Caroline Kennedy should not be appointed Senator from NY

She is a dilettante who mostly spends her time glorifying her family. Sure, given that she has loads of money, she's dabbled here and there with charity work, sits on different boards, and is very, very well connected.

But look at her resume (from Wikipedia):
- One of the founders of Profile in Courage award, named for JFK
- President of the Kennedy Library foundation
- Represented her family at various funerals
- Wrote The Best-Loved Poems of Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis
- Wrote A Family of Poems: My Favorite Poetry for Children
- Wrote Profiles in Courage for Our Time
- Wrote A Family Christmas" a collection of poems, etc. from her family history

Sure, she also cowrote a couple good books on civil liberties and helped Obama choose Biden, but by and large she's done far less than many other public servants. If she wants to run for office someday and shows she's one of the people, then good, I might even support her. But, to hand her a Senate seat would be honoring her surname in a way that perverts the long dedicated service of so many other Kennedys.

she currently has either the wide-ranging, deep policy background necessary to be an good Senator, nor the dedication to the fast-paced, sustained, high-octane type of public life that effective Senate service requires.

However, if she were appointed, I would welcome it--I'd rather take a gamble with her than get a careerist party hack.

x(

At least Caroline has lived there.

It wasn't handed to her on a platter. She had to work hard to get elected, and not just once, but twice.

:shrug:

It's an appointment. As you know.

Nobody in the real world would ever put up with your monotonous pissing and moaning for a minute.

FYI, Hillary is well respected and admired here in New York State, so why don't you just start worrying about your own state once in a blue moon instead of obsessing about hating the Clintons.

the thread we were snarking each other back and forth got locked before i could respond

first let me say
shame on you for using Gatorism to get my money for hillary's debt

but
appeals from a Gator cannot be denied and i have forced myself to compromise to comply with your request
i will send 550 bucks to her in honor of the 11 points we beat alabama by @ 50 bucks a point

all the rest i am giving to the haven
a small underfunded home for families displaced by domestic violence here in my area
they are kind of the adopted charity group of my job and will do a lot of good with it

Go Gators, Go Gators!!!!!!!!



Thank you so much for helping Hillary out!!!! Oh, and I got no shame. }(


In all seriousness, it's great that you are donating the rest of the money to that home. I see so many people who are all of a sudden without jobs that I'm trying to compensate by giving more than usual. There's a greater need this year than I ever seen before.

Thanks again and take care!!!


:hug:

has a small group seriously trying to make a difference without involving outside groups
the haven is the one here
when families fall apart or women need a safe place to be the haven is there
we have been involved with them for about 6 years that i know of and we still have no idea where the haven house is
every 2 weeks we host them to a fried chicken meal for about 20 so we know they have a steady stream of people to help
as a survivor of home destruction i always like to make sure the haven kids get what i can give them

as to the game
i work with a lot of Gatorhaters so it was double sweet for me as the night progressed
now we wait to let the chips fall at the BCS
i think we will be there but i wonder if we will play OU or texas
either way it will be another great game by americas greatest college
THE University of Florida!

as to your lack of shame
i married a Gator and personally i have found a shameless streak to be quite attractive in a woman

and so we arent threadjacking ill give my opinion
hillary had an edge in her first election (unarguable)
the voters of NY then elected her again
say what you want about the first election
but the voters of NY kept her on

caroline kennedy would be a good pick
well spoken good family everyone knows her (they think)
if she is chosen then the NY voters will get the chance to confirm or deny her in the next election

I just think that there are other people who should be considered first, like her cousin or Andrew Cuomo.

