Schorr for DA event in White Plains
-
- May
- 7
Dan Schorr, a former assistant district attorney under Jeanine Pirro, has yet to formally announce a candidacy for Westchester District Attorney, but he does seem to be rallying county GOP leaders to his cause.
Tomorrow, White Plains Mayor Joseph Delfino will be the featured guest at a Schorr rundraiser at Vintage, a bar/restaurant on Main Street in White Plains. Tickets for the 6:30 p.m. event start at $50.
Westchester GOP Chairman Doug Colety, while not endorsing any candidate yet for the post, has made it clear that defeating incumbent Janet DiFiore is a top priority for the party in 2009.
DiFiore was a Republican when she was first elected in 2005 to replace Pirro. But she infuriated many within the party when she switched to the Democrats last summer, just weeks after Colety became chairman.
This entry was posted
on Wednesday, May 7th, 2008 at 1:52 pm by Glenn Blain.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Share and Enjoy: 
| 
| 
Email This
I think it is great to see the Republicans coming together to take back this seat. Janet DiFiore owes her entire career to the Republican party, but turned her back on the GOP because she thought becoming a Democrat was an easier road to re-election. I think members of both parties will show her that Westchester County voters are more intelligent that that!
Despite the recent round of tv ads from DeFiore, it’s hard to see what exactly she’s done for Westchester as far as locking up criminals and decreasing crime. I’m interested in seeing what a career prosecutor like Schorr can offer, because I’ve been unimpressed with DeFiore’s record.
I’m a Democrat, incidentally, and I normally vote along party lines but I find it hard to get behind a Democrat-come-lately.
this should be an interesting race….di fiore has not
sought the limelight as her predescessor did…she was
quick to allow the innocence project to check the descovic
DNA…and there are now 100,000 more democrats than republicans in westchester…Rachel has characterized Mr
Schorr as a career prosecutor..Di Fiore was a prosecutor
a Judge and now District Attorney…Its hard for me as
a Republican to find a lot of fault with DiFiore’s conduct
of the office..and as a former prosecutor I put that above
partisan interests…as frank hogan said “there is no
republican or democratic way to fight crime…”
by switching her party mid-stream she displayed less integrity than a prosecutor should possess. it was ms. difiore who put her partisan interests above her responsibility as a prosecutor. if she wanted to be a democrat she should have waited until the 2009 elections and sought the support then. what she did was wrong and extremely partisan. not a good image for that office. on a matter of record, i too have been thoroughly unimpressed with difiore as da. what has she done to make westchester safer. every night on news 12 there’s another story about gang violence or a murder, stabbing or rape.
UPenn and Harvard law grad Schorr is a very dynamic candidate. It seems he and Mr. Astorino have adopted the “run early” strategy used by Greg Ball when he began his race against Stephens in ‘05.
Schorr is already raising money, and his usage of the internet and social networking(with 1000 members on his facebook group) worked for Ball, John Hall, Kristen Gillibrand, and others.
However, the consultant raises a good point, is there really any difference between the two? I guess perception is reality, so if he can appear to be “Tougher” on crime, he will win, as some Republicans are angry at the DiFiore defection and apparently, some Democrats cannot back a “Democrat-come-lately”, this will make 2009 an interesting year for county politicos.
Peter makes an interesting point. DiFiore herself brought politics into her office by switching parties. She must think there is a Democratic way to fight crime.
is it really relevant what party a district attorney belongs
to..they are totally restricted in participating in politics
except in the year they run..they cannot endorse..they
cannot campaign for..and they cannot contribute to any
other elected official or candidate…so why is party
affiliation even an issue…
If there’s really no republican or democratic way to fight crime, then why switch parties? It seems to me that Janet doesn’t have enough confidence in her crime fighting ability alone to get re-elected. Of course, if she had a wealth of experience actually trying cases, she might be more confident. Seriously, has she ever tried a case?
Party affiliation is only an issue because she raised it. She’s the one that decided to abandon the party that backed her for so long. When the going got rough in the party, she got going. So, it’s not really about affiliation though, it’s about character and integrity.
so that would mean mike bloomberg has no character or
integrity because he switched parties….is it possible
that you can philosophically be uncomfortable where
the party you have belonged to for years has taken
postions that you disagree with…particularly social
positions…and the war in Iraq for example…would
that be a measure of character for you?
