Peter Vallone Jr. (Photo: Facebook)

Peter Vallone Jr., chair of the City Council's Public Safety committee, is fuming over the federal Justice Department's support for a federal monitor over the NYPD.

Filling in for a traveling Mayor Michael Bloomberg on John Gambling's WOR radio show this morning, Mr. Vallone, who is already fighting other measures to curb stop-and-frisk, blasted Attorney General Eric Holder for trying to "mess with New York City" by suggesting new police oversight in response to a lawsuit against the controversial policy. He specifically warned a monitor would lead to more shooting deaths.

“We might as well just call our police commissioner ‘Deputy Monitor’ because they won't be in charge any more," said Mr. Vallone, who accused the Justice Department of intervening in an attempt to change the conversation away from a slew of bad news.

“It’s the best way for them to turn the attention from the problems that Eric Holder and the administration are having ... I think that’s part of this also, because now we’re talking about this and were not talking about the IRS or the press snooping or any of the other problems, giving guns to the drug dealers," he said. "He can now move the conversation to reforming police procedures."

But Mr. Vallone, who is running for Queens borough president, and a sympathetic Mr. Gambling argued the oversight was unnecessary, pointing to the city's record-low murder rate, which is far below other cities, including Chicago.

“How come he's not all over Rahm Emanuel?" asked Mr. Gambling, referring to the city's mayor and former White House chief of staff.

"Exactly!” exclaimed Mr. Vallone, claiming the city is doing just fine on its own. “We don’t need their help. We’re doing very well in New York City, as you pointed out. Much better than every other city.”

He further said the consequences would be disastrous.

"I’d much rather a 14-year-old boy get stopped legally--civilly--courteously sent on his way than a 14-year-old girl get shot in the head on a bus. And that’s what will happen once we get rid of stop-and-frisk," he warned. “That’s the biggest civil rights violation going. Being killed, right?"

Mr. Vallone, a former prosecutor, was equally critical of his City Council colleagues, blasting them as "clueless" when it comes to the law.

"Some of them actually have good intent, but are just clueless. They don’t have a day of law enforcement experience, and that’s a big problem,” he said. “We’ve got these elected officials that don’t have a clue who are now passing these laws, which are very, very dangerous."

"The thought of the City Council being in charge of the security of New York City when it comes to terrorism is probably as terrifying a thought as I can come up with,” Mr. Gambling quipped.

Jumaane Williams, one of the bills' lead sponsors. (Photo: Spencer Platt/Getty Images)

City Council Speaker Christine Quinn announced a plan Monday to bypass Councilman Peter Vallone Jr.'s efforts to halt the passage of two controversial public safety bills by forcing a vote using a rarely-used mechanism that members--including Mr. Vallone---had previously threatened to use against Ms. Quinn.

Councilmen Jumaane Williams and Brad Lander said they plan to file discharge petitions later this week to force the council to vote on two bills opposed by both the mayor and Police Commissioner Ray Kelly: one that would create an independent inspector general to monitor the NYPD and another that would expand the definition of racial profiling and allow those who believe they've been wronged to sue police in state court.

Mr. Vallone Jr., who chairs the Council's Public Safety Committee, is opposed to both bills--especially the latter, which he argues will shackle the police department and cost the city millions in legal fees. As chair, he has the authority to block the bills from coming to the floor, even though they have more than enough votes to pass.

“It would be irresponsible to bring something to a vote that will lead to more deaths," Mr. Vallone told Politicker Monday evening, arguing that lawsuits "would blow a hole in the city budget” and force police officers off of the streets and into courtrooms. While he would allow a vote on the IG bill, the two are being packaged together by their sponsors.

Ms. Quinn, who has been touting her support for the IG bill in her mayoral campaign, is also opposed to the profiling bill, but said earlier this year she would nonetheless allow the bill to come to vote--the first time in her tenure that she said she would allow a vote on a bill she did not support.

