Hochul pick shows Western New York’s got clout

The selection Wednesday of Kathy Hochul as Andrew Cuomo’s running mate for his gubernatorial re-election bid it somewhat telling.

Despite what some will tell you, Cuomo’s re-election is pretty much already in the bag. Rob Astorino might be a nice guy, but he’s not going to be governor unless Cuomo somehow implodes in the next few months.

That’s not to say that Cuomo hasn’t made his share of gaffes. And it’s not to say that he doesn’t have his detractors. But the race is his to lose and he knows it. He also knows he could have chosen just about anyone other than Vladimir Putin as a running mate and gotten re-elected. I have it on good authority that Putin was on Cuomo’s short list, but got scratched when he got banned recently from Mighty Taco, by the way.

I digress — as usual.

Moral of this story is that Cuomo didn’t select Kathy Hochul out of political need or expediency. He was either genuinely interested in Hochul or genuinely interested in Western New York. Maybe both.

Making Hochul’s selection all the more interesting is the potential that Cuomo is eyeing higher office. While it hasn’t been discussed recently, he was rumored to be interested in 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. Whether that’s true, I have no idea. Personally, I don’t see a Democrat from New York winning the presidency, but I also didn’t envision a black man from Chicago doing it, either, so all bets are off.

If Cuomo were to leave office for any reason, be it a White House win, to have time to campaign for the spot, or a good old fashioned Albany scandal, Hochul would step in and be the new governor or New York. Understand, the governor of New York would be from the Buffalo area. It would also be a woman. How it is that New York hasn’t had a female governor yet, I have no idea, but we haven’t.

Obviously a Gov. Hochul would shift some state priorities to our part of the state. Heck, even a Lt. Gov. Hochul would do the same. That’s not to say, mind you, that Robert Duffy hasn’t taken an active role in Western New York. The former Rochester mayor has done more than simply pay lip service to the region. And it’s been nice to see. But I feel Hochul would do even more.

So to sum it all up, Cuomo didn’t have to pick a Western New Yorker, but he did anyway. He knows that there’s a possibility he might not serve a full term and is willing to hand over Albany’s primary position of power to someone from this end of the state. And the rest of the Democrats in the state don’t seem to have a problem with it.

Yeah, the selection of Kathy Hochul says something. And it’s good for Western New York.

Scott Leffler likes corn. He likes cornflakes, corndogs, corn bread and cornstarch. He likes the band Korn and popcorn. He likes all kinds of corn. All kinds of corn! He’s also corny on Twitter sometimes @scottleffler.

Prison perks sound like a great idea

As much as I love my job as a writer and editor, sometimes I think I may have missed my calling.

I’ve often considered going back to school for psychology. I’ve always considered myself insightful and empathetic, two characteristics which seem to me to be perfect for a career as a counselor. Also, as bad as I am at heeding advice, I’m really good at giving it. I feel like I can see issues clearly and come up with peaceful resolutions — as long as they don’t involve me.

The biggest problem with my dream of saving the world as a psychologist, though, is that nearly 20 years out of university, I’m still not done paying for the degrees I have. So paying for additional schooling right now is out of the question.

But behold, Gov. Andrew Cuomo has swooped in with a plan that would help me get free college from one of 10 accredited universities in the state. All I have to do is go to prison.

Now, don’t get me wrong, I’m not built for prison life. I’m much too pretty. But … free college? Maybe it’s worth looking into.

Like any middle-class underachieving male, I’ve occasionally thought about robbing a bank and running away to some tropical paradise — like Amherst, for example. But the downside of getting caught meant going to jail. Now, it would appear, Gov. Cuomo has sweetened the pot.

See, if I rob a bank and run away to Amherst, I’ll be set for life, living the posh lifestyle with my private tennis court and allowing my children to go to Williamsville East High School, which will allow them to get jobs in law firms and whatnot.

And if I get caught, I’ll get free room and board for a while and can continue my education all on the taxpayers' dime. Plus I’m sure that many of my “dorm mates” will be kind of messed in the head, so I’ll get all sorts of practice psychology while in the joint and can immediately open my own office when I leave in 3-5 years — with good behavior.

