Chronology:

On October 28, 2006, in an article dissing the Working Families Party, I wrote:

“In the Senate Dem’s number two targeted race, against Republican Caeser Trunzo, WFP took sides in the Democratic endorsing the thoroughly decent David Ochoa against the thoroughly decent Jimmy Dahroug, who won the primary. As of this morning, WFP’s website still indicates support for Ochoa, whose presence in the race only helps Trunzo, and WFP has billboards all over Suffolk urging a straight vote on its line to ‘send a message’, which, I assume is ‘Joe Bruno, you owe us big’”

On October 30, 2006, in a piece entitle “WTF WFP”, Michael Bouldin, writing on Daily Gotham, upped the ante:

”To pick up some balls played by Gatemouth, I'm just now noticing that the Working Families Party is running its own candidate in a state Senate race that is one of the top pick-up opportunities this year. The race in question is in SD-3, Suffolk, pitting a young, fresh-faced Democrat, Jimmy Dahroug, 28 27, against antediluvian republican Caesar Trunzo, 78 80. The WFP endorsed one David Ochoa, after he won its primary and thus its ballot line; however, Ochoa was simultaneously defeated in the Democratic primary by Dahroug, who had run in 2004 (full disclosure: my organization, New Democratic Majority, supported Dahroug in 2004 and again this year).The truly unfortunate thing is that the presence of two Progressive candidates on the ballot makes toppling Trunzo more difficult. It's also not helpful, as the WFP blog makes clear, that their advertising in the district urges voters to vote their ballot line.”

In response to that, a couple of bloogers helpfully pointed out that Ochoa had endorsed Dahroug, to which I responded:

“Ochoa did the right thing, but WFP still persists in urging folks to vote for Ochoa. By contrast, under similar circumstances, in the 47th SD, they are now urging folks to support the Democrat rather than their own candidate. Why the difference? Because some in the WFP want Trunzo to win. Remember, Trunzo had enough support in WFP circles to get a Wilson-Pakula from the WFP leadership allowing him to run in the primary (Ochoa beat him). Now, the same folks actively keep Ochoa's candidacy alive, against his will, to benefit Trunzo. Meanwhile in Westchester, WFP keeps their line blank and works for Republican Spano under the table. In the fight to keep the Senate as the GOP's last bullwark in state government, WFP serve's as Larry to The Independence Party's Shemp”

Finally, on October 31, 2006, almost two months since the primary, Steve Perez posted the following note on the WFP Blog:

“Working Families Party endorses Jimmy Dahroug for State Senate

The Working Families Party endorses Jimmy Dahroug for State Senate in New York's 3rd District.

David Ochoa won the WFP primary in the 3rd District and as a result will unavoidably be on our ballot line. However, after losing the Democratic primary, David Ochoa suspended his campaign and endorsed Jimmy Dahroug.

There's a good chance to win this year's State Senate race in New York's 3rd District and replace the incumbent with a friend of Working Families.

In the spirit of unity, we endorse Jimmy Dahroug for State Senate and urge voters in Suffolk County to support the best candidate for working families for State Senate, Jimmy Dahroug.”

At the same time, in an act of monumental insincerity “Steve” also posted the following on the “Daily Gotham”:

“same old Gatemouth

Submitted by Steve (not verified) on Tue, 2006-10-31 11:56.

If you were really covering the race, you'd know Ochoa dropped his campaign and the WFP is telling people to vote for Dahroug.Be honest, that's why you didn't link to the WFP endorsements page, because it shows a Dahroug endorsement.”

To which I responded:

“1) When I posted on the 28th, Ochao was still the WFP candidate listed on their website. My piece said this.

2) WFP road signs in the area encouraged a vote for their straight ticket. This was posted on the WFP blog

3) I would have linked both the WFP site and blog, but Room 8 had technical problems making it impossible at the time

4) WFP did not post a Dahroug endorsement until today.

5) So who are you calling a lying sack of shit? Next thing you'll being saying is a vote for Spitzer on the WFP line is a way to send a message you don't like Gatemouth; anything for the cause; but, I'm the one who told the truth and WFP is now backing Dahroug only because I shamed them into it.”

Incidentally, today on the WFP Blog, Gloria Steinem said:

"I'm proud to vote on the Working Families line -- to not only support the best Democrats but to encourage them to have the courage of their convictions on progressive values."

To which I respond:

"I'm proud to rag the Working Families Party -- to not only help the best Democrats but to encourage the WFP to have the courage of their convictions on progressive values."

Remember, Vote Eliot Spizer for Governor on the Democratic Party Line.