Why We Like and Dislike Celia Cohen
We dislike her for writing “insidery ‘humor'” that only she, or perhaps the rich in Chateau Country too, find funny, like this:
It was just another reminder that Carney, the Democratic congressional candidate, used to be the lieutenant governor. If a lieutenant governor falls on a deserted island, does it make a sound?
Groan.
And then sometimes she just writes nonsense puffery that would be more appropriate for the layman instead of the insider audience she is writing for, like this:
The unofficial motto of lieutenant governors in Delaware is, So Near And Yet So Far. Sometimes they move up, more often they do not.
And then sometimes she writes so inane, so ridiculous, that the reader actually gets angry after reading, not because they are insulted or outraged, but because they just had their time wasted:
It is an office that brings with it a whiff of second string, and it is best to remember Bill Clinton and not inhale. It can do a politician no good.
WHAT?
And then there are little anecdotes that make the frustrating exercise worthwhile:
[Former Lt. Gov.] Bookhammer even lost to [former Gov.] du Pont in a contest staged by Republicans in Sussex County to see which of them was faster putting clothes on a bare female mannequin. True story. It happened in 1974. Politicians apparently were more comfortable acknowledging this skill back then.
and this:
It should be noted that [potential GOP Congressional candidate Michele] Rollins’ husband John, who died in 2000, was once a lieutenant governor himself. He was elected to one term in 1952, although she was not around then. She was seven years old at the time.
Writing that makes you picture the late Anna Nicole Smith in the made for TV role of Michele Rollins, a young golddigger looking for a sugardaddy. Which, of course, would be an accurate depiction of Michele Rollins.
And then sometimes Celia writes something pretty revealing and newsworthy, and we wonder why it was not picked up by the mainstream press:
The [GOP] event was a makeup Lincoln Day celebration, moved from February because of all the snow that made Delaware feel more like Valley Forge. Better to leave it to George Washington, and fete Old Abe in March.
The Republicans — about 75 of them hosted by the Sussex County Republican Women’s Club and the Eastern Sussex Republican Club — were in a fine mood.
“We’ve got a big year ahead of us. This is our year, folks,” said Tom Ross, the state chair.
The Republicans were so merry, they did not even mind comparisons between Abraham Lincoln and Barack Obama. They listened to this reading:
Lincoln came from Illinois. Obama comes from Illinois.
Lincoln served in the Illinois legislature. Obama served in the Illinois legislature.
Lincoln was a skinny lawyer. Obama is a skinny lawyer.
Lincoln was a Republican. Obama is a skinny lawyer.
Lincoln was born in the United States. Obama is a skinny lawyer.
So Celia reports that the Sussex County Republican Women’s Club, with notable party luminaries in attendance, including Michele Rollins and State Chair Tom Ross, embraced Birtherism.
How nice.
I confess, it is our fault here at Delaware Liberal that we missed this little tidbit until now. It because of the former reasons why we dislike Celia and her writing that we attempt to limit our exposure to her. But the fact that this birtherism reveal did not make news in the News Journal and elsewhere reveals one of two things: 1) no one reads Celia or 2) Delaware is way more insidery that we ever imagined.
Actually I did a post about Cohen’s post and the birther joke was mentioned in the comments, I think.
No one “embraced bitherism” at the Dinner, the lame skit was written by someone in the SCRWC, it sucked, and everyone basically talked through the whole thing. The only person paying attention was the woman who wrote the skit.
UI, you did write up a post about Celia’s post on Michele Rollins but no one mentioned the birther comments.
M, so the SCRWC has embraced birtherism then. Tell me M, did the last line in the skit get a laugh or not? If it did, then the audience embraced birtherism. If they did not, then your point stands.
You couldn’t hear the skit over people socializing.
DelDem–it’s a far reach from being in attendance to embracing birtherism. How many talks have you listened to? Does that equate to agreeing w/ the speaker? And for your Anna Nicole comment–Michele Rollins was an educated, serious, bright, career happy, single woman–LONG before Mr. Rollins came along. She has returned as such today, though widowed. Care to remember a Sen. John Kerry and his golden goose Teresa Heinz? Really DelDem, these were both credible candidates, who happened to have some money on their side, obfuscated by comments as above. There will be plenty of time to address issues–no need to start a slam book.