Mr. Lander and Mr. Williams expect to formally introduce the final versions of both bills together Wednesday and then file the motions to discharge on Thursday, putting the bills on track for full Council votes.

“We're enthusiastic that the bills have been improved," said Mr. Lander, who praised Ms. Quinn for supporting the efforts. “She and her team have been working very collaboratively with us."

The decision is also full of irony. Mr. Vallone Jr., who is running for Queens borough president, has been one of the most vocal critics of Ms. Quinn's history of holding up bills she doesn't like--and has recently threatened to file his own discharge petitions to push stalled bills he'd introduced to the floor.

Mr. Vallone acknowledged the contradiction, but argued his efforts were justified.

“I don’t think you can compare blocking hundreds of bills due to some sort of disagreement with blocking one bill in 12 years because I don’t want to see lives lost," he argued. “We’re not talking about how much someone is paid. We're not talking about a tax. We’re talking about dead kids ... I refuse to have blood on my hands.”

He also argued that he wasn't really blocking the profiling bill from being voted on, since members always had the option of filing a discharge petition without fear of any type of retribution. After all, unlike Ms. Quinn, he doesn't have any power over other legislation or members' budgets. But he did acknowledge the irony of the move.

"What's a good way to say this?" Mr. Vallone asked, pausing. "I guess fate is a funny thing.”

Councilman Leroy Comrie. (Photo: Facebook)

Councilman Leroy Comrie, once considered a front-runner in the Queens borough presidents race, is "looking at every option," he told Politicker this morning when asked if he's planning to drop his bid.

"I'm not prepared to put that out publicly yet, I'm still working on it," he said during the Memorial Day Parade in the Laurelton neighborhood of Queens.

Politicker pressed him on whether he was going to stay in the contest after the Queens Democratic Party endorsed former Councilwoman Melinda Katz over him, a severe blow to the establishment-friendly pol's campaign.

Sources have said that party officials have been pressuring him to step out of the way ever since the endorsement. But Mr. Comrie simply refused to commit one way or another.

"I'm not telling you what I'm considering at the moment," he replied. "I'm looking at every option."

Mr. Comrie, who has struggled to raise money for his race, said he will make a decision about his candidacy in the next few days. He is facing Ms. Katz, Councilman Peter Vallone Jr., State Senator José Peralta and State Senator Tony Avella in the Democratic primary.

John Liu and Peter Vallone Jr. pose on their sweet rides. (Photo: Facebook)

Queens Councilman Peter Vallone Jr. is a self-proclaimed conservative Democrat, a sharp-tongued proponent of stop-and-frisk and a perpetual thorn in the side of the borough's Democratic establishment. John Liu is perhaps the most left-wing candidate in the mayoral race, in favor of abolishing the controversial anti-crime tactic and was once a darling of the Queens Democratic Party.

Yet Mr. Liu, the city comptroller running for mayor, and Mr. Vallone, who is running for borough president, may form a seemingly unlikely alliance that could further both of their ambitions.

The two Democrats have been in discussion about a plan to endorse each other, help carry petitions for each other and aid in pulling votes from certain constituencies, according to several Queens Democratic insiders familiar with their plans.

"Nothing's set yet and I am weighing my options when it comes to mayoral endorsements," Mr. Vallone told Politicker this afternoon when reached for a response. “But certainly, I would absolutely be considering the only candidate from Queens County."

Mr. Liu is extremely popular in the Asian community and, with no Asian candidates in the borough president's race, the large Queens voting bloc is up for grabs. Mr. Vallone, whose dad was a storied institution in Astoria, has his own loyal following, potentially bolstering Mr. Liu's standing in the neighborhood.

"I think John Liu is going to help Peter Vallone in a big way in Flushing and with the Asian community," said one insider. “What is John Liu's option at this point? He needs someone to get petitions, signatures and share the costs--it's very expensive."

Though far apart politically on many issues, Mr. Vallone said he and Mr. Liu have long been friends, riding motorcycles and wave runners together.

