‘Take it down': Zohran Mamdani draws flak as old post on Columbus goes viral; Italian Americans criticize
on Monday again found himself embroiled in a controversy after an old social media post of him flipping the bird at a statue of Christopher Columbus and calling for its removal started doing the rounds.
Tired of too many ads? go ad free now
In a June 2020 tweet, the socialist Mamdani is pictured flipping the middle finger at the towering statue located in Astoria, a neighborhood that falls within his state Assembly district.
'Take it down,' said Mamdani, who was running for state assembly at the time.
The post didn't sit well with Italian Americans in the big apple city, including the Columbus Heritage Coalition, ever since this week the post resurfaced on social platforms.
Angelo Vivolo, president of Columbus Heritage Coalition, vowed not to support the lefty candidate come November.
'We will defend Columbus Day and Columbus statues,' Vivolo told The New York Post.
'He is being disrespectful to the Italian American community,' said Vivolo, who is the former head of the Columbus Citizens Foundation, which runs the city's Columbus Day Parade. 'If you offend one community, you offend all communities.
'I don't think he will be mayor for all the people of New York City.'
The Italian Americans make up 8% of the population in the city, Mamdani has disrespected a big voting bloc, said Joseph Scelsa, founder and president of Italian American Museum.
'To eliminate such a large population of people would be a travesty,' he said. 'It's not inclusive. It's exclusionary.
'Who's to say who is a hero and who is not a hero? Columbus is our hero.'
Tired of too many ads? go ad free now
Zohran Mamdani pulled a major upset in last month's Democratic primaries for the NYC's mayoral candidate, when he defeated former New York governor Andrew Cuomo.
Mmadani could possibly face Cuomo again in the November general elections, as the longtime Italian American pol is considering contesting as an Independent, along with current Mayor Eric Adams, who also is planning to run again for the office but this time as an Independent. Also in the fray will be GOP's candidate Curtis Sliwa.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
India Today
4 hours ago
- India Today
Congress flags constitutional vacuum in Manipur, questions Assembly's validity
The Manipur Pradesh Congress Committee (MPCC) has raised serious constitutional concerns over the status of the 12th Manipur Legislative Assembly, following its suspended session and the imposition of President's Rule in the a memorandum to Governor Ajay Kumar Bhalla, the Congress demanded a public clarification on whether the Assembly remains constitutionally valid or stands automatically dissolved due to procedural last Assembly sitting was held on August 12, 2024, with the next session scheduled for February 10, 2025, as per a notification issued by the Governor on January 24. However, the session was abruptly cancelled on February 9, a day before it was to begin. This came shortly after Chief Minister N Biren Singh resigned and the Council of Ministers stood MPCC cited Article 174 of the Constitution, which mandates that a legislative assembly meet at least once every six months. With no session held since August and the February sitting revoked, the Congress argues the Assembly is now in constitutional default. It also referred to past Supreme Court judgments, suggesting that such lapses could lead to automatic party further questioned the Governor's authority to cancel a session after it has been summoned, warning that any move to reconvene the Assembly or conduct a floor test without resolving the constitutional issue could trigger legal has been under President's Rule since February 13, 2025, and the Assembly remains in suspended animation. The Congress maintains that the constitutional requirements for its continuity are no longer met, and has indicated it may move court if the Governor fails to the political crisis deepens, the legal status of the Assembly remains uncertain, and demands for restoring democratic governance continue to mount in the conflict-hit state.- EndsTrending Reel
Hans India
4 hours ago
- Hans India
SC seeks Centre's response on timeline for Prez assent to Bills
New Delhi: In a significant development, the Supreme Court on Tuesday sought responses of the Centre and all states on the Presidential reference raising constitutional issues on whether timelines could be imposed for dealing with Bills passed by the Assembly. Observing that the issues raised in the Presidential reference will affect 'the entire country', a five-judge Constitution bench headed by Chief Justice of India BR Gavai sought the replies in a week and fixed the reference for fixing timelines and other procedural details on July 29. "There are issues of interpretation of the Constitution. We have requested the Attorney General to assist us. Issue notice to the Union and all state governments. The Solicitor General will appear for the Union. All state governments be served through emails. List it on next Tuesday. Notice be also served to all standing counsel," ordered the bench which also comprised justices Surya Kant, Vikram Nath, PS Narasimha and AS Chandurkar. During a brief hearing, senior advocates KK Venugopal and P Wilson, representing Kerala and Tamil Nadu respectively, opposed the reference and questioned its maintainability. These objections can be raised later, the CJI said, adding the matter will be taken up in