No one outed Jack B. He is already out. And, as no one will tell you different, he is a great judge.

Hikind is what he is, but his candidate, David Schmidt, is both a social liberal, and almost universally acknowledged as one of the best judges in Brooklyn. He is already an Acting Supreme by merit selection.

On the merits, these guys are both highly qualified. No one will say different.

As Gatey pointed out, to oppose somone qualified because of their political connections is to commit the same sin normally indulged in by the Regulars. In this case, the Regulars are doing the right thing for the wrong reasons, but that is far better than what they usually do, so why complain.

Let's see what the Regulars do with the other slots. There may yet be an opportunity for a substantive complaint, but Battaglia and Schmidt don't present it.   

The NYC Conflicts of Intertest Law has absolutely NO application to the judicial selection process of a political party. Sorry to intervne with a fact.

The previous poster is correct that both Schmitt and Battaglia are excellent Judges.

Wasn't that Richard Velazquez fellow that Lopez broke his ass electing against "Reformer" choice Martin Needleman...not a hispanic jusging by his name and Yarmulke...a Latino? Other than Margarita Lopez Torres, who btw is a horrible Judge by all accounts, what Latino Judges have you actuvely supported Mr. Gumbs?

I understand taht the other likely judicial candidated to be selected will be Delores Thomas, another Judge of fine repute. Where is the commentary on the attempts of Al Vann and Annette Robinson to pay off on Clarence Norman's debt by elevating Paul Wooten to Supreme instead of Thomas...as a reward for dropping out of the DA's race last year to unite Black voters behind Sampson? And where is the credit to Vito Lopez for not having any part of that corrupt and disgusting deal. Or does it just revile people when it is ni the name of Vito or County when such an allegation is made.

Fair is fair.

Perhaps the reason that you don't see any righteous indignation is because the candidates being selected are QUALITY candidates, approved by an Independent Screening Panel.

Finally, why no mention of the hypocrisxy of the Daily News and reformers in failing to mention that the Pataki appointment of Vito's daughter, should it happen, is an appointed Judge under just the system they are seeking. "Merit" selection is always filled with poolitics and politics that is often far beneaththe rocks.

JUust remember, Eliot Spitzer won't always be Governor assuming that he wins. We would have had George Pataki appointing right wing Republican hacks to the Supreme Court for the past decade and no one, not one voter, not one political leader that could be touched, could have been brought to task for it.

Be careful what you wish for and be mindful of full and fair comment when criticizing.

And I agree with Errol Lewis that replacing fake elections with real ones won't necessarily make things better.

How would someone like me, who follows public affairs more closely than most but has little knowledge of the legal system, decide who to vote for as a judge?  I know nothing, and the discussion above really doesn't convince me one way or the other.

Some kind of appointment system is required.  My preference --

• Allow the Court of Appeals to appoint (and remove) all the other judges, including replacement members of the Court of Appeals.
• Impose some accountability on the Court of Appeals by having recall elections every four years for each judge, with a 2/3 majority required to recall. 
• Ensure diversity on that Court by creating, say 15 mega judicial districts, each with one member on the court, and allowing no more than seven judges to be from the same political party (with a ten-year look back to avoid fake party switchers).  Recall votes would occur in each district.  If a district didn't like the judge appoint from it, it could recall.

That's it.  The pols would be out completely.  And the only thing voters would have to be concerned with is whether the judicial system is so far out of whack that it is necessary to vote to recall the Court of Appeals and start over.

Maurice writes:

"During the last 6 months I had come to believe that Room 8 was  populated by progressive intellectuals and reform-minded activists of Park Slope,  Brooklyn Heights and other parts of Brooklyn. "

Maurice, I believe YOU may be a progressive intellectual and a reform-minded person, but from what evidence  did you get the notion that Room 8 bloggers were progressive, intellectual, reform-minded and activist? Because they called themselves progressives?