And really? All this writing about the R’s. Just where is John Carney? Perhaps the state of Delaware wants to know.
I love when Republicans complain about ‘unfair’ campaigning and comparisons, with their trail of destroyed characters of Democratic candidates in their wake, including John Kerry.
Joanne: You left out “gold digger.”
So you call that campaigning? Wonder what Carney thinks? And oh yea, it’s official–Rollins will file at noon–so you can start casting your movie. The rest of us will be pinning down issues–oh and availability–so just where is John Carney—the LAST 16 MONTHS, w/ the majority of those months FILED as a candidate? Countin’ those chickens I bet…..yea Delaware chickens…before being hatched.
Well geezer, if she was–she was good at it. WOW, another accomplishment to brains, drive, vision, compassion, energy, work ethic, success, and CIVIC ENGAGEMENT. Yup, sounds like what this state needs.
“Just where is John Carney? Perhaps the state of Delaware wants to know.”
And perhaps not. I see no signs, except among Republicans, of anyone caring.
M – have you actually been inside the RB Convention Center? If so, then you would know that if there were only 75 people there (the Cape Gazette reported 100 and it was on the same night as the Sussex County Democrats Spring Dinner which drew 3 times the people) that a speaker would not be drowned out by idle chatter.
Hmmh, idle chatter. Much like what comes out of Joanne’s mouth 99% of the time.
It’s a heckuva campaign slogan, Joanne: “Vote for Michelle Rollins. She found gold in Delaware.”
If you think a marriage between a tax lawyer and a multi-millionaire was a love match, you must be a hopeless romantic. You’re probably even willing to believe that Paul Clark and Pam Scott found love between the land-use codicils.
What “civic engagement” are you pointing to, Joanne? Her political machinations to increase the family fortune? Or just the donations to Richard Nixon?
From his obit:
“Mr. Rollins was not above practicing dirty tricks in support of his views. In 1997, the National Archives released Watergate tapes of President Nixon and White House aides discussing Mr. Rollins’s plan to trick a black candidate into running for president to split the Democratic vote. The plan was never carried out.”
A good Republican, all right.
Much like what comes out of Joanne’s mouth 99% of the time.
Seriously? WTF?
How many sharks does the DE GOP get to jump over anyway?
going after JC not cool. and I don’t mean John Carney. even he would be nice to her.
MJ, it wasn’t at the RB Convention Center, it was at the Atlantic Sands, and I was there.
And Geezer, Michele isn’t John, and wasn’t married to John during the Nixon years.
She’s also no “gold digger” she was an accomplished, well paid lawyer with the SEC before she even met him.
What “civic engagement” are you pointing to, Joanne?
Buying her way into the Delaware Republican Party seems like.
“she was an accomplished, well paid lawyer with the SEC before she even met him.”
Right. Well on her way to amassing the fortune she has limited access to now. Dream on, sweetie. You, too, can become just as “accomplished” if you find a multimillionaire who’ll pay for both your tax-dodging expertise and access to your pants.
Geezer, her father, Michael Metrinko, built a business from nothing and ended up with a seat on the NYSE, and Michele was an accomplished lawyer. She didn’t need John for the money.
Rollins is in
http://blogs.cqpolitics.com/eyeon2010/2010/04/delaware-rollins-enters-gop-ra.html
Let me get this straight: She didn’t have to marry money because she stood to inherit it (government employees at the level she served don’t own Jamaican mansions). Thanks for the great defense.
Apologies to Joanne – typing one thing and thinking about someone else (and I didn’t check or edit).
Missunda – Then the Cape Gazette, who had a reporter at the event, must have gotten confused between the convention center and the hotel. And what do you consider a “well paid lawyer with the SEC?” They are paid according to the General Schedule – they don’t do billable hours.
I look forward to seeing Michele this summer shaking the hands of the great unwashed.
