The Gateway (Schmeer, Blur and Plotz Edition) [Now Updated With The Latest DeathWatch Bulletin]

Dateline: Home in Brooklyn, But Still on Vacation. 

Yesterday, the Daily News Editorial Board Daily News Editorial Board, of all institutions, made me have some second thoughts about the due process issues afoot in the Lopez inquiry.   

If the News was correct, then Lopez did not get his day in Court.

But now, we learn Lopez was offered his opportunity to testify under oath, and pulled a Monserrate instead, by refusing to testify (and thereby transforming a piece of ass into a piece of glass for purposes of this discussion).  

As no one is pressing criminal charges, Lopez’s decision is pretty unfathomable, and makes the self righteous pronouncements of Lopez's attorney ring oh so hollow.

But the real news here is the Assembly's Speaker’s schmeer and blur of a prior complainant, the settlement of which includes the first recorded instance of a Lopez staffer who is not being worked to death and still getting paid.

The whole secret settlement reeks of cover up, which one might fairly assume would have happened again if the complainants in the instant matter were willing to settle for cash alone.

The question is no longer whether Lopez needs to go, but whether Shelly needs to join him. 

This is what is known as thinking outside the Boxley.  http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/brooklyn/assemblyman-vito-lopez-refused-testify-assembly-ethics-  www.nydailynews.com   

 

 

 

Chris Owens uses the occasion of the presumed fall of Vito to steal my Al Capone line (without attribution) and rehash his greatest hits 

Most of my comments from the 2006 column linked above still apply; as to his call for a female County Leader, the present female District Leaders are usually no better, and sometimes worse, than their male counterparts, so gender diversity probably should serve as nothing more than a tie breaker in choosing a new leader.

But then again, Owens arguably believes that one’s identity is the prime qualification someone brings to the process, even though he had no qualms about helping to drive from office the Party’s only openly gay District Leader, and did not seem overly concerned about gender balance as the decisive factor when he ran against Yvette Clarke for Congress.  

Owens’ proposal that the Party should take stances on issues brings us full circle; in the sixties, reform meant that public policy should be the realm of the party’s elected officials, who were chosen by the voters. Party policy was ideally what the party’s elected official and its candidates stood for. It was the hacks who felt that party officials should dictate how elected officials actually performed their duties. Now, it is “reformers” like Owens who feel that public policy is too important to be the realm of public officials.  

And we won't even mention the hilarity of Chris Owens railing against nepostism (how exactly did he get his job with Andy Stein back in the 80s?), or his call for the Party to impose term limits not provided for in the law.   

The only real new wrinkle here is Owens’ open call for Democrats to write off social conservatives.  

Now, I’ve said something which might be perceived as a similar call:  

Democrats should not violate their moral principles in order to punish the Orthodox community politically, but it is time that Democrats stopped violating their moral principles in order to shovel Orthodox organizations funds which cannot be justified as anything but political payoffs.

Not when your quo isn’t being quidded and your quid isn’t being quoed.  

Genug is genug.

But my call was one to stop unconscionable pandering; it was not a call to give up.

There are some districts which are socially conservative and will not elect social liberals.

But isn’t it preferable that those districts elect economic liberals?

Should we really give up on electing economic liberals in such areas?  

Before Mr. Owens says yes, he might want to ask Jumaane Williams and some of his other friends where they stand on same sex marriage.

A man like Owens who can’t bring himself to endorse Hakeem Jeffries against pro-intelligent design homophobe Charles Barron look pretty silly mounting his high horse and delivering sermons about the importance of backing social liberals.

On the other hand, Owens is absolutely right about  Vito's elven appointed horses on the Party Executive Committe.  Living in a Post-Vito World  prospectheights.patch.com    

LOPEZ DEATHWATCH UPDATE: The Governor and the TJ Club have now weighed in on the matter of Lopez.

The Entire Weight Watchers Ladies Glee Club is lined up in front of the microphone and they are performing the entire score of La Boheme.

I’ve yet to hear of a County Leader capable of surviving this Governor’s loving attention. Forget Lopez; ask Lenny Lenihan. As Andy Stone said in Casino: The old man said maybe your friend should give in. When the old man says "maybe," that's like a papal bull. Not only should you quit, you should run.


One minor quibble is this purportedly damning description about Vito being inappropriate about people’s personal lives:  

"A lot of questions about their boyfriends or trying to convince young staffers to hook up with each other.”

For some pols, matchmaking is apparently an act of evil; for others, it is an occasion for a glowing puff piece in The Grey Lady. Cuomo calls for Vito Lopez to resign in wake of censure for sexually harassing female staffers www.nypost.com

 

 

 

At least part of the blame for the hysteria about the City's highly sensible proposal to require informed consent before a mohel performing a briss can engage in the procedure called metzitzah b'peh (which involves touching one's lips to the child's wound–a practice not embraced by liberal Jewish movements or the Modern Orthodox) comes from the Mayor's ill-advised insistence on making speeches where it sounds like he wants to ban the practice outright.

Has anyone briefed this man on his own policies?

The Mayor’s seeming ignorance of what he is actually proposing is matched by the outrageous demagoguery of people like David Storobin, who not only implies that Bloomberg wants the practice banned, but also distorts the position held by his opponent, Simcha Felder .

There are a limited number of Mohels. It is quite common for Mohels to come from more traditional streams in Judaism than their clientele. Religiously liberal Jews and the Modern Orthodox often employ Hasidic or ultra-Orthodox Mohels.  

While, as a Free Exercise backer, I oppose banning this practice (even while acknowledging that doing so would advance a compelling government interest in protecting the health of infants), there must full disclosure required so that those whose scruples do not require, or, in fact, forbid (some Orthodox Rabbis have written scholarly pieces demonstrating the religious reasons why the practice should be abandoned) exposure to such dangers, not be put into that position.  

Since most witnesses to this religious ritual avert their eyes during the procedure in question, it’s not as if most folks would even know if this practice was taking place.

But, in the Lewis Carroll world of David Storobin, one fights for the perpetuation of ignorance by spreading misinformation.  

In the Lewis Carroll world of David Storobin, the only Jews with a right to religious free exercise are the Ultra-Orthodox.

David, are you not interested in protecting your fellow Russian Jews? Should they really be denied this information?  

Would you allow this procedure to be performed on your son?

But it's even worse than that; there is no free exercise issue in informed consent.

NONE!!!

Ultra-Orthodox Rabbi Chaim Dov Zwiebel, a leader of the Ultra-Orthodox Agudath Israel admitted outright:  

"There’s nothing about filing a consent form that is inherently in conflict with [Jewish law].”

As a great Rabbi once said, all the rest is commentary. Orthodox Mobilize To Defend Circumcision Rite forward.com    

 

 

 

I endorsed the thoroughly mediocre Shirley Huntley twice when she was running against lunatics (a description, not a value judgment) and opposed her last time out, when she had a sane opponent who showed some promise.

This time out Huntley is opposed by James Sanders, one of the lamest members of the City Council, who is using Huntley's vote for same sex marriage as a wedge issue, which was about to spur my holding-my-nose endorsement of Huntley.

My advice to voters in this district is to move. Shirley Huntley Expects to Be Arrested Monday politicker.com   

 

 

 

It turns out the NRA agrees the government can enact reasonable restrictions on the right to bear arms, as long as you don't apply those restrictions to those who shoot people. Arms and the Duck www.nytimes.com    

 

 

 

So funny you could plotz. Yiddish Curses for Republican Jews www.yiddishcursesforrepublicanjews.com