So, your wife is also a Gator and shameless. It must be the water.......the swamp water. :evilgrin:

Your coworkers must be Seminoles. x(

they are the bane of earth but their ol boy coach hasnt had a good year since 99
angry lsu fans (we demoralized lsu so badly they never recovered)
penn state fans pulling for joepa (i gotta admit i have a soft spot for joepa)
lotta ohio state fans (i dont have to tell you what they are pissed at us for i bet)
nebraska fans (who still cant cope with the sucking sound from lincoln)
andrew cuomo....i could say he would work out
good connections too didnt he marry one of bobby k's kids?
i seem to remember that

There appear to be more Kennedys that one could shake a stick. It must be the Catholic Irish thing, they do procreate (I'm half Irish, just clarifying before someone raps me over the knuckles).

As for your coworkers, screw them!!! They are just jealous of our sheer awesomeness.

:toast:

look at us!
we are like buddies!
lol

Besides, conflict makes for some interesting encounters. If we all though alike it would be soooooo boring.

;-)

for you Hillary haters.

Why don't you put some effort into it and post something intelligent every once in a while...

So what makes Caroline any different... She comes from a strong history of family in politics so I'm sure she knows alot more than she's getting credit for here.

What a stupid post.

:thumbsdown:

On all counts.

What does her work for her family foundations involve? What do you think or know she does? Do you think Barbara Bush could be appointed Senator because of the work she does for her family foundation?

I suggest you educate yourself on the various activities of the (charitable) foundation and the library. And running it is no small matter.

She's also a good constitutional law scholar, something sorely lacking among our current collection of pols.

Comparing her to Barbara Bush is one of the most idiotic things I've ever read here.

on another thread and saying Palin was more qualified.

Un-fucking-believable.

I took care of it :evilgrin:

no frickin way!

stupid strong with this one?

My. God.

Your comparing Barbara Bush to Caroline Kennedy

Does Barbara Bush have a law degree? How many books on civil liberties has she written? Does she serve on the board for any groups legal defense funds like the NAACP?
Was Babarab Bush's father a beloved figure in American History who was brutally assasinated and did Barbara grow up hardly knowing her father?

Did you ever think that maybe Caroline does the work on those foundations in the memory of her father so she could better know a man she only has memories from age 5 of?

I was not comparing her to Barbara Bush, just merely stating that if you think Kennedy's work for her foundation justifies her promotion to Senator, then one could logically hold that same standard to Barbara Bush. And I have no objection to Caroline Kennedys work on Kennedy issues, it's just that I think she's more interested in the Kennedy legacy than in national policy. In fact she seems rather obsessed with her family name.

when I was 5 years old...I'd probably be in interested in preserving my father's legacy as well...mostly as a way to feel close to him.

Most of the work she does is honoring her Father. She never got to know him. I just lost my dad 2 years ago and I knew him for 28 years and I still have a void...I can't imagine what that void feels like at 5.

dilettante (plural dilettantes or dilettanti)

A person who enjoys the arts.
An amateur, someone who dabbles in a field out of casual interest rather than as a profession or serious interest.
A person with a broad but superficial interest in an art or a branch of knowledge. (Sometimes derogatory.)


She got her start (and met her future husband) working at the Metropolitan Museum of Art, and getting appointed as Senator when she has not ever been elected to political office previously would fit my definition of an amatuer dabbling in a field she has previously shown little interest in.

the root of the word is amo or to love
so it would be to do something out of love wouldnt it?
not trying to be picky really but given the base of the word
amo
i feel more than a casual interest is implied

exceptionally kind and willing to listen. She would be a tremendous asset in the Senate.

Ummmm Teddy Kennedy 1962. What had he done prior to running for Senate?

He turned out Ok I guess
:sarcasm:

This is politics. Sometimes an individual's ability to contribute to the party trumps other things.

The Senate is a mixture of legacies and self made men. There are legacies that fucking suck and there are legacies that are better than their fathers. The same goes with the Self Made Men.

His President Brother and His Father essentially buying the election didn't help him win.

:rofl:

I guess they went through with the formality of an election

was appointed, IF she is appointed.

He was actively involved in the nuts and bolts of politics. Caroline has not been.

she is America's first child.