Uh, back to the thread. At least Celia is honest enough to let them know who she writes for. Her ‘contributors’:
PETE du PONT
JIM & ADA LEIGH SOLES
HAL HASKELL
M.C. BYRD (wife of uber-lobbyist and Minner ‘advisor’ Bobby).
Also, Byrd’s lobbying firm, the State AFL-CIO (I’d demand my dues back), and the Building & Construction Trades.
That’s it.
It’s a perfect match really. She makes them still feel relevant, even the Greenville ‘Diaper Dandies’, and they make her still feel relevant.
Vote for Michele Rollins: A “Gold Digger” who can buy the whole election! Her “Daddy” would be so proud. Is this what we want a golddigger with millions buying an election…yeah she will surely represent all us peons.
Like her or dislike her, Celia fills a niche that the MSM and blogs on both ends of the spectrum don’t (or can’t) fill. She’s probably forgotten more about Delaware governmental history than most people who claim to be insiders know about Delaware government.
She has those insider tracks, which sometimes leads to insider-y stories that some detest. But those insider tracks often yield an insight to politics that’s absent from most writing today.
I think there’s room for all three genres in the political game. People can pick and choose what to read, but if they read all three, they’ll have a pretty well-rounded view.
Bullshit. She is a courtesan blow job artist and a very good example of what is wrong with journalism in America.
And you, Jason, are a misogynist.
…..says the guy with no argument to make and no way to refute my observation.
Well, please document that Celia Cohen is a prostitute who specializes in oral sex, given that you have made that claim. Otherwise you have engaged in rank misogynistic libel of the woman.
If you don’t understand the concept of metaphor , you have no business reading and commenting on blogs.
I do understand metaphor — even used to teach it back in the day — but we then go back to the misogynistic aspect of the comment.
Women, it seems — in particular women you disagree with — are nothing but whores in your eyes.
Then again, maybe that isn’t misogyny. Perhaps it is instead evidence of psychopathology.
Geezer very cute stereotyping but you know that a 30 something woman with a law degree from Georgetown working for the SEC in the 1970’s would have had a very lucrative career ahead of her.
Why do people always have to discredit strong, accomplished women? It was done to Hillary Clinton in 2008, too, when her work putting together a health care bill and being an active part of the administration was characterized as throwing tea parties in the White House.
Does anyone here think that Hillary Clinton, despite her law degree and the experience she had on Capital Hill, would have ended up turning tricks at a Super 8 if she had never met Bill?
Tisk.
MJ visit Dover, the Rollins were significant patrons of the arts including a million dollar donation to the Capitol Theater. They have helped the sick and the hungry here and overseas. Knock her on the issues, but don’t degrade her sincere generosity because you happen to be ignorant.
The Rollins choose not to blow a horn in front of the majority of their charitable giving. That is good not bad.
No, not turning tricks. But not getting within sight of the White House unless she took a tour, either.
BTW, in case you hadn’t noticed, I have lots of negative things to say about powerful men, too. “Misanthrope” includes women, too.
David – Throwing money at the poor to get a tax write-off and having your stalking horse claim that is what qualifies you for elective office is ignorant and naive. I would rather see someone who has really worked for the good of the people serving in Congress than someone who, because she shtupped some old guy and got his money when he croaked, who claims that she is qualified because she’s a “patron of the arts.”
Now, go back to doing whatever the hell it is you do and let the adults have a discussion here.
“Knock her on the issues, but don’t degrade her sincere generosity because you happen to be ignorant.”
You don’t have the slightest idea whether her generosity was “sincere” or not. Disclaimer: By this, I don’t mean to imply you have the slightest idea about anything else.
Generosity is great and I’m glad she’s a patron of the arts. We need them. All I’m saying is that philanthropy is easy when you’re rich.
I have to agree with you UI.
I used to do charity bike rides all around the country. We all had minimum donation levels to meet for each ride. I had some friends with a few shekels who could write me a check for $500-$1000, so I was able to raise my money.