"When we were elected, I remember joking at my inauguration that while he was the first Asian-American elected in New York City, which was a huge milestone, I wasn't even the first Peter Vallone elected to the City Council," Mr. Vallone said, referring to his father, the long-time City Council Speaker Peter Vallone Jr.

The borough president candidate recently backed by the Queens Democratic Party, former Councilwoman Melinda Katz, did not endorse Mr. Liu when he faced David Yassky in a run-off during the comptroller's race in 2009. That, coupled with the Democratic Party's endorsement of Council Speaker Christine Quinn over Mr. Liu for mayor, frees both to go rogue and challenge the county organization.

The fact that they're long-time friends also helps. Mr. Vallone, for instance, was the first pol sighted by Politicker at Mr. Liu's fund-raising birthday bash.

"He's a very cool guy," Mr. Vallone said of Mr. Liu, whose campaign did not return a request for comment.

Leroy Comrie. (Photo: Facebook)

The Queens County Democratic Party is expected to endorse Councilman Leroy Comrie for borough president next week, according to four sources plugged into various sides of the race.

The sources--some of whom were disappointed in the decision--told Politicker that Congressman Joe Crowley, the head of the borough's Democratic organization, will probably endorse Mr. Comrie to balance his leadership position in one of the most demographically diverse counties in the country.

"Crowley has a lot pressure, he's got to deal with African-American district leaders who want him," said one Queens Democrat familiar with the decision-making process. "It is what it is."

"It's about 80 percent they're going with Leroy," another Democratic source said. "The black district leaders are strongly behind Leroy. And Joe needs to protect his leadership."

Mr. Comrie, who represents a predominately black southeastern Queens district, was not endorsed by an influential power broker in the area, Rev. Floyd Flake, but sources said Mr. Crowley is still fond of Mr. Comrie, a veteran member of the City Council.

The decision of the relatively powerful county organization comes even as Ms. Comrie's fund-raising continues to lag behind his competitors. According to the latest finance reports released yesterday, he has about $40,000 left in his account, compared with Councilman Peter Vallone's $800,000, former Councilwoman Melinda Katz's $337,000, State Sen. José Peralta's $138,000 and former Assemblyman Barry Grodenchik' $72,000.

Mr. Comrie and Mr. Crowley did not immediately return requests for comment.

City Council Speaker Christine Quinn (Photo: Spencer Platt/Getty Images)

As the spotlight shines on mayoral hopeful Christine Quinn’s record as City Council Speaker, at least half a dozen members are considering forcing measures she opposes to the floor in an unprecedented display of rebellion, Council sources said Friday.

At least one member has already collected the seven signatures needed to file two motion to discharge petitions to bypass Ms. Quinn—a tactic that was threatened in the paid sick leave fight, but that no member has dared yet under her tenure.

The move comes after Ms. Quinn surprised her colleagues this week by announcing her opposition to legislation that would allow people to sue the NYPD in state court for racial profiling--but said that she would nonetheless allow the measure to go to vote.

It would be the first time under Ms. Quinn's tenure that a bill would pass without her vote.

“The Speaker is allowing a bill to come to the floor for the first time that she doesn’t support, so now there are many of us who have bills which the Speaker does not support who are going to take a serious look at exercising the same option,” City Councilman Peter Vallone Jr. told Politicker Friday.

Mr. Vallone said that he is seriously considering using the tactic to push forward two stalled bills that he has sponsored: one that would remove fluoride from the water supply and another that would give communities notice and attempt to regulate the placement of cell phone antennas.

He is also among seven members who have signed onto a discharge motion on a resolution calling for church groups to be allowed to meet in public school buildings. Another bill moving forward, sources said, would establish a "Tenants Bill of Rights."

Mr. Vallone’s plan to use the tactic was first reported Friday by the New York Post. But sources said the plotting extends far beyond his office.