She is smart. She is centered. She has her uncle to teach her the ropes. NY could do much much worse. NY would be hard pressed to do better.

:P

:shrug:

do whatever suits ya. Pick someone that'll win in 2010 if that isn't too much to ask...

You left out:

Kennedy is an attorney, editor, writer and member of the New York and Washington, D.C. bars.

Kennedy is currently President of the Kennedy Library Foundation,<4> a director of both the Commission on Presidential Debates and the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund.

She is also an adviser to the Harvard Institute of Politics, a living memorial to her father.

Books -

The Right to Privacy
In Our Defense: The Bill of Rights in Action

In fact, you just covered the "lighter" side of her achievements.

Most of her critics here (this goes back to her inclusion on the VP search committee) likes to dismissively say she wrote a cookbook. Pretty pathetic, really.

but I don't ever remember her working as one.

An the editing/writing may be from her books?

From Wiki

The Right to Privacy
In Our Defense: The Bill of Rights in Action

which are far more scholarly. The should be in wiki as well.

The other books are the ones she edited.

And even if she is a relative lightweight, she's still head and shoulders better that most those on the other side of the aisle.

I have no problem with it, should it happen.

And what makes you think that after being in the Senate for 2 years she wouldn't want to stay?

Regards

after 2 years, she'd have to run for the seat. If she had proved herself to be unworthy of it she wouldn't be elected. If she showed she was worthy, she would be elected. Something wrong with that?

to just be a placeholder.

is a whole lot more substantial than the likes of most of the Republican Senators. WTF has Bunning done? Or that twit from Alabama? Saxby Chambliss has done what, other than be a cheerleader for everything that is wrong with the Republican Party.

Carlone Kennedy os over qualified if you put her up against those idiots.

A crashing bore.

She obviously inherited her mother's genes when it comes to wit.

than Evan Bayhh

It would be interesting to see her run for Senate, but I rather doubt she has the taste for it.

Just curious.

We've all grown up watching her.

At least, those of us of a certain age have.

If you find her inspiring, that's great. I think she's flat and boring.

To the extreme. I wish her well. I have no doubt that she is a kind person.

But then, I find most of your posts....amusing. Or something.

Don't know why you are venting your bile on me. I think she has done good work. I just happen to think she is a bore.

I've followed her career for many years now.

because those shows with him wrestling with crocodiles and giraffes etc were so enthralling.

A thrill a minute, that Marlin Perkins.

The fact of the matter is that Caroline Kennedy has given many excellent, graceful speeches at various conventions over the last several decades.

Anyone appointed will be "given" the seat that they may or may not have been able to earn through an election. The fact is that I would bet that if NY law was for a special election - as MA's is, she could likely beat any of the people likely to get the position. (In fact, the toughest challanger might be Mario Cuomo's son - who though he worked in the Clinton White House and he is now NY's AG, is helped by his lineage as well. (I know Clinton worked hard to get elected the first time - but she was helped because of the fame and star power she had as First Lady. Then the Democratic party supported her and possible primary opponents didn't compete. The Democratic nomination didn't insure a win, but it made her a favorite to win.

One thing I find interesting is that some unhappy with Caroline Kennedy were ok with RFKjr. Is that because there is resentment that Caroline's endorsement and that of his uncle and Kerry?

For those of us with long memories, as you read the various posts on this topic, you can't help but conclude that this is just more primary fallout. Caroline obviously endorsed the wrong primary contender.

Is she supposed to sing and tap-dance to be a good senator?

I don't think she has the "chops" to run.

She is a boring personality with a famous name.

Who knows how far that will get her?

She will have to lobby for the position.

She will have to cash in on her famous name to get her seat in the Senate. Right?

The part she allows out? I grew up with her, in fact, I'm pretty sure we are the same age. I think she has presented herself quite well, and has done a very good job of keeping her private life private. Something she no doubt gleaned from her doting and wise mother.

Unless you are privy to her private life, I'm pretty sure you are as clueless as I am about her personality.

