Mob Rule in Washington

Exactly thirty years and one week ago, a mob boss named Joe Colombo was gunned down in public and died shortly thereafter. The story is that this mob boss was bringing too much attention to himself by being so vocal in the organization he created: the Italian-American Civil Rights League. The league fought against the mobster/criminal stereotype, etc. So, he could not keep a low profile, and the other head of the other four families decided that he had to go.

I have, however, come across a different opinion. Supposedly given from a freelance hit man of that era, who supposedly had the inside scoop, it appears that the other mob bosses (Carlo Gambino in particular- the real Godfather), were upset with Joe not because of the attention he supposedly brought to himself and mafia activities... but because of the money he was making. Despite the five families being independent (more or less), when a big enough racket came around, they tended to want to share. If one family didn't, or didn't help out, just like in the movie the Godfather, the other families get really mad, and go to war.

Another instance of similar circumstances comes to mind: the assassination of Carmine Galante. I have a picture of his fresh corpse in the book "Donne Brasco," you can google it. His cigar is still in his mouth. The leader of the Bonanno family until he was killed-by his own bodyguards- was killed for one very important reason: not sharing. It's like they never learned the lesson as kids, and the stakes get higher when they grow up. Carmine Galante was a major importer of heroin, and made a ridiculous amount of money off the enterprise. And he didn't share with the other families. So he had to go.

Let us move from New York to Washington. A different breed of mafia runs that place, mostly not Italian, still mostly a bunch of greedy, corrupt, thieving murdering (in one way or another) criminals. The difference? Less thugs, more briefcases. Less bones being made, more law degrees being "earned." Less Mulberry Street, more Wall Street. Even still, you share the spoils, or you come under fire.

It has been more than a year since the Democrats took the majority of both houses of Congress from the Republicans. Before that election they promised we'd be out of Iraq in 90 days, I think it was. 90 days goes by, nothing happens, they claim that rascally ol' dubbya' is preventing them from getting the troops out. (Notice that Bush is always an idiot except in this one case, where he out manuevers them every time, and of course when he agrees with them on lunacy like global warming...) So then the say, well, give us six months. Or whatever. And now, what do you hear about it? What do you hear from the Democrats about getting out of Iraq? Oh, well, you have to elect Hussein Obama to get them out is the recent idea, but that's about it. And before this presidential race started really getting into gear, you heard nothing from them. NOTHING!

But what you did see, if you were looking, was massive, MASSIVE amounts of pork barrel projects suddenly going towards the Democrats. The top ten recipients of pork lately have almost all been Democrats. So, before the Republicans were raping the treasury and spending like drunken sailors on shore leave, and the Democrats had been mostly squeezed out of the action. So, just like their mafia counterparts, they went after the money, meaning the people keeping all the money for themselves, got rid of them, and now that they have it, and they're content. Well, not content, but less unhappy. Talk about a shell game! It's red, it's blue, who will take your money next? And that's all what it comes down to.

Now tell me, honestly, is there really much difference between the Republicans and the Democrats? When you follow the money, is there any difference at all? Any more difference than between the Gambino family or the Bonanno family?

For that matter, is there much difference between Washington politicians and New York mafiosi? Because I can't find much.