What a sucker I’ve been working all these years in hopes of paying off my college loans. If I had the prison-to-practice option when I was looking at colleges, I may have given serious consideration to the whole bank-robbing thing in 1992. To think, I could have been living in Amherst all along. Or at the very least, I’d be there by now.

Some people oppose the governor’s plan, saying that it’s unfair for law-abiding citizens to have to pay for school while convicts get it for free. They’re missing the point, though. They choose to be law abiding citizens. They could be convicts too if they tried hard enough. Just because they don’t have the work ethic to try to rob a bank doesn’t mean they should hold that against those who do.

Scott Leffler is a writer and editor who has actually dreamed of a career in psychology. The rest of this column may be facetious. Follow his new bank-robbing career on Twitter @scottleffler.

Medical marijuana doesn't go far enough

Last week Gov. Andrew Cuomo made a lot of headlines with his State of the State Address. Different things stuck with different people, but the one that most caught my eye was the topic of medical marijuana.

The governor reached into the books to find a law from three decades ago that gave him the ability to — by executive decree — allow as many as 20 hospitals across the state to dispense marijuana to people with certain severe illnesses as an “experimental” research project.

I put “experimental” in quotes just because it’s funny.

According to Cuomo, people with cancer, glaucoma and possibly some other "life-threatening or sense-threatening" conditions could seek to get marijuana through studies based at hospitals yet to be named, with "stringent research protocols and eligibility requirements."

Cancer and glaucoma are specifically named. Other than that, it’s a crap shoot. What about all the other things that doctors and scientists have said medical marijuana could help with? What about multiple sclerosis, a subject near and dear to my heart? What about epilepsy, Tourette's, arthritis, asthma, Crohn’s disease, migraines, nausea, eating disorders? What about anxiety or restlessness? What about people who just plain feel better when they smoke a joint?

New York has a reputation for being a wacky liberal state. We’re bluer than blue. But it wasn’t until a few years ago that gay marriage was recognized here. And we’re still trying to figure out legalizing medical marijuana when 19 other states (and the District of Columbia) already have it on the books. There are two states — Colorado and Washington — that have OK’d it just for pleasure.

How can we possibly be behind Colorado and Washington?

I want to applaud Gov. Cuomo for making a first step, assuming that’s really what he is trying to do. I’d like to think that a guy name Cuomo would have a radical liberal agenda to turn us all into pot-smoking, tree-hugging, gay-marrying hippies. But I doubt it.

Cuomo is getting his ducks in a row to decide whether to run for president. He’s thinking that if Hillary Clinton doesn’t run, he might have a chance. But in order to have a chance, he can’t be the radical liberal that he probably really is.

To hear some people tell it, even allowing medical use of marijuana will send this country straight to chaos. It will lead to human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together — mass hysteria. A majority of those same people probably think it’s always noon because that’s what their VCR tells them. And they’d also likely vote for Strom Thurmond for president — even though he died 10 years ago.

In other words, the opposition to legalized marijuana is fading. The governor should lead on the topic, not be dictated to by national polls, which I feel is the real basis for his current position.

Scott Leffler is not a pot-smoking, tree-hugging, gay-marrying hippie. He just thinks other people should be allowed to be. Follow him on Twitter @scottleffler.

Random thoughts on state of society

The debate over health care in this country has gone from bad to worse, with accusations bandied about by both sides, saying that the GOP hates women and that the left hates religion.

Personally, I think both sides might be oversimplifying the issue a bit and everyone needs to step away from the microphone until cooler heads prevail.

I can say this however: Few things sicken me more than the number of people who hate in the name of their God. I say “their God” instead of just “God,” because it’s obviously a different God than the one I know.

Using religion as a means to attack someone just seems to go against everything religion is supposed to mean. It’s as though some people’s Bibles only came with the book of Leviticus. None of that feel-good New Testament stuff. It’s maddening.

•••

The Republican race for the White House continues to muddle along, ever closer to what almost looks like a guaranteed brokered convention. As you may know, I’m a Ron Paul fan, but he doesn’t have a snowball’s chance, so I basically don’t have a horse in that race. Come April 24, I won’t be able to vote in the New York primary, but I have to imagine it will actually count this year, something it seldom does.

