Gatemouth Post about Gallo's write-in rant and related matters was Right On

Gatemouth’s analysis of the Independence Party write-in primary in the 45th AD was masterful in demonstrating how Russell Gallo and GOP inspectors possibly failed to steal a write-in election from Ben Akselrod  ---  how Gallo then went to court, later to the press and into print, seeking to play the victim after his failure to win the Independence Party primary

On October 10, 2012, Room Eight’s Gatemouth posted  “CRY NO TEARS FOR RUSS GALLO” — that post went far beyond what I said about the same election and Russell Gallo’s claims about his disenfranchised Independence Party supporters  —  posted below in “Eaton, Gallo and Berardelli have unseemly tantrum on GOP Blog after Court’s ruling that the BOE certification of Ben Akselrod as Independence Party candidate in the 45th AD stands”

Gatemouth’s well-reasoned and fact-based thesis comes down to this:
The large majority of Independence Party voters who were given wrong ballots by election inspectors in the 45th AD were probably Akselrod voters rather than Gallo voters. If anybody were the beneficiary of this overall disenfranchisement, it would have been Gallo (it was also suggested by some observer, undisclosed by Gatemouth, that possibly all of it had been engineered to benefit Gallo through the acts of certain election inspectors). To add insult to injury, Gallo through his lawyer Berardelli, as wolves in sheep's clothing, pretended to be the victims of the ballot fiasco and sought  the court’s intervention. They asked the court to strip Akselrod of the write-in win, which he probably had earned; award a win to Gallo, who probably did not earn it; or in the alternative, that Judge Schmidt play Solomon, kill the baby and leave the Independence Party line blank for all.

Equally masterful, is Gatemouth’s legal analysis that demolishes any legal argument that Gallo, Eaton or Berardelli might have about the decision of Justice Schmidt, as follows: “ Gallo's lawyers did not ask for a new primary, the only remedy available at law, because they knew they would lose it. ***  Instead, they asked for the judge to declare the loser the winner, or to leave the line blank. ***  Gallo wanted to cure massive disenfranchisement with even more massive disenfranchisement. ***  In the end, the Judge rightly found that the remedy Russ Gallo did not want [a new write-in primary] was justified, but denied the relief, because the Board of Elections opposed it as it was impossible to accomplish logistically under the applicable law and rules in the allowable time. ***  Gallo is now screaming about this being unfair, and he’s right. ***  It is unfair to the disenfranchised voters. *** Not that Gallo cared about them when he argued the case. ***  In fact, neither candidate made any factual or legal argument challenging the position of the Board of Elections opposing a new primary.”

This blog by Gatemouth is worth a look at:
http://www.r8ny.com/blog/gatemouth/cry_no_tears_for_russ_gallo.html