I have to admit, I’ve been following the D.C. Madam case, if only because it’s bound to be a trainwreck once the numbers in her little black book start getting traced back to their sources. I’m willing to bet there’s a number of anxious lawmakers in Washington, including Senator David Vitter of Louisiana, the first lawmaker to be linked to the D.C. Madam. What’s interesting - but not necessarily surprising - is the spin Senator Vitter put on the situation:

“This was a very serious sin in my past for which I am, of course, completely responsible,” Vitter said. “Several years ago, I asked for and received forgiveness from God and from my wife in confession and marriage counseling.”

What’s really ironic about Senator Vitter’s situation is the fact that he vowed during his 2004 Senate campaign to protect “the sanctity of marriage.” Apparently protecting the sanctity of marriage doesn’t apply to his own marriage - just to same-sex couples who are looking for some small measure of equality. I wish I could say I’m surprised that a Republican was the first lawmaker to be caught up in the D.C. Madam scandal, but I’m not, because time and time again it’s been proven that Republicans are great at talking the talk when it comes to moral issues, but they’re not quite as good at walking the walk. Senator Vitter now joins the ranks of hypocrites like Representative Mark Foley and Reverend Ted Haggard as disgraced moral crusaders who were revealed to be nothing more than self-aggrandizing hypocrites.

So over at the Badger Blog Alliance, some folks are in an uproar because Governor Doyle wants oil companies that do business in Wisconsin to actually pay some taxes. So as I’m surfing the internets, I happen upon the BBA, so I decide to share my thoughts with one of the poor misguided souls over there, and needless to say, I’m more than holding my own.

I’m sure mass amounts of hilarity are about to happen!

CNN is reporting that Senator John McCain’s campaign has had yet another lackluster quarter for fundraising, raising just 11.2 million dollars, down from the 13.6 million dollars he raised during the last quarter. As if that’s not bad enough news for the McCain campaign, it’s being reported the campaign’s cash on hand is somewhere around 2 million dollars. This recent fundraising letdown has led to a prompt reorganization of the McCain campaign, with at least 50 staffers being let go. This is the second round of layoffs for the McCain campaign, a grim reminder of how far he’s fallen since his days as the presumptive frontrunner for the Republican presidential nomination. Senator McCain now trails Rudy Giuliani, Mitt Romney, and Fred Thompson in most of the polls that matter, and I can’t help but wonder if we’re watching the dying breaths of a floundering campaign.

Personally, I’m glad to see Senator McCain’s campaign faltering, because something about him always bothered me. I’ve always taken issue with Senator McCain trying to paint himself as a maverick within the Republican Party (anyone remember the Straight Talk Express from the 2000 campaign?) when in all reality he’s as conservative as just about any member of the United States Senate. I’m glad that Senator McCain’s finally been exposed as just another typical Republican, and I can’t help but laugh at how his blind devotion to George W. Bush’s handling of the War in Iraq has led to the inevitable demise of his campaign. Perhaps Senator McCain should have been a little more of a maverick when it came to Iraq - if he had, perhaps he’d find his campaign on more solid ground.

So according to pretty much every news source out there, Barack Obama has raised nearly 33 million dollars since April, breaking - no shattering - the previous record for money raised in a three month period by a Democratic Presidential candidate.

Obama’s good fortune seems to have come at the expense of John Edwards, whose campaign could only pull in roughly 9 million dollars. Folks over at the Edwards campaign have already begun spinning things, insisting they’ve had a “great quarter.” Now I don’t proclaim to be an expert on the inner workings of a presidential campaign, but it would seem to me that raising 5 million dollars less in the past three months than you did in the three months prior isn’t a good sign, especially when coupled with news that the guy right above you in most polls pulled in roughly 6 million more in the same period of time. What it’s starting to look like is that Obama’s finally starting to suck support (and dollars) away from Edwards, whose campaign seems likely to stall and fall into the second tier of candidates.

Speaking of the so-called “second tier” of Democratic candidates, the CNN report I happened to read noted that Governor Richardson’s campaign brought in at least 7 million dollars since April, which is roughly a million dollars more than the previous three months. This is yet another bad sign for the Edwards campaign, and as a Richardson supporter, I’m glad to see he’s starting to close the gap between himself and John Edwards. If Governor Richardson can manage a better than expected showing in either Iowa or New Hampshire, coupled with a solid showing in Nevada, he could be poised to present a viable and sensible alternative for folks who might not be sold on HRC or Obama, both of whom have serious flaws as candidates.

So I’ve done a lot of thinking about who I plan on supporting for the Democratic nomination for president in 2008. There’s a lot of really great candidates in the race - a fact that makes choosing just one a bit difficult. At first glance, I was tempted to pick a frontrunner like Hillary Clinton, John Edwards, or even Barack Obama, but none of those three made me want to go out and work to help get them elected. After all, I want to support a candidate who excites me, and while each of the “Top Three” certainly are charismatic in their own individual ways, they just don’t have what I’m looking for.

And that brings me to Bill Richardson. Now here’s a candidate I can get behind. He’s essentially pretty moderate (as am I), and he’s got a proven record of success as governor of New Mexico. Add to that his foreign policy experience, as well as his sense of humor and speaking style, and you’ve got a candidate tailor-made to win a national election, especially against a more conservative Republican. This is a candidate who’s got a record of lowring taxes, being friendly to unions, and supporting universal healthcare, all of which are issues that are near and dear to my heart.

I know some folks on the far left of the Democratic Party are reluctant to support a centrist like Richardson, but the reality here in America is that most folks wouldn’t put themselves on the far right or the far left of the political spectrum; most folks would identify themselves as being moderates. That’s why we need a moderate like Bill Richardson in the White House, and that’s why I’m supporting Bill Richardson in 2008.