•••

My oldest daughter was telling me the other day that she’s scared for the future because she’ll be voting in four years, but doesn’t know anything about the current race for the White House. She then named the four GOP candidates and stated briefly what they stand for — or at least what they are perceived to stand for.

Personally, I don’t fear for the future. I fear for the present because my 14-year-old daughter who considers herself uninformed knows more about the contest than most of my adult friends.

•••

I’ve long suggested that there should be an entrance exam to the voting booth complete with five basic questions about the candidates themselves. They should be factual questions that anyone who’s voting would know the answer to. Your grade on the exam would be equal to how much your vote counts. If you get only one question right, your vote only counts 20 percent. If you get them all right, your vote counts 100 percent. This would ensure that the most important decisions made in this great nation of our are being made from those in the know.

Unfortunately, it’s not that way and everyone’s vote counts the same meaning our decisions are being made by the dumb masses.

•••

I understand political expediency and the art of compromise, but I’m disappointed that Gov. Andrew Cuomo caved on his promise to veto the legislative district lines if they were not drawn by an independent (non-partisan) panel. As such, we are doomed to 10 more years of near-guaranteed incumbency protection.

The same people who have gotten us into the mess that we’re in are pretty much a shoe-in to keep us wallowing in the same mess for another decade.

Big brother is "keeping us safe"

The news can be a scary thing.

Take, for instance this report from Sunday, which noted the growing popularity of unmanned (drone) aircraft designed to give a birds-eye view of the ground. Widely used by the military to monitor the ground movements of foreign and terrorist troops, these spy planes and helicopters are gaining use in the states by both government and private corporations.

I’m actually less concerned about businesses using these little tech toys than I am about what the state may do with them.

I read a story the other day that noted that citizens of London are caught on a security camera hundreds of times per day on average. While London is widely known to be the most spied-on city in the world, what’s to say that New York, DC, and even Buffalo isn’t next?

After all, we also found out last week the the New York (City) Police Department had made a habit of infiltrating college campuses in order to watch the activities of Muslim groups. They even came all the way to the University at Buffalo to see what we had going on in our neck of the woods. If the NYPD can spy on us in Buffalo, there’s not much to prevent the feds from doing the same, is there?

Of course, we already have traffic light cameras. Despite the protests of several citizens groups and the NYCLU, these little snap shooters have been quietly installed around Western New York under the guise of “keeping us safe.”

Tell that to London. According to a recent report, there's been little or no change in London's crime rates since all those closed-circuit cameras were more widely installed in the mid 1980s. In nearly 30 years, despite having 51,000 spy cameras strategically located around the city, crime rates are about the same.

If only they had every criminal’s DNA, like Gov. Andrew Cuomo is asking for.

The governor is seeking an “expansion” of the “database” of criminals’ DNA. This was the way the governor’s office worded it. And nearly every news agency in New York State reported it as such using the phrase “database expansion.”

Google the phrase “database expansion” and you’ll get hundreds of hits — all related to this story.
When you think of “database expansion,” though, do you think of the compelled (forced) plundering of the biogenetic makeup of our fellow citizens? Or does it sound the fresh new catchphrase at an accounting firm?

It’s already the case that anyone who is found guilty of a felony has to surrender a DNA sample. This “expansion” would include all misdemeanors. Any conviction. Period.

Law enforcement has come out in support of this, understandably so. But I’ve been amazed at the lack of opposition to this plan. The idea of the state owning a piece of what it is that makes me “me” is downright frightening. I’d like to be self-owned, thank you very much.

When the state can track our every movement and literally owns a piece of us, what does that make us? Property? Pets?

Of course, they’re doing so under the guise of “keeping us safe.”

Maybe we should just be grateful to have an “older sibling” who is so concerned about our safety.

Gov. Cuomo needs to stay on point

Governor needs to stay on point (suggested headline)

I want to like politicians. I really do.

Most election days, I’m disappointed, but hopeful that whoever it is we duly elected will do their job and save the world — or at least our small part of it.

Candidate Andrew Cuomo scared me. After all, he’s a Cuomo. He’s his father’s son. And truth be told, his father is one of the large reasons I went to school out of state — with no real plan to ever return.

Life’s funny that way and about 12 years ago, I moved back to New York. But that’s beside the point.

