Mole and co-hort Sharpie:

I occasionally read your posts and have commented before (in fact you referenced and mischaracterized my previous post above). What continues to disappoint me is your insistence on what I would term hateful politics. You continually insult those who you disagree with, pass their accomplishments off as some self motivated side show and speak of the "independent" democrats as if they have all the answers and would simultaneously raise up millions of New Yorkers to the middle class simply by opposing Assemblyman Lopez and his attempts to provide low cost housing, food, and community organizations to thousands in need.

This blog has in the past attacked Levin for being too young, and now attacks Lopez for being too old, and Davila for "not having it." (I will not comment on the fact that all you can say about Davila is that she quote "does not have it" and "Davila freaking Davila" as those clearly are not well reasoned arguments. I will additionally ignore your comparison to a "well used shoe heal" and assume you did not intend the intensely sexist comment). I suppose the only qualified person for the job in your opinion is a 45 year old male, fair enough.

Additionally, now you add to your roster of criticism that Levin "ONCE AGAIN" failed to show up for a debate when I know he has attended, and performed well, at the last two debates (as have the rest of the candidates).

While your hatred of all things Lopez is well documented (and unwarranted in my opinion) you have now made attributions about the WFP because they dare to disagree with you on a candidate in this race. There must be some conspiracy in the works because WFP would support a very intelligent and liberal candidate that you dislike as too young and too supportive of affordable housing. I suppose under your definition of "independent democrat" the only truly independent choice is blind allegiance to the candidate of your choice.

Fortunately for us this is not how it works. WFP and other organizations are free to make their own choice as to the best candidate and do not engage in the same personal attack, hateful politics that you do. In fact, I'm sure you are aware the WFP has a very vigorous vetting policy for endorsements.

While I realize you and I will not see eye to eye on Assemblyman Lopez I had hoped that after my last post you would engage in thoughtful commentary. That is obviously not the case. You continue to attack through name calling etc.... I think the people in New York are suffering, have seen your brand of politics fail over the last decade, and deserve better from their leaders and public commentators. They are looking for intelligent young leaders to re-build the middle class so they can afford housing, to send their children to college, and take care of their elderly relatives. I continue to hope that the candidates in this race will focus on these issues and thoughtful commentary instead of unleashing ad hominem attacks through bloggers.

Hah! So you are now claiming you didn't attack me for the very actions I stood against at IND? Well, I guess that is the closest I can expect to an admission of wrong or an apology. Funny how when you attack someone, even when proven wrong about it, it remains okay.

And now all of a sudden you are turning Lopez into some kind of hero??? Wow...that is far more than IND ever did. I guess putting Noach Dear on the bench is okay by you. I guess attacking politicians and judges who act independently is okay by you. Pay-to-play politics is okay by you. Offering Bruce Ratner so much taxpayer money it made Bloomberg balk is okay with you. Well, thank you for proving my point that WFP has decided to throw its lot in with the Party machine. What are your thoughts on Lopez putting Noach Dear on the bench? Are you going to portray Dear's homophobia as somehow "independent."

Now, as to my so-called insults. Well, Squadron has noticed and been amused by my tendency to give politicians nicknames...more often than not quoting my wife whose astute though quiet observations I greatly respect. Those who know her treat her opinions, even if expressed in a terse sound bite like "Sado-Yasskikism" or "Vito's Pet," as well worth noting. But in no case have I criticized or attacked anyone without a firm basis in fact (unlike some of those attacks on Marty Connor, not all of which were justified).

The facts are this: Vito Lopez is well known for his corruption, sparking many investigations, and even a Supreme Court case (which upheld Brooklyn's right to foolishly allow Lopez to dominated the judicial elections...the Supreme Court's opinion, not mine). I have covered many of his instances of pay-to-play politics, punishing dissent and blatant cronyism. To most people, Vito Lopez really is a clear illustration of the WORST aspects of machine politics. No...I take that back. Clarence Norman was the worst. Vito Lopez has softened some of the rougher edges of the Norman machine, but otherwise continued the corruption.

Steve Levin may well be an intelligent young man. And, by the way, I never (contrary to your insinuation) EITHER attacked Levin based on his youth (as opposed to pointing out his only experience is doing Lopez's bidding) or Vito based on his age or ill health. So once again you try mischaracterizing my views. My criticisms of Levin have been a.) he is a part of Vito Lopez's machine with all the anti-reform, crooked things that implies, and, in fact, has little else to his name other than this, b.) he has consistently avoided showing up in my part of the district, blowing off both CBID and IND forums and endorsement meetings more than once, and c.) his behavior which I personally witnessed at the CBID dinner where he publicly showed disdain for Congresswoman Nydia Velasquez as she made a speech about how wonderful it is working with the Obama administration was disgusting and showed a clear tendency on his part to carry on the kinds of vendettas Vito Lopez is known for (Nydia Velasquez is one of the targets of Lopez's hatred). Or maybe you agree with Levin and Lopez's vendetta against Nydia Velasquez?

