‘America’s Mayor’ apparently is going to bypass a run for the NY governorship and turn his sights toward ousting Kirsten Gillibrand (who was appointed to the seat vacated by Hillary Clinton).

Here’s the story from the WaPo:

After months of relative quiet regarding the political future of former mayor Rudy Giuliani (R), the New York newspapers have exploded this afternoon with reports that not only has he decided not to run for governor in 2010 but that he plans to enter the Senate race against Kirsten Gillibrand instead.

Maria Comella, a spokeswoman for Giuliani, released a statement insisting that no decisions — about the Senate or governors races — have been made; “When Mayor Giuliani makes a decision about serving in public office, he will inform New Yorkers on his own,” added Comella.

According to conversations with several Giuliani insiders, the Mayor has not made up his mind yet although a run for either governor or Senate is not likely. Interestingly, a Senate bid appears to be the more likely choice if Giuliani decides to get back into the political game, note the sources.

This is definitely an interesting turn of events. It looked like a Giuliani-Cuomo match-up was developing in New York (notwithstanding Cuomo having to challenge incumbent David Patterson). But from the sound of it, Rudy is opting to go for the presumably easier seat to win.

Honestly, for Republicans this is probably the preferable choice. The Senate seat is needed far more than the governor’s mansion considering what this administration and the Democrats in Congress are trying to foist upon us.

One thing is for certain – a Rudy senate run only makes 2010 that much more interesting.

Cross-posted at CMNJ.

So, what say you Lib media? Bill Cosby? Maureen Dowd? JIMMY CARTER? Are the Democrats all racists for opposing David Paterson and telling him to get the heck out of the way? Or can only Republicans who oppose a black man be racist?

ALBANY, N.Y. – Gov. David Paterson isn’t scrapping his plans to run for the office he inherited 18 months ago despite growing pressure from Washington and intervention by the Rev. Al Sharpton, who has contacted the governor and the White House over his concern.

A senior Democratic adviser close to Paterson said Sunday that the state’s first black governor is still planning to run and is focusing on the state’s fiscal crisis. The adviser spoke on condition of anonymity because he wasn’t authorized to speak for Paterson.

The governor’s office has refused to comment since reports Saturday night revealed the Washington-based effort to persuade the governor to drop out of the 2010 race. That would pave the way for the far more popular Andrew Cuomo, the state’s first-term attorney general.

The Rev. Al Sharpton said Sunday on his radio show that he has spoken to the White House and Paterson about his concern that Democrats do what is best for the people of New York. He wouldn’t say whether he was advising Paterson to drop out.

Obama has not spoken to Paterson about the race, said a senior White House official who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss the sensitive political matter. But it’s no secret that Democrats — in New York, in Washington and at the White House — are very concerned about Paterson’s re-election bid.

The White House has not ordered Paterson to leave the race and would not do so, the official continued, saying only the governor can make the decision about what’s right for him, the party and the state. But Obama’s concern of losing the governor’s office in such a key state has been communicated to Paterson and his advisers, the White Office official said.

Another senior Democratic adviser in New York said those seeking Paterson’s withdrawal are suggesting he could land a Washington job in the administration. The adviser spoke on the condition of anonymity because the official wasn’t authorized to speak for Paterson or the New York congressional delegation.

Read the rest HERE.

Cross-posted at Conservatives with Attitude!

Gov. Deval Patrick and four Democratic governors called on the president-elect to include $250 billion to support schools pre-K through college in the $1 trillion economic stimulus package.

“We think it’s critical to have a safety net investment for education,” said Patrick. “Schools are the one transformative investment that lifts people out of poverty and long-term reliance on the safety net. States have made tremendous progress in raising standards and in education reform and none of us wants to lose ground during this recession.”

In a conference call with reporters Patrick, Ted Strickland of Ohio, Jon Corzine of New Jersey, Wisconsin’s James Doyle and David A. Paterson of New York, the governors outlined three major categories for the infusion of cash: infrastructure for shovel-ready projects, money for essential services such as Medicaid, welfare and food stamps and school funding – pre-K through college.

So, Corzine, et al, claim they want $1 trillion buckeroos to help their state’s economies during recession but they want to take a full 1/4 of that – $250 billion – and allot it to pre-K through college education?

Certainly enabling our young people to obtain a quality education is a worthy goal – and the merits of spending that much on education are a debate for another day – but it is hardly a stimulus for the economy to buy new desks for little Johnny and little Jane. Moreover, money shouldn’t be a factor in “raising standards” or “education reform.”

Let’s take this again for what it is: a group of Governors unwilling to make the really hard choices for their state’s budgets, after having spent far too much, and now simply waiting for a handout from Obama when he takes office.