Members have long been fearful of crossing Ms. Quinn because of the enormous power she wields. She has repeatedly been accused of withholding member money from those who cross her--a charge the Speaker's office has repeatedly denied.

But members considering the tactic said their resolve has grown as Ms. Quinn's record as Speaker has come under greater scrutiny in recent weeks, both by the press and by her mayoral rivals, who have slammed her repeatedly at debates and other events for her decision to delay the paid sick leave vote and called for reforms to the member item system.

“This is occurring because there’s a real sense in which members want to experience true democracy,” said one Council source, who said the New York Times story on Ms. Quinn’s temper had also made them feel more confident that she would be held accountable if members pushing their legislation saw budget cuts.

“Now members are starting to feel that there’s a level of transparency that they perhaps feel wasn’t there before,” said the source. “Everybody’s watching her.”

Another Council source said they expected more members to test the tactic once budget season is over at the end of June and they no longer have to worry about the potential loss of funding for their districts.

“There were rumblings that paid sick was going to be the one that broke the flood gate before this,” he said, adding: “It’s going to be interesting."

Whether fellow members are willing to vote for legislation introduced without the Speaker's blessing remains to be seen.

Mayor Bloomberg and Peter Vallone Jr. in the stands at Citi Field today. (Photo: Facebook)

Rather uncharacteristically, the Mets managed to win today's game against the Braves 1-0. In his posting, Mr. Vallone shared his thoughts on the players and the team's victory.

"some mets observations - santana's still the man even without run support; jason bay still has warning track power, wherever that track may be moved to; we got a good 6 innings out of our spankin new center fielder; and we're one game over 500!! woohoo!," Mr. Vallone wrote.

However, since today's game was the Mets first of the season, their victory gives them a winning percentage of 1.000 rather than one game over .500. Mr. Vallone was corrected on his error by none other than New York Post columnist Andrea Peyser.

"actually, we're at 1.000," she wrote.

Mr. Vallone "liked" Ms. Peyser's comment.

Full Disclosure: This reporter is a diehard Yankees fan. As a native New Yorker, the Mets are the only team he hates more than the Red Sox because he believes they are an affront to New York's glorious baseball legacy.

NYPD Commissioner Ray Kelly during his testimony before the City Council Public Safety Committee hearing. (Photo: Hunter Walker)

NYPD Commissioner Ray Kelly fielded questions on the department's controversial stop-and-frisk and Muslim surveillance programs during a contentious hearing of the City Council Public Safety Committee. Mr. Kelly was ostensibly testifying about the NYPD's preliminary budget for the coming fiscal year, but the hearing quickly turned into a heated discussion of the department's most controversial policies when committee members questioned the commissioner following his testimony.

Mr. Kelly began his testimony by praising the NYPD for reducing crime in the city to historically low levels.

"Last year, we saw continued, outstanding work from our police officers," Mr. Kelly said. "We ended 2011 with the lowest murder total in half a century and the lowest rate of auto theft in modern memory."

Mr. Kelly said the controversial practice of stop-and-frisk, which rose to record levels last year, was one of the factors that  helped "make this historic reduction in crime possible." In his testimony, Mr. Kelly pointed out "about half" of stops result in a "limited pat-down" and "only 9 percent involve a more thorough search."

"We utilize the long-established right of the police to stop and question individuals about whom we have reasonable suspicion," Mr. Kelly said.

Critics of stop-and-frisk point to the fact it is disproportionately deployed in minority communities. They also cite the fact that last year's nearly 700,000 stops only resulted in the seizure of approximately 800 illegal guns. Mr. Kelly said the majority of gun violence occurs in minority neighborhoods and said analyzing stops by race rather than looking at crime statistics is faulty logic.

"Our critics use a thoroughly discredited model of applying pure census numbers to analyze stops by race," Mr. Kelly said. "If we conducted stops according to census data, half of all stops would be women."

