Notes - March 4

- Well, with the wedding closing in, time is becoming increasingly scarce, and I'm getting more and more distracted. My friend Bob just called. While I remembered to bet his horse Foolish Bid at Philly Park on Saturday (4th place), I completely forgot about his Primal Peak today ($26.20). Oh man.... But Bob gets not only the winner's share of the fat $31,000, but another 40% by virtue of the horse being a PA-bred. So, not too shabby at all, and congratulations!!

So, posting continues on a when-able-to basis (though I will of course find time to go to the Rangers-Icelanders game tonight). Thanks to everyone for all the comments on the Filly Friday post. It's obviously a topic which elicits quite a lot of passion, though mostly from those opposed. The more supportive comments are of a "give it a chance" nature. My personal opinion remains that the true championship races should be billed as such, distinguished from the newer races which do not warrant that status, and run, if not on the same day, at least on days on which a lot of people can watch and participate.

However, I also do appreciate that the Breeders' Cup is trying to do something, and I'm certainly willing to give it a chance, as Chip Tuttle requested. (Full disclosure demands that I point out that I worked for the Breeders' Cup last year....and that I'd love to do so again in the future if they'll have me....though I guess not at the cost of my rubber-stamping their decisions, which I also must point out that, to their enormous credit, they've never asked nor required me to do.) Regular readers know that I feel that an effort to get people involved in the races, via online handicapping/selecting contests, would be a wonderful way to expand the sport's appeal. I hope to find some time to respond specifically to some of the commenters, but please feel free to keep them coming.

- When Governor Spitzer took office, he declared with much fanfare that he would strictly limit campaign donations to him to $10,000, far less than the $55,900 permitted by law, as part of his drive to clean up Albany. “I think this is unprecedented....I do not know of another instance where others have acted unilaterally," he said at the time.

But the NY Times reported on its front page today that donors are easily skirting that limit - and with the Governor's help. In the drive to take the Senate from the Republicans, donors are being encouraged to also donate to the state Democratic Party, which Spitzer also controls.

Mr. Spitzer’s aides acknowledge encouraging contributors to give to both accounts, but say they are abiding by the law and the governor’s pledge, while trying to match the bare-knuckle politics of state Republicans.

“Reform needs action; it’s not a rhetorical device,” said Ryan Toohey, the governor’s top political strategist and the architect of the Democrats’ efforts to win the Senate. “So long as the Republican Senate is there, reform is going to be too often frustrated by their obstructionist tactics.”
.....
A review by The New York Times found that the governor raised more than $1 million from at least 50 individuals or business entities that donated $10,000 to Spitzer 2010, the governor’s campaign fund, and then far more than $10,000 through the state party. The two entities are housed in the same Manhattan office, one floor apart and connected by a spiral staircase.

In a number of cases, donors wrote consecutive checks to the two organizations. For instance, on July 7, Eric D. Hadar, a real estate developer, wrote a $10,000 check to Spitzer 2010 — check No. 4032 from his account — and then gave $94,200 on check 4033 to the state party, formally known as the New York State Democratic Committee. [NY Times]

Bruno's spokesperson John McArdle said: “From our standpoint, it’s not surprising....If it were a Republican, you’d have The New York Times and the League of Women Voters attacking him.”

Er, John....in case you didn't notice, it was the NY Times that broke the story. Try blasting the Albany Times-Union instead.