Come on. The war in Iraq? How is that a measure of character for a DA? The party switching because of the 100,000 vote advantage that the consultant spoke of earlier speaks to more “win at all costs” character and political expediency than anything else… However, does Westchester need a bluebood harvard DA? or a working class crime fighter like DiFiore? I think thats the real distinction here.
my point had to do with the reason for the switch…remember
di fiore won against 100,000 plus democrats the first time
I believe she could win again as a republican with conservative and independence party support..but consider
the fact that it is only with three parties that any republican has any chance at all..which puts your fate
in the hands of one julio cavalo..chairman of the IND
party….from my point of view allowing any minor party
to have a veto or to have the opportunity to impose any
condition whether it be your position on abortion or
anything else is dangerous…
I think Mr. Bloomberg’s situation is different in two ways. First, he has more money than God and never relied on the party to push him through (the way the Republicans helped DiFiore). Though I don’t condone his switch, I beleive it was an ideological shift, hers is simple pandering. Second, that is NYC, not Westchester. I care what happens here first.
I also have to take issue with all this “no Republican or Democratic” way to fight crime. Are you familiar with the scales of justice ? The traditional notion is that Republicans are affiliated with public order, whereas Democrats lean towards the side of individual rights. I am a registered Dem, but in the area of Law Enforcement, I would vote Republican (leaving aside for a moment the individual) because I want someone whose ideology is consistent with being tough on crime (ie, stronger jail sentences, more enforcement by police in high crime areas, etc). Therefore, party affiliation does matter.
She switched parties on a whim, has punted major cases (like the Bubaris case in Mount Kisco) and hasn’t done much for the major cities in this county that need to lower their crime rates. I say, let’s try someone new.
This is absurb. The Consultant is never willing to criticize any of the candidates he previously helped elect, even when they commit crimes or switch parties. Than he wonders why some place less weight on his opinions as to how and improve the Republican party. While, I can respect his defense of his friends, he should concede that the majority of Republicans have a good reason for being angry at the decision instead of resorting to pure spin.
DiFiore was elected as a Republican. If, “there is no republican or democratic way to fight crime…” why switch parties? Why make an issue of it, if it has nothing to do with her job according to the Consultant? She did so because she was an opportunist who warmed to Andy Spano’s advances. She realized that she was barely able to beat a flawed Democratic candidate and thought she would assure her re-election by switching parties. If Republicans don’t run a strong candidate against her, than every Republican elected official in Westchester has a vested interest in switching parties and becoming Democrats as they will basically run unopposed.
If DiFiore had a problem with the Republican party, as other posters have previously mentioned, she could have resigned her seat and run for election as a Democrat. That would have been the decent thing to do. Party registration matters. LaGuardia once said, “there is no Republican or Democratic way to take out the garbage.” He said in part because he was a Republican in a very Democratic city but it is still true. You can be a good elected official regardless of party affiliation but party affiliation lays out your basic political philosophy and for the DA position indicates how you will approach issues of great importance not taking out the garbage type issues.
It is difficult to tell if DiFiore is doing a good job or not. Unlike being Mayor of Yonkers, the issues she deals with it don’t get much press attention unless there is a high profile case until election time.
As for the Consultant’s comparison with Bloomberg, I would concur with Sandy critique and add that I don’t think what Bloomberg did was correct. He used the Republican party so he did not have to run in a Democratic primary and then dumped them as soon as he could. At least, for Bloomberg, his motives and faux Republican switch was transparent. Everyone, knew Bloomberg became a Republican purely for political purposes. DiFiore, gave countless interviews indicating why she was a Republican. As for Iraq, that is really a pathetic attempt to justify her party switch. Iraq, has nothing to do with being a DA and the war in Iraq was already an issue in 2004. Please don’t insult our intelligence.
As for Re’s comment, Schorr is not a bluebood. He did well academically and went to Harvard Law School. The fact that he graduated from a school that accepts less than 10% of all applicants should work in his favor and not against him. He was more academically successful than DiFiore. Whether that should be an issue is a voter’s choice but are we going to have a race to the bottom approach where we should elect people from the worst possible law schools because they are more in touch with the common man? I can’t follow that logic.
As for DiFiore as a working class crime fighter, she lives in Bronxville and her husband, Dennis Glazer, is a partner at one of the most prestigious firms in Manhattan, Davis Polk, where profits for partner are a couple a million dollars a year. How is she more in touch with the common person than Schur who sacrificed a potentially lucrative career to devote his life to public interest as DiFiore did but without the benefit of a spouse bringing in millions of dollars?
