoy, really - only encourages more division and more isolation from a community that is already feeling isolated. His frustration with the problem is understandable (though one might imagine a clearer understanding after 10 years as PM), but this tirade does nothing to help bring communities together and that is what everyone needs these days. Read More......