One thing I will say about Christie: He may be highly and too-frequently partisan, but he's not actually crazy in the way most prominent Republican officials are. (I'm talking about you, Lindsey Graham!) He's shown that he's not willing to ignore reality simply to score points over an issue as important as disaster relief, and in the Valley of the Blind, that makes him the one-eyed king:

The governors of New York and New Jersey came down hard on the Republican-controlled House Wednesday, saying it was “inexcusable” that Congress failed to act on disaster aid and that those hurt by Hurricane Sandy “can no longer afford to wait while politicians in Washington play games.”

New Jersey Republican Gov. Chris Christie has scheduled an afternoon press conference to follow up on the statement issued together with New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, a Democrat. Christie’s criticism of the House follows an emotional speech in Washington by Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y) taking Speaker John Boehner to task for cancelling a promised vote this week on the aid.

“With all that New York and New Jersey and our millions of residents and small businesses have suffered and endured, this continued inaction and indifference by the House of Representatives is inexcusable,” the governors said. “It has now been 66 days since Hurricane Sandy hit and 27 days since President Obama put forth a responsible aid proposal that passed with a bipartisan vote in the Senate while the House has failed to even bring it to the floor. This failure to come to the aid of Americans following a severe and devastating natural disaster is unprecedented.”

Since it's almost certain that New York Governor Andrew Cuomo will toss his hat into the 2016 Democratic primary race, it's worth noting that he could possibly be one of the most Republican Democratic governors ever.

I never in my wildest dreams thought I'd see a Democratic governor support Republican candidates for the state senate, but that's exactly what Cuomo did.

Yes, this is bizarre. Why would a Democrat support a Republican candidate in a contested election? Cuomo tried to pass it off as support because some Republicans voted the same sex marriage law in New York into effect. That would be just dandy, except as Chris Hayes points out, one of those Republicans was defeated in his primary by a Tea Party candidate, yet Cuomo gave no support to the Democrat. Why would that be?

AlterNet reported on this just before the election:

Apparently, pretty hard. What’s really going on? There’s seems to be only one plausible explanation: the Governor prefers conservative Republicans to progressive Democrats. I know it’s hard to figure. But actions speak louder than words. To Cuomo, it may be true that it is more important to keep Republicans in control of the Senate so that he never has to face strong pressure from the left. This tactic, according to key players in New York politics, is an open secret.

Were the Democrats to win back the Senate, inevitably it would mean that they would pass some bills that reflect the interests of their constituents -- against hydrofracking, for raising the minimum wage, on gun control, on school aid, on the incarceration society. That’s not what Cuomo wants as he prepares a 2016 presidential campaign in which his theme will be “I can bridge the partisan divide.” It’s baloney and he knows it. By bridging the divide, he means forcing Democrats to accept a softer, gentler Republican view of the world.

Oh, the bipartisanship fetish again. I could see some nods toward bipartisanship if we were actually dealing with a rational Republican party but there are no rational Republicans. They've run for the hills or switched to independent voter status. From the top to the bottom, the Republican party is not rational, but they are cynical, and Cuomo is playing right into that cynicism.

This kind of Democrat is no Democrat at all. Not even liberal. If Cuomo believed in the strength of liberal principles, he would push for a Democratic state senate to put those principles on display, to hold up New York as a bastion of successful liberalism instead of some bipartisan mishmash nonsense.

There's this myth that plays out in cynical ploys like Cuomo's about how bipartisan is best, yada yada. Yet the most progressive, prosperous times in this country emerged when true progressive legislation was passed with large liberal majorities. Today we have politicians like Cuomo who go all mushy at the idea that all things bipartisan are good, when in fact, this country has just said in their loudest voter voice that progress is what they want.

Cross Cuomo off your list. If he can't stand by even the most basic principles, he's not worth considering in 2016.

The latest stories from the front lines of the labor fight across the country...

I really love Britethorn's framing of the passage of gay marriage in New York, versus the conviction for corruption of the Governor of Illinois.

Open thread below....

At the Empire State Pride Agenda's fall dinner last night, Democratic gubernatorial candidate Andrew Cuomo told attendees he wants to make marriage equality a reality in New York:

"I don't want to be the governor who just proposes marriage equality. I don't want to be the governor who lobbies for marriage equality. I don't want to be the governor who fights for marriage equality. I want to be the governor who signs the law that makes equality a reality in the state of New York," said the Democratic nominee.

The declaration was "music to our ears," one activist said.

There were initially some reports that Cuomo wasn't going to show up at the event, and that he declined to fill out ESPA's candidate questionnaire. Over the summer, the NYT ran a story quoting activists questioning his dedication to advancing gay rights.

As for his GOP rival, Carl Paladino, Cuomo said: "We are looking at an extreme political agenda on the other side of the election, and you saw it this week with the LGBT community -- but it's not just the LGBT community."

The Paladino campaign has been in high damage-control mode since Sunday, when the candidate made what some considered highly offensive remarks about gays during a visit with Orthodox Jewish leaders in Brooklyn. He has since apologized for those remarks while maintaining his stance against gay marriage.

Cuomo then went on to hit Paladino for his stands on immigration and abortion rights, and urged the group to make it to the polls on Election Day.

"Take nothing for granted because people are afraid, people are anxious and these forces are looking to exploit that," Cuomo said.

Gee, what do you suppose Lewis is hiding?

A major legal battle is brewing between Bank of America President Ken Lewis and New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo because the CEO is refusing to hand over a list of Merrill Lynch executives who received $3.6 billion in questionable bonuses right before the banks merged late last year.

"Bank of America has made the decision they don't want to turn that information over to us and we, therefore, tonight served Bank of America with a subpoena to turn over that information," said Special Assistant to the New York Attorney General Benjamin Lawsky Thursday evening, "and we intend to get that by whatever means is necessary going forward."

Lewis met with the attorney general's office for four hours, and he claimed afterward that he fully cooperated.

But New York officials told ABC News the session with Lewis was ugly and combative. They accused Lewis and the bank of stonewalling, saying they refused to provide a list of which executives got what of the billions in bonuses.