Mr. Kelly also addressed criticism of the NYPD's widespread surveillance program in the Muslim community, which was the subject of a critical series by the Associated Press that has drawn widespread attention. The commissioner described this program as an integral part of a counterterrorism program that foiled "14 attempted plots in past ten years." Mr. Kelly also said all surveillance efforts followed federal guidelines.

"In gathering intelligence, we adhere to a set of federal guidelines, the revised Handschu consent decree."

Some of the NYPD's investigations of the Muslim community took officers to New Jersey. These out-of-state missions have been a major target of critics including New Jersey Governor Chris Christie and other Garden State elected officials who say they were not notified of the NYPD investigations. Mr. Kelly dismissed these claims in his Council testimony.

"It is also entirely legal for the police department to conduct investigations outisde of city limits and we maintain very close relationships with local authorities," he said.

Once Mr. Kelly's testimony concluded, the committee chairman, Councilman Peter Vallone Jr.,  opened up the floor to questions from his fellow committee members. Melissa Mark-Viverito got into a testy exchange with Mr. Kelly about a recent Quinnipiac poll, which showed racial disparities in the way people view stop-and-frisk and Muslim surveillance.

"Overall people, yes, are supportive of these efforts, but when you start digging at the numbers, 59 percent of whites approve of stop-and-frisk policies, 27 percent of blacks approve. That is a large large gap in the sentiment," Ms. Mark-Viverito said. "When it comes to Muslim surveillance, 22 percent of whites think the NYPD is unfairly targeting Muslims ... 41 percent of blacks. Now, you as Commissioner are in charge of the safety and security for all New Yorkers, do those figures cause any sense of concern for you."

Mr. Kelly began to answer.

"Let me say this, in terms of the stop-and-frisk policy--"

Ms. Mark-Viverito cut him off before he could finish.

"Commissioner, I'm sorry. I want to respect you, but I just want you to answer that specific question," Ms. Mark-Viverito said. "Do those numbers, the gap in the way the sentiment is expressed by people of color in the city, does that have any concern to you?"

Mr. Kelly and Ms. Mark-Viverito both began speaking over each other and nearly got into a full-fledged shouting match. Mr. Kelly argued that minority communities are disproportionately affected by violent crime, so stop-and-frisk is benefiting those areas.

"Let me tell you something that also should be a concern to you," Mr. Kelly said. "96 percent of the shooting victims in this city are people of color, 90 percent of the murder victims are people of color. Now, stop and question is one of the strategies that we use, there's a whole host of others that have reduced crime in this city significantly. ... Who do you think's lives are being saved?"

Ms. Mark-Viverito countered by saying, regardless of the intended affect of these policies, they hurt the department's relationship with minorities.

"My community feels under siege and I understand what you're saying about the intent, but what I'm saying is that there has to be an acknowledgment that we can always fine-tune and improve our policies and practices," she said.

Mr. Kelly responded that police work often causes tension and said critics of stop-and-frisk and minority political leaders don't identify alternative solutions to reduce crime.

"There's always an issue of tension because of what we do. Yes, the police arrest people, we use force, we're the bearers of bad news, we do stop and question people," Mr. Kelly said. "What I haven't heard is any solution to the violence problem in these communities. People are upset about being stopped, yet what is the answer? What have you said about how do we stop this violence? What have leaders of the communities of color said? What is their tactic and strategy to get guns off the street?"

As her time ran out, Ms. Mark-Viverito agreed there should be a deeper discussion about fighting crime, but she stuck to her point Mr. Kelly should express concern about the perception of stop-and-frisk in the minority community.

"There needs to be prevention and deeper community based tactics," Ms. Mark-Viverito said. "I would agree with you there, but I think there has to be an acknowledgement."

During Ms. Viverito's testy back-and-forth with Mr. Kelly, one of the most outspoken critics of stop-and-frisk, Councilman Jumaane Williams turned to Councilman Dan Halloran and quietly whispered, "This is going to be fun."