I'm one myself.

But we vote blue and listen to some damned fine music.

And in any case, I don't want to be entertained. I want to be represented.

Sorry, couldn't help it :)

things she perceives to be important. You might describe her as shy, or reserved, but boring? NO way. Philanthropists fight over who gets to sit next to her at $10,000 a plate dinners. She has a genuine passion that would surprise the people on this board who are excoriating her. She's a fighter. And, honestly, a very nice, kind person.

She doesn't deserve the comments here on DU. Not in the least.

no crashing bore. She's a delightful woman who is very committed to her causes.

Just because there is no scandal in her life doesn't make her a 'crashing bore'.

Just as JFK escalated Vietnam and tried to do the same with Bay of Pigs. (JFK was great in many ways, but he he was pretty bad in some ways, too.)

I believe in human dignity as the source of national purpose, in human liberty as the source of national action, in the human heart as the source of national compassion, and in the human mind as the source of our invention and our ideas. It is, I believe, the faith in our fellow citizens as individuals and as people that lies at the heart of the liberal faith. For liberalism is not so much a party creed or set of fixed platform promises as it is an attitude of mind and heart, a faith in man's ability through the experiences of his reason and judgment to increase for himself and his fellow men the amount of justice and freedom and brotherhood which all human life deserves

I believe also in the United States of America, in the promise that it contains and has contained throughout our history of producing a society so abundant and creative and so free and responsible that it cannot only fulfill the aspirations of its citizens, but serve equally well as a beacon for all mankind. I do not believe in a superstate. I see no magic in tax dollars which are sent to Washington and then returned. I abhor the waste and incompetence of large-scale federal bureaucracies in this administration as well as in others. I do not favor state compulsion when voluntary individual effort can do the job and do it well. But I believe in a government which acts, which exercises its full powers and full responsibilities. Government is an art and a precious obligation; and when it has a job to do, I believe it should do it. And this requires not only great ends but that we propose concrete means of achieving them.

Our responsibility is not discharged by announcement of virtuous ends. Our responsibility is to achieve these objectives with social invention, with political skill, and executive vigor. I believe for these reasons that liberalism is our best and only hope in the world today. For the liberal society is a free society, and it is at the same time and for that reason a strong society. Its strength is drawn from the will of free people committed to great ends and peacefully striving to meet them. Only liberalism, in short, can repair our national power, restore our national purpose, and liberate our national energies.

What do our opponents mean when they apply to us the label "Liberal?" If by "Liberal" they mean, as they want people to believe, someone who is soft in his policies abroad, who is against local government, and who is unconcerned with the taxpayer's dollar, then the record of this party and its members demonstrate that we are not that kind of "Liberal." But if by a "Liberal" they mean someone who looks ahead and not behind, someone who welcomes new ideas without rigid reactions, someone who cares about the welfare of the people -- their health, their housing, their schools, their jobs, their civil rights, and their civil liberties -- someone who believes we can break through the stalemate and suspicions that grip us in our policies abroad, if that is what they mean by a "Liberal," then I'm proud to say I'm a "Liberal


JFK made some mistakes. However many people believe one of the reasons why he was shot was Vietnam and his desire to pull the advisors.

JFK did not try to escalate it - it was planned under Eisenhower and he, at worse, failed to stop it. Even though he escalated Vietnam - there were very few soldiers there when he was assasinated - the big escalation was LBJ.

Not to mention, Caroline Kennedy is not her dad. Caroline Kennedy as a young teen volunteered on John Kerry's 1972 campaign and backed McGovern. (At a Kerry rally, she spoke of bicycling from school to get to the campaign office.) You might recall what JK was famous for in 1971.

JFK added advisor's to the Vietnam war. 15000 of them. Eisenhower initiated the Bay of Pigs. Look up your history. I am disappointed in the remarks made by some people. Freepers loose again?

But I guess the people of New York would have a chance to take her out in two years if they find her unqualified.