There are some very thoughtful comments on all this.
Frankly, if the Consultant as a Republican wants to praise Democrats like Mike Spano and Janet DiFiore, he should either join the Democratic Party himself or, as a nominal Republican, he should just follow the old adage, “Silence is Golden.” I’d say that no matter which party this concerned or who it concerned. This time, it concerns the Consultant.
I don’t buy, for a second, that Janet switched parties because she was so philosophically uncomfortable with the Republican party. I think she was simply uncomfortable with the math of voter registration here. To suggest the switch has to do with her ideals further calls her character into question. It’s disheartening to think that she was fundamentally opposed to the current party line and chose to leave the party instead of asserting her beliefs and lead it. There, I said it: she’s a leaver, not a leader.
We can guess why she left all we want. It’s a shame that she never explained it herself, electing to bail on one balmy August weekend when she thought nobody would notice and offering only that it was a personal choice. Shame on the media for not hammering her on it.
Where will the Westchester Guardian come down on this one? For the ex-Pirro ADA Schorr? Or one of their favorite targets in DiFioire? Perhaps they’ll get behind the Right to Life nominee.
no one curiously has addressed the minor party issue
involved here…why does a republican have to go hat
in hand to the conservative and independence parties
to get a nomination, particularly when republicans
are in the minority in the county by some 100,000
votes…doesn’t anyone see the potential problem
particularly for a law enforcement officer with
that situation..you are placing a lot of emphasis
on the fact that janet switched parties and no
emphasis on her law enforcement record…that
will be the issue in the campaign…her record
as a prosecutor judge and da against mr. schorr;s
who I assume unlike tony castro has at least some
westchester experience as an ada….
I happen to believe that when it comes to my friends
I really don’t care what party they belong to…
you don’t dessert your friends….whether its mike
spano or janet or whomever….thats just the way
I look at life…its way to short to be hung up
on labels….and as for the republican party ..if
they were not held hostage by the conservative party
on social issues…and the independence party on
other issues..they might have a good chance
to present a new approach to governing particularly
in new york state where the best they could do was
to nominate John Faso and John Spencer…both
of whom got conservative party assent BEFORE
they received and as condition of republican party
support..
We’ve beaten this dead horse of party switching enough; I’ll gladly place emphasis on Janet’s law enforcement record. What has she done in the courtroom?
The best Republicans could do was John Spencer after Ed Cox left the race after the Republican establishment rallied behind Pirro. Not because of the conservative takeover of the Republican party.
The Consultant is trying to demagogue the issue and present irrelevant issues. Conservative and minor party influence in the Republican nomination process HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH DIFIORE’s PARTY SWITCH. SHE WAS NOT FACING A REPUBLICAN PRIMARY OR EVEN REPUBLICAN DISCONTENT.
She made a self-serving move. Unlike the Consultant, she believes party affiliation matters. Now, she faces a credible opponent, who Westchester Republicans can and should support. If the Consultant wants to support DiFiore as a friend, fine. Most people can respect loyalty to a friend regardless of party affiliation even if we disagree. Ed Rendell is good friends with Senator Arlen Spector and owes his political career to Spector but Rendell does not tell Philadelphia Democrats to support Spector. The Consultant takes a different view. Fine. Just acknowledge that DiFiore does not deserve Republican support from Westchester Republican voters and that he (the Consultant) is defending her because of friendship and loyalty and that most are going to disagree. The Consultant’s seems unable to acknowledge this and seems to want to argue that DiFiore was: (1) Perfectfully justified in leaving the party, (2) that it was done for ideologically and not more sinister motives, and that (3) Republican voters should reward a party switcher.
No is buying that, so please stop selling.
the voters of westchester both republican democrat
and independent will have to make up their own minds
as to who they want as their next da….going back
to the days of carl vergari..many democrats including
burt roberts supported a republican..not because of his
party but because he was a good law enforcement officer.
Last year because of party, mike bongiorno lost his
rockland seat..he was a good republican who should have
remained the da…but because elliot spitzer came
down to rockland and implored voters to elect
the “party” candidate…bongiorno was thrown out
I view law enforcement office as unique…its not
ideological..its not party oriented..its whether you
can do the job….and that is what the election will
turn on…other than bloggers no one cares that di fiore
switched parties…it won’t even be a blipp on the screen
its a bad issue to raise for mr. schorr because he would
only be re inforcing the fact that he wants people to vote
for him because of party affiliation..never a good thing
in a da race..