On one ride from SF-LA, we happened to be riding through the Central Valley, home to many farms and many poorly paid farm workers. On this particular day, the farm workers waved us down and asked why so many people were on bicycles (there were 3000 of us). We explained that we were raising money for AIDS treatment centers in SF and LA. One gentleman walked away and came back a few minutes later with $1.67, which he had collected from his 10 co-workers. That $1.67 meant more to me than any of those large checks. It wasn’t a write-off for them – it came from the heart.
MJ what a disgusting, ignorant, uninformed comment. Rollins was a Georgetown educated lawyer working for the SEC in the 1970s. As I clearly stated before, someone with her education and work experience would have been successful with or out without a rich husband.
Again, it’s discouraging to see so many people line up to bash the successful woman. She had a promising career as a lawyer before she met her husband, and she’s had a successful career building two hotels and running at least two businesses after his death. Not to mention the fact that she’s created massive amounts of jobs in Delaware, and is responsible for millions of dollars a year going to the state’s bottom line.
“someone with her education and work experience would have been successful with or out without a rich husband.”
She would not be worth $100 million, and you know it. There’s successful, and then there’s rich.
“she’s created massive amounts of jobs in Delaware”
This is the new Republican word of the week — jobs. Never in 100 years have Republicans cared about jobs, and you can tell because they still hate unions. But all of a sudden they do. I wonder why? Just for your information, Mz. Understandable, no business owner ever, ever, ever created a job unless he or she thought that employee would bring in more profit than his salary and benefits cost. Jobs are a byproduct of entrepreneurship, not its point.
“…and is responsible for millions of dollars a year going to the state’s bottom line”
This one’s really rich, no pun intended. You mean that the state is responsible for millions of dollars a year going to her bottom line. The state gave her a license of the sort that costs $50 million in other states for nothing.
Not that any of this should hamper her ability to mouth conservative boilerplate, which is all any Republican candidate ever does.
MJ doesn’t like women generally and Geezer is a smoldering misogynist. Don’t expect anything but bottom feeder regurgitations from these two.
The acid vitriol and raging invective spewed at Michele Rollins from over here in Hyenatown tell you all you need to know about what she really means to them:
Delaware’s House seat remains GOP in 2010 and their ignorant jock made gubernatorial reject gets sent back to obscurity.
Try all the class warfare garbage you like ya jackals. Michele is a charismatic dynamo who will run circles around your boy. All these hackneyed smears will get stuffed right back in your politically inbred little faces.
Ooh, I’m so hurt. For the record, I have much worse to say about her piece of shit dead husband. And she’ll be lucky to finish within 10 points of any Democrat who runs.
Love the resurrection of the “class warfare” meme, too. John Rollins’ horse-racing business loses money until the state gives away a gambling license that has, so far, generated more than $1 billion in revenue for Dover Downs, with a rate of state reimbursement lower than any other gambling state’s. But it’s “class warfare” to point that out.
Unless you’re a slumming rich person, Nonna, you’re a self-loathing member of the middle or lower class.
Comment by missundaztood: “…And Geezer, Michele isn’t John, and wasn’t married to John during the Nixon years.
She’s also no “gold digger” she was an accomplished, well paid lawyer with the SEC before she even met him.”
Ok missundaztood I didn’t read the obit for her husband 10 years ago, because I was still living in Iowa, but assuming Geezer is right, which I have no reason to doubt, then she put that tid bit about her husband in the obit. People don’t include what they see as skeltons in their loved ones obit, (Happy Rockefeller didn’t include how Nelson died in the obit she would have submitted to the NYT) which would mean she wasn’t ashamed of his tactics! Now if Geezer was talking about the papers own column after his death, and I misunderstood obit to mean what the family provides the paper (with a picture) to be put in the obit section of the paper, then that changes my opinion only to the extent she may not have been proud of his actions. It doesn’t change my mind about the type of person he was, and she either married someone she didn’t know, was a kindred spirit, or was properly repulsed by that part of his character, but felt his money cancelled it out. None of those options speak well of her character or judgment. And don’t give me the excuse she was young, she was 30, had graduated from college, and held two post college degrees when she married him!