Prior to the hearing, Mr. Williams and Councilman Brad Lander held a press conference inspired by stop-and-frisk on the City Hall steps where they called for the appointment of an NYPD Inspector General to guard against abuses of civil liberties by the police.

Since Ms. Viverito's time was up, Mr. Vallone stopped her by saying, "I'm sure that's going to be continued with some other Council members. Mr. Williams, who was wearing an anti-stop-and-frisk pin and recently debated against Mr. Vallone about stop-and-frisk on the Huffington Post jokingly responded, "Not me."

"Jumaane do you have your button on today?" Mr. Vallone asked.

Mr. Kelly's next heated exchange was with Councilman Robert Jackson. Mr. Jackson brought up allegedly untruthful statements made by the NYPD's top spokesman, Paul Browne, in conjunction with the Muslim surveillance program and the department's screening of a controversial anti-Muslim training video.

"Some of the responses by your deputy commissioner in respect to questions that were asked by media where false information was given, or incorrect information concerning surveillance, and about the videos and what have you, leads to question the honesty and integrity of responses by NYPD to questions from the media," Mr. Jackson said. "I question the honesty and integrity. ... The Deputy Commissioner needs to be held responsible for giving incorrect answers to these types of questions that are put forward to him by the press and others."

"I won't even bother," Mr. Kelly answered sparking another near shouting match where he and Mr. Jackson repeatedly spoke over each other.

"No Ray Kelly,"  Mr. Jackson said. "When you have a deputy commissioner that has all of the staff available, when he's asked a question and he gives an answer, OK, which is totally incorrect, then you start to question the honesty, integrity of his responses. And the bottom line is, that you're the commissioner and you're totally responsible for everything under your jurisdiction."

Mr. Kelly described the discrepancy over Mr. Browne's description of his appearance in the anti-Muslim training video as an honest mistake.

"He first said that he thought it was outtakes. I was in that movie for 16 seconds, by the way, where I talked about the nuclear threat to the city. So, that was incorrect, because I do a lot of interviews," Mr. Kelly said. "I think that was the fundamental issue, as to whether that was an outtake or I was in the movie. We then admitted that it was a mistake. He made a mistake. He said it many, many times. ... We're a big organization, we have a lot of interactions with a lot of people."

Mr. Williams eventually got his chance to question Mr. Kelly. He pointed to specific, predominantly minority police precincts in Brooklyn where there are high numbers of stop and frisks and rising numbers of shooting incidents.

"Can you explain the discrepancies between the stop-and-frisks you do in these districts and the gun violence not going down?" Mr. Williams asked.

"Well. I think overall violence is going down, when you look at the big picture," Mr. Kelly answered.

Mr. Williams responded to Mr. Kelly by saying he was discussing the specific communities "that are most impacted by the gun violence that you continually say leaders and elected officials like myself don't care about, or are not giving answers to."

Mr. Kelly answered with a curt retort.

"Well, you're not giving answers," he said. "You don't have any answers."

Mr. Williams pointed to comments Mr. Kelly made earlier in the hearing implying gun buyback programs are the only response elected officials who criticize stop-and-frisk have to violent crime.

"You poo pooed gun buyback programs," Mr. Williams said. "I had one in November, 85 guns off the street, one tenth of what you did with 700,000 stop question and frisks."

"I didn't poo poo it," Mr. Kelly said. "It's of value, but that's all you hear from elected people. That's the only answer that elected officials have."

After Mr. Williams' question, Mr. Vallone announced there would only be two more questioners, because the hearing was already running about ten minutes late.

"Thank you Mr. Chairman, for your commitment to the 12 o'clock cutoff," Mr. Kelly said.

"No one tries harder than I do commissioner," Mr. Vallone said.

"Well, you did not succeed," Mr. Kelly answered.

Despite his frustration with Mr. Vallone for not ending the hearing on time, when the final questioner, Councilwoman Tish James, raised her own questions about the effectiveness of stop-and-frisk, Mr. Kelly recommended she read Mr. Vallone's pro-stop-and-frisk portion of the Huffington Post debate with Mr. Williams.