Exactly what reform-minded activism did any of them do aside from writing blogs favoring their own "reform" candidates? Attend political club meetings promoting THEIR "reform" candidates?

Did any of them stand next to Margarita Lopez-Torres day after day introducing her to the public as she fought across Brooklyn against the machine? Or go as a VOLUNTEER to the Board of Elections day after day to fight  the Brooklyn machine's attempt to defeat her by chicanery? Or support her ultimately successful law suit that overturned the judicial selection process based on the blatant corruption of the Brooklyn machine?

Which of the Room 8 bloggers' "reform-minded" friends did NOT participate in that corrupt process? And which of them actually get out in the street to put their high-minded "progressivism" to work, supporting truly progressive candidates?

In Brooklyn, Maurice, almost all political types have "sell-out" in their past and jelly in their spine.  People (as in voters) are disgusted with all of them.

Nowhere in my item did I suggest that Jack Battaglia is a special gift to Brooklyn’s courts. I explicity said that I am supremely ignorant about who would or would not be a good judge. My point was that I think the editorial writers at the News probably know as little as me about Battagila and that it was unfair to attack him so harshly. On some other points, I think we should all be amused that Pataki is appointed Vito's daughter as this avoids 2 worse alternatives - Pataki appointing a hack Republican instead of a hack Democrat and Vito attempting to get his daughter a Civil or Supreme Court slot from Brooklyn in the next few years.

Regarding the issue of ethnic diversity, didn't Vito support and help elect 2 Black women to Civil Court last week over 2 Italian men? Didn't he support a Black women for Surrogate last year over a Jewish man. And wasn't the Vito the person who plucked the sainted Margarita Lopez Torres out obscurity and pick her to get a unopposed Civil Court judgeship?  

What's with you gay people already? Who knew that Jack Battaglia was gay?  And who cared before you decided to let the whole world know? Does it make sense for the public  to think that there is a special relationship between gays and Battaglia? Is this what you want? Is this what Battaglia wants? What kind of insensitive arrogant idiots do you have among you? And why don't you try to put a muzzle on them?

Come on Vito is taking credit for the election of the Civil Court judges is it offensive to your or us to understand the truth.  So far I have not heard a word of the ethics of the Gumbs Towns palm card deal? 

To: Yoda  From: Maurice.

 I suspect that most readers can  tell from your determined postings that you are anxious to defend and support Vito. It has probably raised their interest and speculation(not mine) as to your identity. 

 I know you must find what I have said about Vito to be aggravating, and somewhat threatening.  So I expect your criticism..  That's fair. But I think it would make for more meaningful dialogue if you and other Vito allies  really  pay attention to what other posters are actually saying.

10:19 above said that it was clear that "two Black women were going to win those two County-wide positions." Did 10:19 say which two Black women?  No. He/she  didn't.  Again, the fact is that no matter what Vito did or said, or didn't do or didn't say, on the evening of September 12, two Black women were going to emerge as the winners.  And all four of these Black women knew that two of them would win. That's why they were willing to spend their money.

Vito gets no credit for it. If he wanted to be a champion for Blacks and Latinos, he could have used his influence to get Pataki to appoint Blacks and Latinos to the higher Courts. The racism of Pataki's judicial appointment is incredible. But Vito, instead has made it a selfish personal ethnic and family affair when it comes to current appointments.

Moreover, Yoda, the truth is that all four of these Black women wanted and hoped to get the County endorsement.  The people who were backing these ladies were all solid County people. Even their poster thugs were County people. Tahaka Robinson, Musa Moore, and Omar Boucher have always been basically part of Clarence's operation.   

This was strictly an "intra-County" struggle.  None of these Black judicial candidates were part of any Reform-movement or insurgent struggle. So no matter which of them you and Vito supported, you were really supporting "insiders. And no matter which of them Evans supported, he would be supporting County candidates, even though only two got the official endorsement.

Do you understand now, Yodas?