mid-August. In May, President Droupadi Murmu exercised powers under Article 143(1) to know from the top court whether timelines could be imposed by judicial orders for exercise of discretion by the President while dealing with the Bills passed by the state Assemblies. Article 143 (1) of the Constitution deals with the power of President to consult the Supreme Court "if at any time it appears to the President that a question of law or fact has arisen, or is likely to arise, which is of such a nature and of such public importance that it is expedient to obtain the opinion of the Supreme Court upon it, he may refer the question to that Court for consideration and the Court may, after such hearing as it thinks fit, report to the President its opinion thereon". The President's decision comes in light of the April 8 verdict of the apex court passed in a matter over the powers of Governor in dealing with bills questioned by the Tamil Nadu government. The verdict for the first time prescribed that the President should decide on the Bills reserved for her consideration by the Governor within three months from the date on which such reference is received. In a five-page reference, President Murmu posed 14 questions to the Supreme Court and sought to know its opinion on powers of Governor, President under Article 200 and 201 in dealing with bills passed by the state legislature. Article 200 deals with situations with regard to passage of Bills by the state Assembly and subsequent options available to the Governor on grant of assent, or withholding of assent or sending the Bill to the President for reconsideration. Article 201 deals with the Bills reserved for the President's consideration by the Governor. The rules prescribe for the review petitions to be heard by the same set of judges in the apex court in chambers while presidential references are heard and considered by a five-judge Constitution bench. Article 200, the reference underlined, which prescribes powers of Governor to be followed while assenting to bills, withholding assent to bills and reserving a bill for President's consideration, does not stipulate any time frame upon Governor for the exercise of constitutional options. The President said similarly Article 201, which prescribes the powers of President and the procedure to be followed while assenting to bills or withholding assent, therefrom does not stipulate any time frame or procedure to be followed by the President for the exercise of constitutional options under Article 201 of the Constitution. President Murmu also questioned the exercise of plenary power under Article 142 of the Constitution by the Supreme Court to make the bill re-presented to Tamil Nadu Governor, as deemed to have been passed. "Whereas the concept of a deemed assent of the President and the Governor is alien to the constitutional scheme and fundamentally circumscribes the power of the President and the Governor," the reference of May 13 said. President Murmu said the contours and scope of provisions in Article 142 of the Constitution in context of issues which are occupied by either constitutional provisions or statutory provisions also require an opinion of the Supreme Court. The verdict has set a timeline for all Governors to act on the Bills passed by the state Assemblies and ruled that Governor does not possess any discretion in exercise of functions under Article 200 of the Constitution in respect to any Bill presented to them and must mandatorily abide by the advice tendered by the council of ministers. It had said state governments can directly approach the Supreme Court if the President withholds assent on a bill sent by a Governor for consideration.
Indian Express
4 hours ago
- Indian Express
Does your politics matter on a dating app? Love should be about discovery
The heart wants what it wants, and in the case of young singles today, it wants perfect ideological compatibility. If love is about overcoming barriers — of geography, class, race and religion — politics, it seems, is the stumbling block that few romances can recover from. That, at least, is the reason offered by a new generation looking for love on dating apps where, with mini manifestos on their profiles, would-be lovers are making clear their political/ideological dealbreakers. While it's been around for a few years, the trend appears to have solidified with the victory of Zohran Mamdani in the Democratic primary ahead of the New York City mayoral election later this year. In Mamdani's story about meeting his wife on a dating app, many see hope of finding their own perfect matches. This practical approach to relationships, with the elimination of an entire area of potential conflict, may seem admirable, especially in these polarised times. But does it offer any room for the spontaneous combustion known as love? Because no matter how many heartbreaks it might cause, friction is essential if sparks are to fly. And while the good common sense of laying out the terms and conditions of a relationship right at the outset is undeniable, so is the fact that love is a journey of acceptance and discovery. It is neither a contract to be signed, nor a checklist to be filled. As William Faulkner once wrote, love happens 'despite', not 'because'. It unfolds in bits and pieces, in arguments and conversations. This age-old process may lead to a broken heart or two, some unmet expectations and dashed illusions. But when a clash of wills results in a meeting of minds and hearts, it is a price well worth paying.
