About Me

Name: Michael Scotto
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Archives

Calling All Sane Democrats... Anybody?

 
Somebody Needs to Explain Democrats to Me

I used to be a Democrat. I grew up in a home that supported Democrats. When I arrived on the campus of North Carolina State University in Raleigh in 1984 (and later at The University of NC at Greensboro) I found a whole new world of Democrats. These people were vicious, America-hating Socialists. They loved the Soviet Union, the Sandinistas, Fidel Castro and they never met an abortion they didn’t want subsidized.

Wackos will always be with us. What puzzles me, however, is how so many sane Democrats then and now can live in denial. They simply don’t want to believe that there is a sizable wacko community in their party that hates America, wants us to lose (everywhere) and has no core value except abortion. These people are not just a tiny fringe, they represent a significant voting block in the party and hold leadership posts.

The socialists that dominated the college Democrats in the 70s and 80s now hold Democratic leadership positions around the country. 

The supposed "right wing" (miniscule) Klan (in reality more populist than conservative) had no home and has no home in the GOP. The connection has always been a red herring. There are no GOP candidates trying to swing the "white supremacist vote." Yet in the Democratic Party all the candidates are trying to woo the "Chavez" vote.

Michael Moore sits in a place of honor next to an ex-President at their convention. Cindy Sheehan photo ops are a must for many. Fundraisers at the Playboy mansion are treated like fundraisers at a Boy Scout jamboree… check that… if you want the leftist vote, better stick with the Playboy Bunnies (the Scouts being the threat to America that they are).

I just don’t get it.

The Middle East is chock full of nations which treat women like dogs, endorse slavery and impose the death penalty for people converting to any other religion except Islam. Yet in the midst of all that violence, tyranny, misogyny and barbaric behavior Jimmy Carter chooses to write about "Israeli apartheid"?

Nancy Pelosi's daughter and Democrats are more worried about Evangelical Christians (whose theology led to the creation of the Constitution) than they are about militant Islam. 

Hugo Chavez suppresses dissent, seeks the government takeover of private property and pushes the Venezuelan legislature to give him the power to rule by decree (if you missed that, it says "rule by decree"!). Yet again, the American left (represented well in the US government) is overly concerned with the "dictatorship" of George W. Bush? And these are people that think that men like Chavez are the only hope for the world.

I know there are patriotic Democrats in this world… take off the blinders… and let's hear some noise! Anybody? Please?

Now we find out that the Black Caucus which was formed to protect the rights of African-American voters from disenfranchisement has refused to admit a non-Black member of the House who represents a district that is 60% African-American.

Stephen Cohen (D-TN) was chosen by a majority of his district to represent them. In the process, he defeated a number of African-American candidates. For using their right to choose who should represent them in the House of Representatives, the African-American community in one Tennessee district will now be disenfranchised in the House. Weclome to the Democratic Party apparatus, Mr. Cohen.

The message from the Black Caucus to the black community of Tennessee: "You didn’t vote correctly." Some have already pledged to work against (fellow Democrat) Cohen in 2008 for the crime of not having enough skin pigmentation. Who cares what the voters want anyway?

What's a little disenfranchisement among friends?

I don’t think the House members in the Black Caucus understand how the House of REPRESENTATIVES is supposed to work. Men and women are elected to REPRESENT their constituents. Apparently the Black Caucus believes that they were elected to represent all African-Americans everywhere (and by extension, NOT represent the non-black members of their districts?).

Look at this carefully: the Black Caucus has decided that it will represent the African-Americans in Rep. Cohen’s district despite the fact that Mr. Cohen was chosen by those voters for that same purpose.

I am starting to see how liberals can support dictators, ignore tyranny and single out a particular race for criticism despite their supposed love of personal liberty. Liberals want to rule by decree, severely tax and regulate private property and they want to single out certain races and religions for criticism, exclusion and punishment. The Democratic Party of my parents has become the Democratic Party I tangled with in college.

As a reminder of how things have changed, the released memo states that the Black Caucus is to remain "exclusively African-American."

We used to have bathrooms in Alabama like that, but thankfully some Republican judges didn’t see things in terms of "exclusivity." I guess the Black Caucus has decided to judge a man based on the color of his skin rather than on the content of his character (or even the by the wishes of his own constituents).

Wake up, reasonable Democrats, your left wing is on fire.

If you're looking for a party that believes in personal liberty, a limited government and a colorblind society. We have one. It's called the Republican Party.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Assassinated Trying to Free His People... From a Diseased Image

Hating Parts of Your Own Culture Is Sometimes a Good Thing

My subheading is actually misleading. Joe Petrosino didn't hate the organized crime part of Italian-American culture, he simply didn't recognize it. To him, and to the vast majority of Italian immigrants around the turn of the last century, the "values" represented by the mob culture were foreign to the true values of most southern Italian families.

Joseph (Guiseppe) Petrosino arrived in America in 1874 at the age of 14. At the age of 23 he joined the NYPD and made it his life's work to showcase what was true of most Italian immigrants: they were good neighbors, honest workers and patriotic Americans. To Joe, organized crime brought shame to the Italian-American community. He hated that part of his culture. I imagine he would hate how it is glamorized today by Italian-Americans in shows like The Sopranos and Growing Up Gotti.