I do believe she is appointed and then has to run for election to the remainder of the term which would be through 2012 when she could run for her first full term....

and would do as well if not better than many other current sitting senators.

I don't want to hear it.

Voting for Hillary Clinton is the ultimate in dynastic politics.

Caroline Kennedy can stand on her own family name.

Right?

:)

And I don't like the hypocrisy of supporting one dynasty, and then turning around and whining "No more dynasties!" when it's someone else.

Ironic, that.

But there was no way in hell I was voting for that tool Rick Lazio.

Regards

http://archives.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOLITICS/stories/05/16/hrc.nominate/index.html

New York Democrats nominate Hillary Clinton for Senate

May 16, 2000
Web posted at: 10:35 p.m. EDT (0235 GMT)

ALBANY, New York (CNN) -- With her husband at her side and some 11,500 other Democrats watching in the hall, first lady Hillary Rodham Clinton received the state convention's nod as the Democratic nominee for the U.S. Senate from New York.

...

Some had termed the evening more a coronation than a convention because the vote formalized what had been expected for months.

Sen. Charles Schumer announced the nomination, which was seconded by Reps. Charles Rangel and Nita Lowey. The nomination of the nation's only first lady to run for public office was passed by a unanimous voice vote.

"I'm proud to be nominated by my friend Chuck Schumer, because I am looking forward to serving with him as part of a team on behalf of New York," Clinton said.

Lowey decided not to run for the Senate seat last year after Clinton expressed her interest in the post.


...

In a continuing effort to dispel any concerns that her new residency only reflects a "carpetbagger" status, the first lady has campaigned heavily throughout the state, making stops in each of New York's 62 counties to discuss her plans on health care, education, agriculture, tax cuts and the economy.

"That's going to be my primary focus, the economy, when I'm elected senator," Clinton told Buffalo voters at a nationally televised town hall meeting earlier this month.

Despite Tuesday's nomination, it still is appropriate to refer to the first lady as the presumptive Democratic nominee for the Senate seat, but technically not as the actual nominee. The state Board of Elections does not certify a candidate as the official nominee until after primary day -- which is this September 12 -- even if only one candidate is running.

Clinton will almost certainly run unopposed in the Democratic primary. Two other Democratic Senate hopefuls who sought to be considered in Tuesday's convention balloting failed to get the required 15 delegate signatures. Clinton got more than 200 names on her petition.

Other Democratic candidates would now have to embark on a laborious statewide petition drive to be listed on the September primary ballot with Clinton, and none are known to be planning such an effort.
Entrenched opposition?

A new poll conducted by the Quinnipiac College Polling Institute indicates the first lady is in a dead heat with New York Mayor Rudolph Giuliani, her once-all-but-certain Republican rival for the Senate.

...


or how they got NY residency a few months before that

With Some Help, Clintons Purchase a White House
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9503E5D8153AF930A3575AC0A96F958260

By ADAM NAGOURNEY
Published: September 3, 1999

President Clinton and Hillary Rodham Clinton yesterday settled the question of where the First Family will live once their lease on the White House expires, signing a contract to buy a $1.7 million, 11-room Dutch Colonial home in the wooded suburbs of Westchester County. The choice of a home in New York removes one of the chief obstacles in Mrs. Clinton's path as she prepares for a run for the United States Senate.

The Clintons, indebted by over $5 million in legal bills from the investigations that have marked the Clinton Presidency, were able to buy the white-shingled, five-bedroom home in Chappaqua after Mr. Clinton's chief fund-raiser, Terry McAuliffe, personally secured the loan.

The White House said that Mr. McAuliffe had put up $1.35 million of his own money with Bankers Trust. Under the terms of the mortgage, Mr. McAuliffe will get the money back, with interest from the bank, once the Clintons pay back the mortgage, or, as is more likely, refinance it in five years.

The deal was announced in a three-paragraph statement issued by the temporary press office of the White House -- a room in the Holiday Inn in Auburn, about seven miles from where the Clintons are vacationing in upstate New York. It apparently concludes one of the more unusual house-hunting expeditions embarked on by any American family, complicated by the Clintons' station in life, the fact that they have not owned a home in 16 years and Mrs. Clinton's political ambitions in New York.

They really owed him a lot.

She should be Secretary of State instead.

you provided some useful info!

I totally agree with you. I have never understood the nepotism that is allowed to flourish in the congress/senate. I think about Sonny Bono's wife getting his seat, it was unbelievable...........And people wonder why the congress has been such a mess for so long. Not that there aren't many reasons of course.

If Caroline wants to be a senator, she should run, just like any other person.

Someone here said that Hillary was just a name, a totally ridiculous comment. I would say that comment would apply to Caroline. And the contrast of the two of them is strikingly different!

Talk about a dynasty.............

Save the snark!

Do you think that without Hillary's family name, she could have turned up in New York a few months before an election, and threw her hat in the ring, and won the seat? If so, I'd like some of what you're smoking....

And to think that I like her BECAUSE she is not a typical hand shaking pol. There is a whole lot of character behind the reserved (not boring) Caroline. She is a very straight shooter, is honest, dedicated, hard working, and intelligent. She is not blackmailable, like most of the people in Washington. The typical politician loves the limelight of campaigning, and then their egos get in the way of doing the job. Not so with Caroline, who is very unlike the typical pol. I also think she is tough. She has the personal qualities that would enable her to be an outstanding Senator.

I'll take my handshaking reps over her any day of the week. Pat Leahy, Bernie Sanders and Peter Welch worked to get where they are. And there is no evidence whatsoever that she's tough. None. Zero. Zip.

I love the way she handles herself. We don't need every single Senator to be the type that puts themselves in front of the spotlight and says "Me, Me, Me" to raise money, attend fund raisers, consort with K street in order to get elected. Every one of them is like that, and we can use a few with a different style.

If you think Pat Leahy or Bernie does any such thing, you're woefully uninformed. And they aren't alone.

If she wants the seat she can run for it. She's not fucking royalty.

Didn't know that she was being appointed KING.

As far as I know, Patrick Leahy, and Bernie Sanders are not eligible for appointment to this position. Sheesh!

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

:eyes:

Some people need to learn how to respect other people's opinions and stop acting immature, petulant and cruel.

she has a law degree and has practiced law.

Being a Senator doesn't really require A LOT of Washington insider know-how, anyway. She would just be one of a 100 others, a really really junior senator with a small basement office.

My guess is that Dems are prepping her for a possible Presidential run in the future.

I would rather have President Caroline Kennedy over President Sarah Palin any day!!

it would do is bring another goddam progressive woman into the upper chamber.

My god, people, when will this STOP? The first thing you know, Caroline would start hanging around with Barbara Boxer and Claire McCaskill and THAT ilk, and they'd be thick as thieves, promoting environmental protections, health care, and low-income housing. We'd never hear the friggin end of it.

It would be one more nail in the coffin of the Reagan Revolution. We already have PLENTY of liberal women in the damn Congress -- we don't need another one.

I mean, let's not get carried away here.

that has nothing whatsoever to do with why I don't support her being APPOINTED to the Senate. And she's hardly the only possible dem who would hold those positions. Obviously.

running around and adding one more -- a WOMAN no less -- would be unthinkable.

Caroline Kennedy must be STOPPED!

:hi:

some sort of brain transplant.

:hi:

detention facility in Michelle Bachman's district, please dear god form a posse and come get me!

and are qualified for more than their name.

Nothing against her, but CK is after all only known to the exent she is due to her bloodlines.

bloodline her gift for converting political celebrity into meaningful social action is exemplary, and by the strength of such sacrifice, she qualifies more notably than many others.

In fact her position has been dramatic for its quietude. She works behind the stage, well out of range of microphones and spotlights. For some many decades she pointedly has not drawn attention to herself as a president's daughter.

