ShareThis Page
Cede Dimitri to Philly |

Cede Dimitri to Philly

| Tuesday, February 21, 2006 12:00 a.m

What is one to make of Dimitri Vassilaros’ column ” Give Philadelphia to New Jersey ” (Feb.19 and• He recommends ceding the city to New Jersey because of Philly’s liberal voting record.

It may have been only a half-serious suggestion, in which case it amounts to pandering to the anti-Philly bias in Western Pennsylvania.

I am pretty sure Dimitri has taken a stand once or twice against politicians pandering to the masses, so that seems hypocritical.

Or maybe he is sincere in calling for a massive government solution. But wait, that would be anti-libertarian, and that would make Dimitri a LINO, Libertarian In Name Only. That seems hypocritical, too.

I do, however, see a solution. Having spent roughly the first two-thirds of my life in Philadelphia and these past 15 years in Pittsburgh and the surrounding area, I think I have some valid thoughts to share.

First, both populations have locked in Democrats to run their cities, resulting in state-financed bailouts for both. The difference here is that Philadelphia doesn’t suffer from the same degree of drastic flight to greener pastures.

Second, both cities tend to be provincial, preferring to support “one of their own” in spite of evidence it may not be in their best interests. See Gov. Ed Rendell or former Pittsburgh Mayor Tom Murphy for real-life examples.

And third, both cities are in the stranglehold of liberal print media, with the Trib being a notable exception.

So the solution is clear. We should cede Dimitri to Philadelphia. That would be addition by subtraction for Western Pennsylvania.

Jim LanzelottiPenn Township

Categories: News
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.