Joe Petrosino was assassinated in Sicily in 1909 while on a mission to chase down mob criminals from the US. His death has inspired many who came after him to seek the high road of honor, justice and truth.

Thomas Sowell, in his book Ethnic America, describes the driving force of the southern Italian immigrant with the words "sanctity of the family." For many today they can only see The Sopranos version of what that phrase represents, but that show (and the countless shows and movies of the same theme) have given American audiences a grotesque vision of what "sanctity of the family" means to most Italians.

Sowell notes that not only the family, but the village is also valued in southern Italian culture. Southern Italian immigrants had no historic hatred of other ethnic groups and generally got along well with Jewish, Irish and other immigrant groups. If you valued family, they valued you.

As with all cultures, not everyone took the high road. Some "families" took to crime.

I need not give a history of Italian-American organized crime. Turn on your TV and you're likely to find it represented in one way or another multiple times in multiple ways up and down the sattelite dish. What I need to do, however, is to remind all of us who it was that brought down the mobs and mob bosses. Among those who brought down the dons you will repeatedly find the names of Americans of Italian descent, from cops to DAs to judges to juries. 

Brave Italian-American men and women who hated a disease that had spread its stench to the whole community made it their life's work to bring criminals to justice. They did it because they were patriots, American patriots. Like Joe Petrosino they did it because they understood that all Italian-Americans carried a stigma because of the actions of a small group of thugs. Italian-Americans suffered at the hands of the mob as much as or more than any other group.

An attack on organized crime was an attack on organized crime; it was not an attack on "Italian culture". Patriotic and law-abiding Italian-Americans never saw it any other way.

In many ways it was important that the men who brought down the mob (from Petrosino to Guiliani) were of Italian descent. It demonstrated to the world that attacking a disease associated with a culture doesn't translate into an attack on the culture itself. It was important to honest Italians that the greater culture know that we shared their disgust and fears. This could only be accomplished if we first distanced ourselves from the disease and then led the charge against it, welcoming help from wherever it arrived.

I want to be very careful not to appear as though I am telling other cultures exactly how they should attack their own problems and image, but one thing I know (and this is what Joe Petrosino knew), the solution can only come when honorable and patriotic Americans decide that curing the diseases that infect their own culture is more important than defending the worst of the worst because of some skewed notion of "unity." 

I don't have the particulars or all the answers for you. Some cultures have a much harsher history of oppression than the southern Italians had. My father used to tell me that a second generation Italian-American could get a haircut, buy a new suit, get an education and blend in with the rest of the greater society. But Americans of African descent couldn't use that strategy. A haircut, a new suit and a large vocabulary can not alter the color of your skin.

Thankfully, we live in a day where the content of one's character is more often than not trumping the color of one's skin. But the change in attitudes isn't universal yet and it hasn't helped everyone; the prison rates among young African-American males remains frightfully high. I don't pretend to have the answers, but Joe Petrosino taught me this much, whatever the answers may be, they must be found within each community.

The first step for any culture, stop glorifying your worst members.

I don't mind the mockery of the mob stereotype on shows like The Simpsons. I am a big fan of Chico Marx too. Just like any other aspect of US history and culture, some good-natured satire can be very funny. But the glorification of organized crime or any implication that all Italian-Americans are somehow potential mobsters should not be tolerated by Americans of Italian descent.

Hopefully other cultures will be smart enough to stop glorifying the worst members of their communities. Until then, I'll keep tallking about Joe Petrosino even as The Sopranos garners more Emmy nominations.

Hating elements of your own culture can sometimes be a marvelous thing.


Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Bill O'Reilly & the Death Penalty

I Voted For the Death Penalty Before I Voted Against It

Now, some people are objecting to Saddam's execution. I myself oppose capital punishment, but I also understand that in cases involving crimes against humanity — like this one — a statement has to be made to the world. There is no difference between Saddam and the Nazis who were executed at Nuremberg. Mass murder is mass murder. Evil people who destroy thousands of lives must be held to account. - Bill O'Reilly

We'll ignore the usage of "I myself" [shudder] by Mr. O'Reilly and concentrate on his supposed opposition to capital punishment.

Bill O'Reilly has a number of pet leftist positions that he likes to trot out regularly on his program (like his strange love of RFK...?). He does this to try and convince us how "centrist" he is and to endear himself to the leftists he has on his program. One of these positions is his repeated opposition to the death penalty. However, in the case of Saddam (and Nuremberg) he sees a justification for this act of societal retribution (it's not merely a "punishment").  Retribution = Something justly deserved.

Well, Bill, that means that you are FOR the death penalty (as are most sane people). I am opposed to the death penalty for jay-walkers, but that does not mean that I am against the death penalty. You might be opposed to it in most instances (who isn't?), but allowing it for mass-murder means that you believe that the death penalty is a legitimate means for a society to practice retribution.

Bill is like the woman who is flattered and agrees to spend the night with an admirer after he asks her if she'd be willing to accept his offer of $10,000 for the liaison. After she accepts he renegotiates, "Would you spend the night with me for $10?" To this latest offer she replies in horror, "What kind of woman do you think I am?" To which her suitor responds, "We've already determined that, now we're just haggling over the price."

Bill, we've determined that you support the death penalty, now we're just haggling over the crimes.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (2) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »