Coons reveals his true views on diversity in the US Senate
On Friday, Coons appeared on a panel at the University of Notre Dame Law School. Near the end of the panel, Coons was asked a question about increased partisanship in the Senate, and specifically about the fact that in the “good old days” of bipartisanship “Congress was a lot more homogenous”
I want to believe of our country and ourselves that a more diverse Senate that includes women’s voices, and voices of people of color, and voices of people who were not professionals but, you know, who grew up working class and were the first in their family to go to school and so forth, that we can engage those voices and that they can be part of the debate, and that that doesn’t produce irreconcilable discord.
I think history may judge otherwise, but I appreciate your raising both points.
Just read the whole thing.. Not having a primary opponent is allowing Coons to really go off the rails.
h/t REV He’s a very active activist! Consider sending some Patreon love to his podcast.
Two things.
Good for ERS for acknowledging how appalling Coons’ views (not his utterance, let’s be clear…his views) are.
The GOP Senators on the panel clearly have a better understanding of the value and importance of diversity than Coons.
You left out the part where he plays the victim:
Yup. There is too much in that peice for one post.
“Dozens of angry (non-bipartisan) folks came to my office to protest me,”
Senator Coons,
Have you ever wondered why rich white guys don’t have barge into your office to protest?
Who is the last DE Senator to publically admit being rattled by protesters? Has there been any?
I feel like it may be working.
Big ups to the legion of adult dirtbags™ (L.A.D.s) for digging this up for our man at Splinter to report. You know who you are. Well done.
Yeah, if he gets this upset about it, we should do it more. Let us know ahead of time when you make your next foray.
We haven’t barged into the Senator’s office because we have jobs.
For the record, the arrested protestors were white, but your article (and website as a whole) executes top-notch race baiting.
See also: the hypocrite or lazy-beggar canard from a day or two ago.
It’s like I call my shots now.
Plus the racism. I mean, this a great comment.
Just your regular reminder that Chris Coons’ defining characteristic is cowardice. He can pretend it’s bipartisan comity all he wants. Those of us who have followed his career know it’s his cowardice in the face of bullying. He wouldn’t stand up against Tom Gordon, and by his comments at Notre Dame he apparently would have been A-OK with losing that Senate race to Mike Castle.
I noticed that. It reads like losing to Castle was the plan.
Because it was … In six years he had figured out how to do the county executive’s job. Two more years there and he could have gone back to work at the family business.
Instead, we got a guy whose greatest claim to fame is waking up early to schmooze on Morning Joe.
He does his bit for the family business by ensuring the Pentagon budget includes lots of Gore-Tex for the troops.
Senator Chauncey Gardener
Peter Sellers… RIP to a genius.
Sad, sad, sad. Terrible script, horrible plot, bad performance. Another box office flop produced by the Chamber of Commerce. Reality Show meet Docudrama meet Comedy (of errors) meet tragedy.
Rep. John Kowalko
“In the garden, growth has its seasons. First comes spring and summer, but then we have fall and winter. And then we get spring and summer again.” Maybe pessimistic Ben should listen to Chance the Gardener (the “real” one, not Coons), who was often wise by accident. I’m looking forward to some Watergate-style TV. “I like to watch.”
I came across your comment and realized you were confused.
The Sellers character wasn’t wise by accident. It was a critique about the gullibility and point of view of “elites”. How actually they will swallow any old nonsense.
Your perspective is very telling though.
I believe it is you who might be confused. As a gardener, Chance is wise in the way of nature. Nature is cyclical, not linear. It was not only the critique you cite, though it was that. It was also a commentary on people who think they can overrule Her dictates because they’re so smart, as well as a commentary on several other things besides. You should read the original novella, which is, Sellers aside, better than the movie.
Never read the book. I will do.
Yes I understand that art is a matter of perspective. No right answer. Is the character just a stand in for “nature”? Gotta read the book I guess.
The character doesn’t succeed as a gardener. In fact I don’t believe we ever see him garden.
He is “successful” because the elites actually are credulous.
In any case, he ain’t a Forest Gump type, if that’s the inference.
I haven’t seen the film in forever, but IIRC the garden is a walled, closed-off urban enclave he tends. He doesn’t stand in for nature. He’s in touch with nature, which the urban sophisticates are not.
Yes, the elites are the buffoons of both the book and the film. And no, he’s not a Forrest Gump type at all. He just likes to watch.
It brings me no pleasure in noting this.
if you say so.
I feel horrible about it.
Well, I just happened to run across these later comments by you and wanted to clarify a little. Chance said things that might be wise to adopt in certain circumstances, even if he didn’t know he was saying anything special. As I said, a pessimist might be wise to take heart at Chance’s remarks about renewal. Agree, though, that the main point in this case was to mock the gullibility of elites.
One of my favorite movie endings of all time. It turns the whole movie upside down.