It’s true she wasn’t with him while Nixon was President, she didn’t marry him until 1976, when she was 30 (and he was 60 YUCK!). But she married him soon after he had offered to “trick” a black candidate to run for President to split the Democratic vote. Someone who thinks they can “trick” a black person, who would have the capacity to garner enough votes to effect the election, at a minimum is a racist, and not merely a closet racist.
Think about it, Rollins would have believed he had the ability to “trick” a prominent black leader to run for President, or that black voters are so dim they would vote for any black candidate regardless of qualifications, or a combination of the two. Rollins essentially thought this potential black candidate would not see through his plan, and actually believe the country as a whole was ready for a black President, which it wasn’t. The idea that there was such a black leader who could be tricked into running is laughable enough (which means he was a dumb racist), or maybe he thought he knew a black leader with a ego to rival Ralph Naders, who knew Rollins was using him, but felt he could use Rollins as well to gain stature through the ill-advised run, however such a candidate would be unlikely to garner sufficient support to make a difference. Putting your name on the ballot doesn’t split the vote. Essentially Rollins thought all the blacks (or a significant portion) would vote for this phantom black candidate merely because of their shared race. Remember this phantom black candidate would either be very egocentric or dumb enough to be tricked to run for President by an aging white Republican millionaire. Not only would it be difficult to get the candidate on the ballot in all 50 states, as he wouldn’t be the GOP or Democratic nominee, but most voters, regardless of color do not throw away their vote. Yes some voters do throw away their vote, and occassionally votes for candidates without a chance do effect election (Nader votes in 2000). However, even if this phantom candidate could pull black votes away from the Democratic nominee, if you looked at the states where this phantom would have a chance to pull votes away from the Democratic candidate, they would be predominately southern states that are likely to go Republican any way. There would even be the possibility of “white fear” in swing states causing some to vote for the Democratic candidate instead of the GOP, out of fear that the black candidate could win their state. If the idea was to get a black candidate to run for the Democratic nomination, experience has taught us that by and large blacks and white Democrats vote the same. While Mr. Rollins could never have forseen the 2008 race, it proved his plan would not have worked. Before whites in Iowa (a state with an African American population just over 2%)supported Obama in record numbers, most African Americans didn’t think Obama had a chance, and were supporting Hillary. It was not until lily white Iowa came out in droves for Obama, that African American voters started to believe he could win. If Rollins plan could have worked during the Nixon era, African Americans would have supported Obama in large numbers before Iowa, but prior to Iowa his support among African Americans polled was less than among college educated whites, after Iowa it started to increase, and after events in SC, most African American voters backed Obama.
While she is not responsible for his actions prior to their marriage, if she has never spoke out against them, especially when he was still alive, it is fair to assume she embraces the conduct, or at least doesn’t view it as reprehensible. And if she actually put that episode of his past in the obit submitted to the paper, she was not ashamed of his conduct in 2000, and it is too late to walk it back!
Also as far as her charity, one needs to view it in the context of her wealth. When a school teacher donates 100.00 to a charity they make a sacrifice. When people of her wealth make a donation they don’t have to skip going to a movie or a night out, often it is a matter of reducing their tax liability, with the added bonus of having your name for ever on a building or hospital wing. Not to get too biblical, but as Jesus said the poor women who gave a penny gave more than the man who gave bags of silver, because she gave all she had. I’m glad Rollins gives to charity, but I’m more concerned with where she stands on the issues.
Actually, that was from the New York Times obit, which was prepared by the newspaper staff, not the family. They would never mention that. And I don’t hold her responsible for any of that; I don’t expect a wife to speak against her husband.
But let’s have a reality check here: John didn’t marry her for her looks, though she was plenty attractive, but for her tax expertise. She basically helped him by finding ways to avoid paying taxes. That’s a great selling point in the middle of a recession. I”m certain it will really help her connect with the average person.
But don’t worry — the female sheeple of Delaware always vote for their own. That’s how we got KWS.