When Andy Cuomo was inaugurated as governor, I hoped that my earlier opinions on him were wrong. I hoped he would be a strong governor who would make good decisions and get us out from the fiscal mess that we were in and dysfunction that seemed prevalent in Albany.

Just over a year into the younger Cuomo’s first term, however, I’m beginning to think that either he doesn’t want to be governor or he has no idea what the job is supposed to entail.

Maybe I’m jaded, but from my perspective, the state of New York — with Andy Cuomo at the helm — accomplished only one thing in 2011. That accomplishment is the tax cap. And I say accomplishment in an ironic tone. The governor’s best idea of how to save us money in 2011 was to tell entities he didn’t control (school boards, towns, villages and cities) that they couldn’t raise taxes higher than 2 percent. That’s akin to petroleum companies holding a press conference to protest the price of milk and eggs. It would be laughable if it didn’t pass.

Last week in the governor’s State of the State address, Cuomo said he’s taking on a new job. He’s going to be an advocate for the kids. In fact, Cuomo went so far as to say that he’s going to be the only advocate that kids have.

According to the governor, school kids in New York state don’t have anyone looking out for their interest. Teachers are in it for teachers, he says. And school boards are in it for school boards. Thank goodness the kids have Andy to look out for them.

Understandably, this position was not favorably viewed by teachers and school administrators. In fact, many of them were rather irritated. And who could blame them?

A few years ago, county legislatures in the area jumped on this “schools cost too much money” bandwagon. It was much easier for them to complain about other taxing entities than to try to rein in their own. That talk seems to have quieted somewhat and they’re back to complaining about state mandates — now that the state is focused on them.

My position with them was the same as my position with Governor Cuomo. If you’re so interested in how school disticts operate, give up your elected position and run for school board.
I’m not saying that our school system is perfect. But that’s beside the point.

There are more than enough problems that Andrew Cuomo could be focusing on that are actually under his control. Instead he’s doing nothing more than finger pointing in order to shift the focus away from the heart of dysfunction in New York state — Albany.

Schools just don't seem to get it

You would think that for all their college degrees and the fact that they’re teaching our children, school administrators would be an intelligent bunch.

I’m kind of wondering, though, due to the stories I’ve been reading about all the school budget workshops and meetings, if that really is the case.

The state’s education system got rocked when Gov. Andrew Cuomo told every single school district in the state that they’re getting less money due to statewide belt tightening. Every school district locally has been told that they’ll be getting less state aid next year than they did this year.

Of course, the school boards have done their obligatory whining, which I would expect. Then they dug in deep and cut programs and salaries, like they need to. Or, at least that’s what they said they’ll have to do. But not before almost every school district said they’d be digging into their reserves in order to preserve as much as possible.

This is the part that confounds me ... the digging into the district reserves, also known as the “rainy day fund.” It seems like their thought process is if they can just get through this year, everything will be OK and they can go back to taxing and spending and hire all the teachers back and restore all the programs, etc.

Except, my understanding is that this isn’t a matter of it being a rainy day. This is the way things are now. The state is not going to pony up as much money as it has been because of the dire financial straits it is in. And next year, the cuts may be deeper, even.

I know I said previously that I thought it cheap that Cuomo’s two best ideas for saving money were a property tax cap and a limit on superintendent’s salaries. That still remains true. But many of the correspondences I’ve gotten in the past week pointed out — and correctly so — that school districts are out of touch with reality.

One prime example last week came to me from a friend of mine, who happens to serve on a school board. This friend advised me that two of her school board colleagues had suggested that they jack taxes up as high as they can get away with this year, before the property tax cap becomes a mandate.
Because obviously the answer to all our prayers is higher taxes.

I pointed out that these were school board members, right? The smart ones. The ones running the show. The ones deciding how our children should be educated.

If the high taxes don’t get you, the rampant stupidity will.

Savings need to start in Albany

As much as I appreciate the governor’s efforts to save us money, lately his focus seems to be aimed in the wrong direction.

With a $10 billion budget gap, Gov. Andrew Cuomo has decided that the best thing he can do for us is tell local school districts how much money they can spend and what they can spend it on, proposing a property tax cap and salary limits on school superintendents.

As much as I love the concept of my local school districts not taxing me to death, it’s not the governor’s decision to make. Those school budgets come before the voters and we always have the option of turning them down, which we do often.