You also ignore my questions regarding Davila...and interesting that you play a sexist card given the fact that both candidates I am supporting in these two races are women: Jo Anne Simon and Diana Reyna. Somehow you manage to imply Diana Reyna is a 45 year old man! I have no idea why you would mention a 45 year old man in a race between two women, but you do. I guess that is to distract from the basic fact that Vito Lopez is running Davila simply because Reyna refused to vote the way Lopez demanded and instead showed an independent streak. Wow...so blind adherence to Lopez is the new WFP platform? I remember a certain Surrogate race that stemmed from a similar vendetta by Vito Lopez against Margarita Lopez-Torres because she refused to hire Vito Lopez's daughter. Is cronyism another WFP platform? You defend the man and claim I am merely insulting him when what I oppose is this kind of cronyism and political vendettas against independent thinkers that Vito is known for.

Yet you defend the man. You actually are defending the kind of corruption, cronyism and machine politics Brooklyn is well-known for. Again, thank you for proving my point. To somehow turn that into some kind of "independence" is, as I said above, precisely the same kind of hypocrisy that allows IND to maintain the word "independent" in their name. Neither WFP nor IND can claim "independence" anymore.

Aha! Now I understand the problem! You are a newbie to the scene! How else could you have said something so stupid as "Jo Anne Simon and Alan Fleishman have been the only district leaders who have been consistent critics of Vito Lopez. They have stood for greater transparency in the way the county party is run. They have stood by independent judges and politicians who Vito tries to attack. Where has working families party been in the fight for judicial reform?"

WELL EXCUSE ME -- WFP didn't just yap yap like Joanne Simon does about how she is "opposed" to Vito Lopez, when it's all talk. In 2003 WFP actually mounted a very tough campaign for Supreme Court justice for a highly qualified slate headed by Margarita Lopez Torres who, I'm proud to say, received more than 50% of the vote on the WFP line in the 52nd AD (JOanne and Alan being the district leaders of the 52nd AD, and the IND being the democratic club of the 52nd AD) in a race against the Democratic "machine." The machine prevailed because the judicial district was larger than the 52nd AD. In fact, it included all of Bklyn and SI. With no matching funds (state office), and only 6 weeks to mount a campaign, the WFP put its money where its mouth is, EVEN THOUGH IT WAS A ONE-IN-A-MILLION SHOT!! The WFP also actively participated in the lawsuit Judge Lopez Torres undertook with the NYU Brennan Center to overturn the judicial selection system (all the way to the US Supreme Court). Finally, WFP members enthusiastically and effectively supported Judge Lopez Torres in her hair-thin victory for the Surrogate's seat.

In short, Mole, I would say that the WFP has been a LEADER in the fight for judicial reform -- in court, in the street and on the ballot. I would say that Joanne Simon has been a TALKER about how independent she is from a corrupt county chairman against whom the WFP fought with actions, not mere words.

As for Joanne's position on BBP, again, my friend, you are sadly mistaken. She is "against" housing in the park like she is against smog in the air. All talk. She is UNWILLING to state unequivocally that she will TAKE ACTION to oppose housing in the park, and she is still "studying" Sen Squadron's "PIRC" plan. That is what she WROTE on the WFP questionnaire and answered in the interview. Maybe she said something different at YOUR interview.

Since your memory apparently does not serve you well, I feel compelled to correct a third error you made. In 2004 when the WFP endorsed a Republican (Sen Nick Spano) in exchange for the Republican state senate agreeing to give A MILLION PEOPLE a raise via an increased minimum wage, there was no hope of gaining a Democratic majority in the State Senate. There weren't enough good candidates willing to run against Republican incumbents, maybe because the Democrats are not very good at running effective campaigns against incumbent Republicans. And state Democrats were pretty universally felt to be so hapless that they couldn't raise enough money to win anything. In that election year and every one since, WFP has fought hard to elect Democrats to the State Senate and has played a critical role in taking or retaining the seats now held by Sen Johnson, Sen Foley, Sen Stackowsky, Sen Auburtine, Sen Valesky and Sen Parker. In 2006, WFP helped Sen Cousins-Stewart win Nick Spano's seat. In 2008 WFP replaced Marty Connor (who, along with Joan Millman, GAVE us the frigging Develo-Park) with Daniel Squadron. Now there is a Democratic majority in the State Senate, and one that is becoming more willing to take progressive ACTIONS.

Mole, I know it's fun to make wild accusations and to promote conspiracy theories, but you aren't furthering the cause of getting GOOD people elected to political office by smearing them and, by inference, the people who spend their time studying the issues and coming to club endorsement meetings. The people who attended the WFP Bklyn chapter endorsement meeting felt that Steve Levin was the best candidate to represent WFP's values in the City Council, just like the people who came to IND's and CBID's endorsement meeting felt that Joanne Simon was the best person to represent THEIR values.

It's unfair and immature to slime someone else's choice as being "corrupt," when arriving at that choice was an honest, painstaking effort by working people representing WFP members in Bklyn to come up with the person who would best represent THEM. It's called democracy.

Please, stop it!