“It’s true she wasn’t with him while Nixon was President, she didn’t marry him until 1976, when she was 30 (and he was 60 YUCK!). But she married him soon after he had offered to “trick” a black candidate to run for President to split the Democratic vote.”
The attempted “trick” was in 1971, she married him in 1976. That’s not “soon after”. And the obituary with the Nixon “trick” quote was written by William Honan for the NYT.
Ouch, nonna. Did Delusional David spike your Geritol with some illegal substance this morning?
I’m glad you know so much about me. Actually, I’m a donor to Emily’s List and have worked for more female candidates over the past 40 years than male candidates.
So, unless you have some proof that I don’t “like women generally,” do us all a favor and STFU.
No worries, MJ — nonna is the one with the woman issues around here. It’s how he gets to pretend that his own political arguments (such as they are) aren’t based in a whole lot of class resentments.
Another great slogan for Michelle: “Vote for Michelle Rollins. She’s nowhere near as sleazy as her dead husband.”
I don’t care if Rollins pulled his Nixon dirty tricks before he married her, she’s still the type of person who would marry someone who would do that type of activity.
I just purely resent rich people buying themselves a public post. As I listened to her quote on WDEL News last evening and she talked about it being time for her to step-up, all I could think was Yeah Michelle, ya better get yourself down to DC and vote to protect all your wealth. Of course, I’m sure she’s got it sheltered somewhere so she doesn’t have to pay her fair share for the bounty the US has showered on her. Just ICK on so many levels.
I don’t think you can get credit for creating jobs unless you do that in an industry that doesn’t need the protection of the state to survive. Besides, I think that the people who no longer work for the old Rollins Environmental might have alot to say about the so-called creation of jobs.
It’s sheltered in Jamaica. And creating jobs somewhere outside the US doesn’t count.
Married her for her tax expertise? Back to the canine shelter. SEC attorneys know as much about taxation as most Blue Rocks infielders. Even if Michelle had been a tax expert, guys don’t make their third trip to Rosalie Obara’s honeymoon launch to get non-billable help on § 482 allocations.
You may want to check out Dover Motorsports, they own tracks in 3 states, hold hundreds of car racing events, and hundreds of thousands of people attend those racing events. That creates jobs not only for the tracks, but also for the communities surrounding the race tracks and their hotels, restaurants, and stores that sell big #1 foam hands, etc.
No “protection of the state to survive” in that industry.
The Dover Downs opened in 1969, the casino didn’t open until 1995, so they existed for over 25 years without the benefit of the casino or “the protection of the state to survive”.
And since we’re talking wealth, is Chris Coons an heir to the Gore fortune because he was born into it, or because he married into it?
The current Dover Downs along with the rest of its in-state cohorts is working overtime to not have to compete for its business and looking to the state to help restrict that competition. The old Dover Downs might not even be in business without various rescues by the state including the approval of the video lottery.
So help yourself to your selective history of the success of these venues and your avoidance of the sorry Rollins Environmental business.
“The Dover Downs opened in 1969, the casino didn’t open until 1995, so they existed for over 25 years without the benefit of the casino or “the protection of the state to survive”.”
Again, you must be joking. The raceway held two races per year, and whatever the profits were then got diluted by the money-losing horse racing operation. You really think that’s in the same league as an operation that brings in nearly $200 million annually? Yes, Dover Downs “existed” before gambling. It thrived — including the spinning off of the motorsports as a separate entity — after it was CHARTERED BY, not protected by, the state of Delaware.
She was a working tax attorney before joining the SEC, John. Can you say the same about most Blue Rocks infielders?
Chris Coons, unlike Michelle Rollins, is in his second term in public office. Unlike Michelle Rollins, he’s not just coasting and paying money to have his water carried by elected officials.
She bounced around to several government jobs. Her career in tax law never progressed past the entry level.
Which still puts her far above a Blue Rocks player. And you know it.
So the difference between Coons’ silver spoon and Rollins silver spoon is that Coons is already in office?
Keep trying. Don’t worry, she’s a dynamo. Heh.