And as much sense as it makes to me that school superintendents should make less than the state’s chief executive, that’s another thing that shouldn’t be up to that chief executive. If Andy Cuomo is so interested in how school districts run, maybe that’s the job he should have gone out for instead of governor.

Personally, I want Andrew Cuomo making as few decisions about my school districts as possible. The state meddles in the affairs of other government agencies way too much. And frankly, if the state would cease some of that meddling, those local school taxes wouldn’t be as high as they are to begin with.

The multitude of governments we have to deal with is already frustrating. The interaction between those governments makes it downright infuriating. If the federal government would worry about federal things, that’d be awesome. And if the state government would stick to state things, that would be equally fantastic. And that would make it so much easier for our towns, villages, cities, school districts, counties, etc., to do their jobs.

It’s akin to working for a mega conglomerate corporation and having six different bosses, each of them telling you to do something different. Or having your mother tell you to take out the trash right now while you’re trying to bring in the wood that your father told you to bring in. It’s simply impossible to serve two masters. Especially simultaneously.

The power to control your school districts lies in your hands. And if you let Andy Cuomo take that power from you, you will never get it back.

So as much as you may like the idea of saving on your property taxes, you should tell Andrew Cuomo to stay out of your school district’s affairs. And as much as you may think that your superintendent is overpaid, for the sake of simplicity, tell Andy Cuomo to stick that idea in the circular bin ... or wherever you want to tell him to stick it. I don’t judge.

•••

As an unrelated side note, I’d like to wish a prosperous retirement to a friend and former colleague of mine. WLVL’s news director, John Raymond, called it a career last week.

Radio has been good to John. And John made for some great radio.

He made me laugh at times. And he made me livid at times. But I enjoyed working beside him for the better part of seven years.

I’m certain I’m not alone when I say, John Raymond, you will be missed. Thanks for the memories.

What about the other guys?

One week from today we head to the polls to choose – among other things – the next governor of the great state of New York.

Most of you already probably know who you're voting for. Like the vast majority of New Yorkers, you'll be voting for one of the candidates of the two major parties. You knew this before the candidates were announced.

The Democrats will be voting for Andrew Cuomo and the Republicans will be voting for Carl Paladino. There will be some exceptions, of course, but for the most part, that's how it will go down.

There are others out there, though, who aren't sure who to vote for yet. The thought of another Cuomo in office scares you. Maybe this one has actually figured out how to tax the oxygen in your lungs. His father was pretty close to figuring that out. And Paladino makes you nervous, too. He's a bit of a loose canon. What might he do if actually elected?

There's been some clamoring on the internet over the last week, asking for a debate between just Paladino and Cuomo. Ever since the circus that was the only gubernatorial debate, the Paladino camp has pushed for a debate between just himself and Cuomo, claiming that people deserve that debate.

Something tells me that it's the Paladino people clamoring for this format because their guy was outshined during the last debate. They want a chance to siphon votes off of Cuomo, who holds what appears to be an insurmountable lead over their guy.

I feel like I know plenty about Andy Cuomo … and Carl Paladino. The last thing I want is a debate between just the two of them. Then again, I already know that I won't be voting for either one of them. I realize this puts me in the minority.

I'd prefer to see a debate between the five candidates we don't know as much about. Now, maybe you feel like you learned enough about them during the first debate and subsequent media coverage since, but compare that to the media coverage we've gotten about Carl and Andy for the past several months. It's a pittance.

I'd rather hear more from Kristen Davis, the former madam who got Eliot Spitzer in all that hot water. I know she wants to legalize prostitution (which I agree with), but I'd like to hear more.

I'd prefer to hear more from Jimmy McMillan, who thinks the rent is too damn high and says you can marry your shoes. He seemed a bit off, but he deserves to be heard.

I'd like to hear more from Howie Hawkins, the Green Party candidate who delivers packages by day. How would he lower our taxes?

I should be able to hear more from Charles Barron, the Freedom Party candidate and New York City Councilman. How exactly would slapping the closest white guy to him help our situation?

And of course, I'd like to hear more from my party's candidate, Warren Redlich. We seem to agree on a lot, but if he's such a good Libertarian, why is he actually a registered Republican?