"What about mine?" Mr. Williams asked as the hearing let out. "What about my article commissioner?"

Mr. Kelly didn't respond. After the nearly three hour hearing was over, he took questions from reporters in the lobby. The Politicker asked him if he was disturbed so many of the committee members focused on the controversies surrounding the department rather than the preliminary budget, which was the topic at hand.

"No. I've been here many times before with these hearings," Mr. Kelly said. "It's the way they sometimes go."

Another reporter asked Mr. Kelly what his reaction was to the hearing since it "seemed like it got pretty heated in there."

"Not really," Mr. Kelly said. "You know, I've been around a long time. Sometimes they get heated, sometimes they don't."

Peter Vallone Jr.

In a post on his Facebook wall last night, Councilman Peter Vallone Jr. slammed Attorney General Eric Holder for weighing in on the controversy over the NYPD's widespread surveillance of the Muslim community. Mr. Vallone cited Mr. Holder's role in the "Fast and Furious" scandal where the ATF lost guns used in a sting operation and said the attorney general has no business criticizing the NYPD.

"just heard AG Holder is 'concerned' about the NYPD . really? you're concerned about surveillance that anyone with a computer and a car could do but apparently unconcerned that you 'lost' 2000 firearms to drug dealers and terrorists to use against the NYPD???," Mr. Vallone wrote.

On Thursday, Mr. Holder said he was disturbed by reports the NYPD spied on Muslims in New York, New Jersey and Connecticut. Officials in New Jersey have expressed dismay they were unaware of the NYPD's investigations in that state. Mr. Holder made his comments on the NYPD's Muslim surveillance program during a subcommittee hearing of the Senate Appropriations Committee when Democratic New Jersey Senator Frank Lautenberg asked how a law enforcement agency could investigate residents of another state without notifying local authorities. Mr. Holder said the Justice Department is "in the process of reviewing the letters that have come in expressing concerns about those matters."

"At least what I've read publicly, and again, just what I've read in the newspapers, is disturbing," Mr. Holder said. "And these are things that are under review at the Justice Department.

Mr. Vallone's invocation of Fast and Furious is further evidence of the Queens Councilman's uniquely conservative position within his party. The Fast and Furious investigation is a favored topic of right wing politicos, but it's rare to see the scandal referenced by a New York Democrat like Mr. Vallone.

Peter Vallone Jr. (Photo: New York City Council)

"You would never, ever see this even considered when it comes to a different religion, a title of this type," Mr. Vallone said in his appearance on the web show TMZ Live. "I don't think the word should be used in a title to begin with, I mean it just shows you how far down we've come to be discussing a title like this. I think it's ridiculous."

Mr. Vallone said the show is a disgrace to the memory of Walt Disney, founder of ABC's parent company.

"I think Disney would be turning over in his grave looking at what's been done to his legacy. This is an ugly word. I can't get past the title. This is an ugly word that shouldn't be in any title," Mr. Vallone said. "We're telling people to get it out of our lyrics and respect women and were using it this way. And it absolutely should not be used next to the word 'Christian.'"

ABC initially changed the show’s title to “Good Christian Belles” and eventually the abbreviation. ABC claims the “B” in the acronym still stands for “Belles.” Mr. Vallone doesn't buy this explanation.

"That's ridiculous. I don't have idiot written on my forehead," Mr. Vallone said. "You can't name it after a book and then later say, 'Well, in my mind, it actually means something else.' Stop being ridiculous."

Despite his anger with the show, Mr. Vallone said he doesn't want it taken off the air. He just wants the title to be changed and an apology from the network.

"I'm not calling for this to be pulled off the air. People who want to watch it, watch it. I'm just calling for people in good conscience, of all different faiths to not watch it," Mr. Vallone said. "So many people aren't even aware of what this title means, and they should be, and the name needs to be changed and I think an apology should be issued."