Sorry to defame the Carolina League. Michelle briefly aspired to be a tax lawyer. Though that didn’t last long, she moved onto other trades. Yet the notion that “John didn’t marry her for her looks, … but for her tax expertise” is among the biggest howlers in the brief history of this elegant site.
Sorry about that. I’m always willing to believe the worst about John Rollins. And I will note that he didn’t pick just any pretty face, or even a bimbo in general. I’m sure he had his pick of golddiggers — heck, he had already married one, hadn’t he? Michelle was No. 3.
And next time you see a 30-year-old marry a 60-year-old who isn’t rich it will be on either Maury or Jerry Springer.
Was it Coons mommy who married Bob Gore, thus giving him a trust fund the size of North Dakota and that job he held at W.L.Gore? Wouldn’t that make Coons mom a “golddigger”?
And what is Coons’ *mom* running for again?
Sheesh.
Keep trying missunda – you’ll eventually get off the bottom rung. Might take you a few years, but you’ll get there.
Nice try again — well, not really. Neither Chris Coons nor the Gore family paid out millions in campaign donations in order to get close enough to Richard Nixon to teach him a thing or two about dirty tricks, nor hundreds of thousands to fund Delaware candidates.
If you want to make your “woman of the people” feel good, why not buy her a gift certificate to her favorite spa?
So Rollin’s husband, who’s been dead for ten years, is fair game even though he’s not in a race but Coon’s mom isn’t? Nah, I don’t think it works that way. And if people want to call Rollins a “golddigger” they shouldn’t be surprised when that same label is slapped on Coon’s mother.
Let the battle between the obscenely rich begin!
Geezer I’ll send a gift certificate to Coons, too, maybe he can give it to his mom as a thank you for that WL Gore job she scored him.
So Michelle picked her pot of gold — Coons did not.
it is the choices that are under scrutiny here.
They are in separate battles. You won’t win Castle many points by noting that his challenger is rich. So is Castle, though not Michelle Rollins rich.
Has anyone seen Coons’ financial disclosure statements? Is his fortune in the same league as Rollins’?
As far as going after her husband, I’ll use any excuse to bash his greedy, arrogant, roasting-in-hell soul. It won’t be used against her by anyone but me.
Oh, is THAT what’s “under scrutiny here”? Because it looked like an ignorant, uninformed Rollins bashfest to me. Thank you for the correction.
Damn straight it’s a bash-fest. But it’s neither ignorant nor uninformed.
Indeed.
But apparently the *personal responsibility* crowd is making another special pleading.
Comment by missundaztood: “And since we’re talking wealth, is Chris Coons an heir to the Gore fortune because he was born into it, or because he married into it?”
The simply answer is neither. When Coons was young his Mom married into the Gore family.
Having great wealth is not a problem with me, some of the best Democratic presidents (FDR & JFK) came from great wealth, again I vote on issues, and the candidates character, which is not directly related to their balance sheet.
I also don’t fault Michele for marrying John Rollins for money (at least in part). I admit the age difference is a bit creepy. I can’t imagine getting married to someone who has children older than me (at least John McCain’s children from his first marriage were all younger than Cindy, and at the time John was good looking by traditional standards). And I admit the idea of marrying someone for wealth or power (especially 30 years my senior) makes me want to gag, but that has to do with my own priorities.
I also don’t buy that John married her for free tax help. It’s true she has a masters in taxation in addition to her JD, but he had two prior marriages, and the risk of marrying someone to help you shelter your money, would not only be odd, but given his marriage track record it would be down right crazy to have someone who could become your 3rd ex wife that involved in where you hide your assets. I have to assume two divorces taught him something. Also Henry Tippie was (is, he is still very much alive last I heard)a far better accountant than Michele could ever hope to be. Actually Michele wasn’t/isn’t an accountant at all, she has never sat for the CPA exam, although she has an LL.M. from Georgetown. Tippe besides being very generous to our respective alma mater, was Rollins’ accountant, and business advisor.