Unfortunately, my five person “also-running” debate is unlikely. So I'll have to do what I always have to do come election time. I'll have to do my own research and come to my own conclusion.

Those of you who aren't yet sure who you're voting for should do the same. And it probably wouldn't hurt those of you who already know who you're voting for, either. The Democrats and Republicans got us into this mess, don't forget.

On the role of media ...

The role of media is to tell the story without becoming part of the story..

This is conventional journalism wisdom and I say sometimes it's hogwash.

Last week, New York Post Editor and talk show host Fredric U. Dicker got into a heated argument with gubernatorial candidate Carl Paladino over accusations Paladino made against his opponent Andrew Cuomo. This led to Paladino accusing Dicker of working with Cuomo … and eventually telling Dicker – who refused to back down – that he would “take him out.”

Many learned journalists would say that Dicker had crossed the line and should have backed down from the argument after Paladino refused to answer the question Dicker had asked. Dicker should have been content with going back to his desk and writing, “Paladino refused to answer the question,” they would say.

It is a popular school of thought that as journalists, we are there to record events for posterity sake, but shouldn't interfere with what's going on too much – kind of like Marty McFly in Back to the Future. If we do interfere, it will disrupt the space time continuum and the whole world will instantly turn to dust. Or something like that.

I say as journalists, we are there to get the story. And if we have to get our hands dirty a little and get involved in what's going on to get the story, then so be it.

Investigative reporters – the kind you see on the TV news confronting slumlords and whatnot – couldn't do their job without being part of the story. They knock on the door with the TV cameras behind them, sticking those cameras in the faces of the “alleged” slumlords and start asking some tough questions.

I see it as akin to a lawyer asking a judge if they can treat a witness as hostile. I'm not sure if that ever happens in real life or only on TV shows, but it sure is compelling. People sometimes take the same tone with others when they can't get an answer by asking politely. They berate the answer out of them. It might not be pretty but it works.

Well, it works sometimes. Dicker got thrown out before he could get his answer.

Both Dicker and Paladino are unrepentant about the situation, each claiming the high ground.

“People understand where I'm at," Paladino told the New York Times. "They want someone who will fight for them -- they don't want someone who's going to back down."

Paladino's right. I do want that from my politicians. But I also want it from my media. I want someone who's not going to back down and let the person they're attempting to interview dictate the terms of the story. I don't want “no comment” to be good enough.

No journalist worth their salt would let a source edit their story for them. It's just not intellectually honest. But by running away from someone who doesn't want to answer a question, they're basically allowing them to edit it before it's even written.

I'll be honest. That is what I try to do here, after all. I'm being somewhat hypocritical. I've accepted “no comment” on dozens of occasions. Maybe hundreds. I've gone back to my desk and typed it, feeling defeated with every click of the keypad. But I don't have the kind of gumption to get up in a guys face and demand answers the way Dicker did last week.

That's why we need to respect guys like Fred Dicker. We can't always count on the story “coming out.” Or the other candidate forcing the issue.

The role of media is to tell the story. But in order to tell stories, you need to have answers to questions.

Run Carl Run ... but why?

Politics to me is a sport. And I'm a fanatic just as many are sports fanatics. I'm not just interested in who wins or loses the game, I'm enthralled with the play-by-play and the locker room interviews … and even the cheerleaders.

One of the things I find most compelling in politics is what makes a candidate decide to be a candidate. Specifically, I'm always intrigued to see what makes someone jump into a race they're pretty sure they can't win.

Now in sports, this is easy. The league determines the schedule and you know that every so often all teams end up playing each other. The Bills are a perennial candidate, kind of like Ralph Nader. They can no easier opt out of playing the Patriots than Nader could say “no” to another publicity filled run for president.

The Bills do it because it's required. Nader does it because he's full of himself. Those two are easy.

But what makes a guy like Carl Paladino run for governor? This thought had been plaguing me for a while. Then I heard my friend Chris Smith talk about it on a recent podcast hosted by another friend of mine – and former colleague – Brad Riter.

Chris is a very bright guy and gets politics better than most. Begrudgingly, I might even say he understands politics better than yours truly. And I endured four years of schooling and tens of thousands of dollars in loans studying the topic.

