There's really no question that New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer will become his state's next Governor. He'll win the Democratic primary over Tom Suozzi as well as the general election against either Bill Weld or John Faso. But one factor seems certain to liven up the race to replace Pataki -- the Green Party candidacy of author Malachy McCourt.

McCourt, the Brooklyn-born, Ireland-raised author, actor, and radio host, strikes me as being slightly more serious than the last celebrity candidate to run for Governor of New York on the Green Party line. In 1998, the Green nominee was 'The Munsters' star Grandpa Al Lewis, who was actually pretty widely recognized as a social activist in New York City, where he shared the airwaves with McCourt on local Pacifica station WBAI.

With such a blowout election expected, progressives interested in the issues McCourt is championing -- namely abolition of the death penalty and shutting down nuclear power in New York -- will likely not shy away from voting Green. Since the point of McCourt's run seems to be restoring automatic ballot access to the state's Green Party, it's quite likely that his campaign will be successful.

If the race between Spitzer and his challengers gets any closer, McCourt could wind up playing the Nader 2000 role, but that's doubtful. In order to put the Greens back on the electoral map, McCourt only needs 50,000 votes, which shouldn't cut into Spitzer's total significantly. In other words, Malachy McCourt may be a great guy, but he's no Kinky Friedman.

There's more...

When I first learned that the Nassau County Executive Tom Suozzi, a Democrat, was entertaining the idea of challenging Attorney General Eliot Spitzer for the Democratic nomination for Governor of New York, I thought he was probably just trying to make waves to raise his profile. And then I learned that Ken Langone, a billionaire Republican financier with a serious grudge against Spitzer, was one of Suozzi's main cheerleaders. I hoped Suozzi wouldn't take the bait.

Unfortunately, Suozzi did take the bait, officially announcing his candidacy last week. Even more unfortunately, Sen. Chuck Schumer -- another beneficiary of Republican Langone's largesse -- decided to throw his weight behind Suozzi, as well. In researching Langone's financial support of Schumer, it struck me that he'd also supported William Weld, then the Governor of Massachusetts challenging John Kerry for his Senate seat. This is notable as Weld has since moved to New York and is pursuing the Republican nomination for the governorship of that state. It's an eyebrow raiser, to say the least.

But according to the New York Observer's blog, The Politicker, Langone may not be the only enemy of Spitzer's actively backing Suozzi. Nicole Brydson reports that questions are being raised about "campaign donations [Suozzi] received from individuals tied to First American Title Insurance, now under investigation by Eliot Spitzer."

Now, I should make something clear here. I am not opposed to primaries. It makes me a little uncomfortable when people view any debate within the party as a bad thing. However, in this case, I question why Suozzi's in this race. Is it really to help shape the debate? Or is he allowing himself to be used by powerful interests to bloody Spitzer for the general election? Because I think Suozzi's a promising Democrat, I can't stand the fact that I think it's the latter. Based on the evidence however, that's the impression I'm left with.

In his campaign announcement speech, Suozzi said that "New York needs an independent leader who owes nothing to the insiders and the lobbyists and answers only to you." That's great rhetoric. But when he accepts support from a fellow Democrat's most crooked enemies, it certainly doesn't seem to match the reality.

I've often wondered where the Republican Party goes post-Bush. Can they hold their neoconservative/corporate/social conservative coalition together without one centralizing figure at the top? After eight years of Bush in the White House, I think the American electorate is going to be looking for a change. (Hey, they seem to be ready after only five.) One of the dynamics we're seeing emerging now is Bush becoming something of a punching bag for Congressional and state Republicans. Witness as one example Republican governors joining with their Democratic colleagues in  criticizing the administration on both cuts to the National Guard and the UAE ports deal.

Earlier this month, the governors signaled their displeasure with the Pentagon's new budget -- which called for a reduction in National Guard troop strength -- by sending a letter of protest. That brought a quick decision to rescind the proposed cut. But governors said they still have many questions about what the Pentagon is planning.

Idaho Gov. Dirk Kempthorne (R), who met earlier with Rumsfeld and encouraged him to speak with all the governors at the NGA meeting, said states may not be able to respond adequately to natural disasters or terrorist attacks at home if the equipment shipped to Iraq with National Guard units is not replenished and if other Guard funding is reduced. "This is a formula for disaster," he said in an interview yesterday. ...

The port issue has drawn criticism from Republican and Democratic lawmakers.

Huckabee said the governors association would take no official position but said elected officials in both parties were justified in challenging the administration, given the outcry over the agreement.

But make no mistake, no one should accept this as proof of actual independence. After all, the Republican governors still need Bush's money.

Republican governors and gubernatorial hopefuls briefly put aside worries that Bush administration stumbles could hamper their chances with voters this fall to address a more immediate concern: the need for cash to fund their races.

A swank crowd of Republican governors and supporters from corporate America and elsewhere gave President Bush a rock-star welcome as he headlined a Monday night reception that added $9.6 million to GOP campaign coffers for fall gubernatorial races.

"I thank you for your steadfast support," Bush told the audience gathered in the stately National Building Museum.

Some have wondered if the administration had been deliberately allowing Republicans further down the food chain to loudly go after Bush as needed if it suits them politically. It's not the most advanced jujitsu, but sometimes it's hard to tell with this administration where the incompetence ends and the tactics begin. I'm still not sure one way or the other, but it's telling that the Republicans are only willing to distance themselves just so much from the leader of their party.

There's more...