Michele today is no beauty, but in fairness when I’m her age, I doubt I’ll be much to look at either. While I haven’t seen pictures of her from the 60’s and 70’s, I have to assume that any women who was Miss USA in the mid 60’s was very attractive. My guess (and I admit geezer, it’s only a guess) John was attracted to her for her looks, and wanted a “pretty young thing” as wife #3, and the educational background was just a plus.
missundaztood you ask: “So the difference between Coons’ silver spoon and Rollins silver spoon is that Coons is already in office?”
There are many differences between the two. In fairness to Rollins, by all accounts since her marriage to John in the late 70’s she did work hard increasing the Rollins fortune, and by all accounts Coons has had no part in increasing the Gore fortune. I can’t imagine Chris would argue spending more than a decade in college obtaining various degrees and then serving as in-house counsel for W.L. Gore & Associates after law school has contributed to the companies financial success.
The question isn’t, or at least shouldn’t be whether someone was lucky by birth, or by marriage (Michele’s own marriage, Chris’ mom’s marriage), the question should be where do they stand on the issues, and what will they do if elected, and based upon their track record can they be trusted.
Realistically I don’t think Coons has a chance at beating Castle, or at least what ever small chance he has he seems to be squandering. And I really don’t know where he stands on the issues I care about, because they aren’t the type of issues that county government is involved. I wish I knew where Chris stands on issues important to me, and I have tried to find out his positions, but his website is silent on his position on any issue, let alone the specific issues I care most about. I’m also a bit concerned about his ability to keep his word (although at this point that isn’t a problem because he has failed to state any positions). When he ran in 2004 in his campaign literature promised not to raise property taxes, which as County Council President he should have known he would not, or could not keep after 10 years without a property tax increase. I don’t blame Coons for raising taxes, the economy took a downturn nationally, and locally, and I can forgive him for breaking his promise, although I do think he knew he couldn’t keep the promise when he made it, and should not have made the promise.
However I do know Mike Castle’s positions and I can’t imagine that Coons would not be better than Castle on the issues I care about.
I have no idea Rollins positions on any issues, she has failed to address issues. I’ll be interested to know her position on the bail out given the amount Wilmington Trust received, and her pay as a Board of Director more than tripled after they took the money.I’m sure that I will disagree with Rollins on most important issues, and I will happily support Carney.
Missunda is only on here so she can get an invite to Rollins’ Jamaica resort or her Chateau Country estate – as a guest instead of the hired help or a paying customer. Keep pimping for her – she may recognize you one day.
MJ you’re just so clever, rarely correct, but certainly clever.
ID she’s been in the race for 24 hours, maybe you should at least give her 48 hours before declaring that she’s failed to address issues.
Actually, I’m both!
Comment by Geezer: “They are in separate battles. You won’t win Castle many points by noting that his challenger is rich. So is Castle, though not Michelle Rollins rich.
Has anyone seen Coons’ financial disclosure statements? Is his fortune in the same league as Rollins’?
As far as going after her husband, I’ll use any excuse to bash his greedy, arrogant, roasting-in-hell soul. It won’t be used against her by anyone but me.”
I don’t think Coons has ever released his financial information, and I’m not sure that he has to depending upon whether the assets are in his name, a trust, etc. I do think he should not pretend that he has benefitted from his step dad’s wealth. I heard him at a talk during his 2008 primary and tried to protray himself as this poor child from a single mom. And he claimed (or strongly implied) he was able to go to college because of the Truman scholarship he received. He did get the scholarship, but not only did he not need it, those are huge scholarships. In the talk/interview (I heard it on WDEL) he completely ignored his mom’s marriage, and how their life obviously changed after that. It seemed to me that he saw being lucky that his mom married well as a liability. I don’t see it that way, but I saw his claiming to know about people’s financial struggles because he grew up the product of a struggling single mother, who could barely make ends meet bordering on dishonest. I don’t doubt for a few years before his mom married Gore he knew hard times, but to make it sound like during your entire youth you did without, and without the Truman scholarship you wouldn’t have been able to afford college was pretty phony.
My guess is we’ll never see a financial document, other than bare bones on either Coons or Rollins, but I don’t see wealth as an issue.
Also I agree Rollins’ husband is fair game.