But enough about Chris and enough about me. Back to Carl Paladino, the Republican-ish candidate for governor who has only a slightly higher chance of winning than you do. And I probably don't need to remind you that you're not on the ballot.

Some people run knowing that they'll lose because their political party has offered them a job after they lose. The party wants to save face by having a candidate. The party also wants to make the other candidate spend money. And there's always a chance that the other guy - who everyone knows is going to win – does something really stupid and loses. This does not describe Carl. He created his own party and has no need for a government or political job.

Some people run knowing that they're going to lose in hopes of increasing their profile for another race in the future. Their first run is strictly to get their name out there so that two years from now when people go to the voting booth, they say, “hey, this name looks familiar.” This also does not describe Carl. He has no interest in running for anything else. He just wants to be governor.

Some people run knowing that they'll lose because they want to inject their ideas into the system. As a candidate it's easier to get your message across. Hopefully someone with some authority will pick up your ideas and run with them. This doesn't describe Carl either. He hasn't exactly released a platform of things he wants to accomplish. His whole message is “I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it anymore.” It's kind of hard for someone to pick that up and run with it.

The best I can figure is that Carl Paladino is running for governor because he likes the attention. And I think he enjoys playing spoiler, having effectively neutered Rick Lazio's candidacy. There's also the possibility that he thinks he can win, but I doubt it.

Basically, Carl Paladino is our own home-grown Ralph Nader.

Hey, look, I'm mad as hell, too. And I'm not looking forward to four or less years of another Cuomo … or Rick Lazio. But I also can't vote for a guy who has poor judgment (his email fiasco) and no real solutions.

So to those of you with the orange “mad as hell” yard signs, do us all a favor and take them down. You're just enabling him and feeding his addiction.

Plus, you look silly.

Oh goody, another Cuomo

It was brought to my attention earlier this week that Andrew Cuomo, son of Mario Cuomo, will be our next governor.

This wasn't the worst news I got this week, but it was close.

I was no fan of Cuomo the elder. Kind of like I was no fan of Bush the elder. And then came George W. Bush, who somehow made his father look like a compassionate genius. The cynic (read: journalist) in me fears
that Andrew Cuomo will make me pine for the days of Mario, just like George W. made me pine for the days of George Herbert Walker.

And yet, Andrew Cuomo's acceptance speech was rather uplifting. He said we need to balance the budget without raising taxes. He said we need to eliminate bureaucracy. He said we need to get rid of some of
the four million special districts (only a slight exaggeration) we have in New York State.

I couldn't disagree with any of these things. And I'm sure you couldn't either. Of course, if wishes were horses, beggars would ride. And if Andy Cuomo were capable of accomplishing those things, the
three governors who sit between him and his father would have, too.

Fact of the matter is that New York is broken from the top down and the bottom up. And the pessimist (read: voter) in me isn't entirely sure that it can be fixed. Ever.

Cuomo pulled one stunt that I like, though. He chose Rochester Mayor Robert Duffy as his running mate. This will give his administration a Western New York perspective while preventing Buffalo Mayor Byron Brown from advancing his career.

A few things to point out:

First of all, I know Cuomo's selection by the Democratic Party doesn't really make him governor … yet. But, come on. The state GOP is rudderless. I have as good a chance of being governor as any of them. And I'm not running.

Second, I know that “technically” Rochester is not in Western New York. But whoever decided that Western New York was eight counties not including Monroe is an idiot. It's probably the same person that starting calling up “upstate.” I'm just saying.

Third, I'm sure I just offended some Byron Brown fans, including some friends of mine who work for the guy. If they can give me one example of something good he has done, I'll volunteer to campaign for him to run as a third party candidate.

Fact of the matter is, Cuomo is going to be governor and Duffy is going to be LG. If they owe you favors, call them in now.

I hope that the new governor is capable of controlling spending and reigning in bureaucracy and eliminating waste. But I'm not going to hold my breath any more than I did when Spitzer became governor. Or when Paterson took over from him.

Governor's a tough job. Only the best and brightest can be successful at it. Unfortunately, the best and brightest are too smart to want it. So we'll give it to the son of a guy who wasn't very good at it when
he held the job.

Come to think of it, this actually was the worst news I got this week.

Way to aim low, New York.