Village Independent Democrats Endorse Anderson for Surrogate's Court
The Village Independent Democrats voted last night to endorse Nora Anderson in the Manhattan Surrogate’s Court race.
After two rounds of voting she beat Milton Tingling, eleven to nine, according to Anderson campaign manager Michael Oliva. Another candidate, John Reddy, came in third.
What’s interesting about how this race is turning out is the shifting idea of who is the insider and who is the outsider. (It's a particularly noteworthy issue given the Surrogate’s Court’s reputation as a patronage mill.)
Anderson started out as an outsider candidate not allied with the Democratic Party’s leadership, but has gone on to win six endorsements from local Democratic clubs. But Tingling, who won the New York Democratic organization’s endorsement, has won his share of club endorsement also, making it hard to tell, by that measurement, who is more of the party insider [endorsement tallies corrected].
It's easy for her to win endorsements when people don't understand anything.
The V.I.D. is an important endorsement. Along with their reputation as reformers; they have a pretty strong track record of their judicial endorsements getting elected. They
actually get out and do the work for their endorsed candidates.
Wow, not that I care about this race, but it's cool to see that Anderson is taking the boys TO TOWN.
I was at the meeting last night, here's my quick recap:
1) Tingling seems to be looking for a retirement package. He leaves the impression that he doesn't know much about the Surrogate's Court.
2) Reddy has some good experiences, but I'd like to know more about what he is going to do to change the court systems for the better and less about him. Enough with the articles he has authored and community service, give me more about improving the Court.
3) Anderson also seems to have good experience and claims to be the "reform" candidate. This struck me as funny when I was reading about her background and found out that she was a court-clerk in this Surrogate's court for something like 15 years. Was she part of the problem? And if not why didn't she fix the problems?
Just a few observations...
Mike Oliva also elected another woman to the bench in Brooklyn, Kathy Levine. She is now sitting in Civil Court in Staten Island. He did have the Times on his side that time though.
Still, a win is a win.
I too was there and would like to share a few comments.
Anderson's claim to be the "reform" candidate is a bit laughable given how many years she's worked with the Brooklyn Surrogate getting plumb assignments. There were a few whispers about other so-called cozy "insider" relationships she has within the crowd I was standing next to but that most likely was just sour grapes from a rival faction. But I do agree with the previous comment- why didn't she try to do anything to fix the problems? Was she part of the problem because she was an insider?
Reddy seems to think the race is all about him, how much good he's done, his impressive resume of good works. I agree, enough with the "look how great I am" speeches and more about what improvements you have in mind. He must have some ideas about Court improvements after working as counsel to the Public Administrator for so long. Or does he think that the Court works perfectly well as is and would continue the tradition if elected?
Tingling strikes me as the most baffling candidate. He is a Supreme Court judge, so he doesn't need another judicial job. He could retire in his current job if he's looking for a retirement gig. As the only candidate who's been on the bench and has experience with a variety of cases, I wonder why he seeks the Surrogate job. The "down home" charming stories are entertaining, but does he really mean what he says about his vision for the Court? To make it more accessible for regular people? I don't know, that sounds too simple an answer and too "good" to be true. Yet out of all the candidates he's not trying to present himself as a "reformer" or the "good deeds" candidate. He just struck me as a guy have a conversation with a crowd. Maybe he's presenting himself as the "regular guy" candidate?
Just some observations...
This is not about Oliva or Seto. This is about who is the best candidate for Surrogate.
Stop the negative attacks on the campaign staff. Your just jealous.
Actually Anderson, whom I've met on several occasions, including at her fundraiser last night, does not get those assignments...and she has the documents to prove it.
She doesn't get gauardianships or appointments. She is not even on the list.
YOU ARE LYING!
Nora ain't no reformer. She was chief clerk in the court--which h is an administrative role--and thus oversaw the other clerks that she rants against. I don't understand how she can be such a reformer and want to clean up the system and make the clerks more responsive when she had the opportunity to do so for many years. She's either incompetent or doesn't actually mean what she says.
First of all it's you're or "you are," not "your," and it's "is not" or "isn't," not "ain't"...learn the language better before you post.
If you honestly think a clerk can change the court you have a fundamental lack of understanding of how things work.
Now I know you're probably supporting Al Roker...but he's a total hack...and everyone knows it.
How can you call somebody who has won 19 out of 20 probate contests,, and 9 out of 10 decisions before the appellate division, incompetent? Are you even thinking or are you just wandering in the wilderness?
What's "incompetent" is your proficiency in writing.
I guess all the people in these clubs who are bucking county are doing it as a result of her good looks. Stop insulting people. Nora is the best candidate in this race, hands down. Care to respond?
Your lack of focus is amazing. Nora complements the clerks in every speech she makes. It is her idea to have Pro Se clerks. Why? It's because she respects their abilities.
Are you focusing yet?
Now I know Roker has tried to steal all of her ideas, and copied her literature, but that doesn't allow you to twist the truth. It won't happen. People can sense it. That's why Roker will lose.
Again, you are copying, you are twisting, and YOU ARE LYING!
How's the amiable hack been?
There ain't no "your" in my post. How much do you get paid by Nora? Plus, it's easy to get club endorsements when you pack the club. You bore me.
Didn't think so. =)
Again with the name calling.
I suppose Tingling is Al Roker by virtue of being the black male candidate.
Does that mean Anderson is Diana Ross given she's the female black candidate? How about Eartha Kitt? Oprah?
Why don't we give Reddy some clever nickname? How come nobody's saying anything about him? Rude to leave the third candidate without some funny nickname to refer to.
How about addressing all three by their first or last names? They DO have names and whether you think any or all are worthy candidates it's rather RACIST to call one Roker and the other by name- or address her by her "good looks." People should vote for a Surrogate based on an attractiveness scale?
Petty.
Lighten up.
Some of the knee-jerk comments by politically corectoids on this blog prove that liberals have no sense of humor.
Judge Tingling himself has amusingly referred to his resemblance to Al Roker!
Learn to laugh and stop with the defensive knee-jerks and false accusations of racism, sexiesm, or whatever other ism-ism is in vogue this year against people you have never met and know nothing about.
Judge not lest ye be judged.
If Seth Rubenstein wanted to be Manhattan Surrogate that badly, why didn't he just run for the office? Instead he buys Nora Anderson for $225,000 and gets to run the court from behind her pretty face. Anyone who thinks that $225,000 loan will be repaid is crazy. That was the cost of buying Nora as a front person. The court will be run Seth Rubenstein. This is clearly corruption before Nora and Seth ever take the bench.