I will honor Paterson's choice and feel he has a deep bench in front of him.

But I see no reason at all why an intelligent, unselfish, capable, potent woman like CKS should not be able to represent the citizens of New York State.

live there. 'Was a Bella Abzug volunteer, in fact.

This is going to be an interesting political drama.

Are you serious?

talk about a stupid fucking comparison. wowzer.

Seems to me their experience is about the same except for the fact that she's not been directly in the government. His work in Chicago, hers with various foundations and causes. His books, her books. Their high intelligence. She might be a breath of fresh air.

Obama served for years in the Illinois Senate. He ran for that seat. He served in the U.S. Senate for four years. He ran for that seat. He practiced law. He was a conlaw prof.

If she wants to run, fine. She should run. She has never put herself out their for the public to judge.

:popcorn:

Not saying she's the BEST, but she's pretty cool.

Nothing like a quick look at Wikipedia
to get the whole story.

I'd say appoint her.

We can NOT have anyone in the U.S. Senate who is involved in any way with POETRY.

We just can NOT.

but I basically agree with your post. She seems to be a genuinely nice person who has done some charitable work, but the qualification is in the name.

a reliable substitute for her own resume?

A close connection to Barack Obama -- the importance of which should not be underestimated.
A high profile for New York's Senator from the instant she took office (as opposed to someone known only in the state).
The respect that she'd be accorded by the rest of the Senate.

It's gonna be beautiful!!

Hillary must be steamed at the idea. She's got serious competition now.

Heh, I'm looking forward to it.

Now those doubts have evaporated.
There will be a Senator Kennedy waiting in the wings...

But I'm afraid our standards will be set so high after 8 years of Obama, no one will seem capable of filling his shoes.

Obviously, I'm still in the "honeymoon phase"!!!

Watching him up there, I have to keep pinching myself. Not only is the Bush era finally over -- but we're getting this amazing new President instead.

And I give a lot of credit to Michelle -- both for being a great campaigner and for supporting his run.

:fistbump:

I'd love to have a choice other than an "inevitable" Hillary redux in 2016. Once was enough.

There were many more candidates more experienced and resumé-qualified to be SoS than Hillary but Barack
chose her for her big-name recognition, among other things.

And many here whined all election year about how Barack Obama was too inexperienced to be president but
44+ million Americans disagreed and now he'll be 44 instead of the supposedly "more experienced" Hillary
and McCain. Ah, Schadenfruende is so sweet!

Heh, I love Caroline Kennedy for her many good works in New York (I am a native New Yorker) and I think
she'll represent the state wonderfully. Furthermore, Gov. Patterson will do what's best for Gov. Patterson,
the Democratic Party, and President-Elect Obama. I'd much rather have a loyal Obama supporter replace
Hillary than that Clintonian asshole Andrew "shuck and jive" Cuomo mentioned in the press. That way, New
Yorkers will have a direct conduit to getting what they want right in the Oval Office, which is great for
New York and Gov. Patterson's political ends, which includes balancing a budget facing a $5B shortfall.
Caroline Kennedy is a political rock star who's finally awoken to her potential to do good and I applaud
her interest in the Senate seat. I would bet if there was an election, she'd win in a landslide. New Yorkers
love her (much more than Hillary, I daresay, especially after this election year) and we're a tough
crowd to please.

If she wants the job, she'll get it. That's the way the game is played in American politics.

If she were Senator, she'd be one of the Senators with the closest connections to Obama. Don't you think that is something that could benefit New York State?
And she would have greater support and respect from the rest of the Senate than the typical liberal New York Senator.
She'd be effective in getting things done for New York for reasons that wouldn't show up on a resume.

And for the Democrats in New York, she'd offer instant name recognition and fund raising ability. Any Rethug running against her will have a steep uphill battle.

But if she's appointed I won't be complaining. I'm just so happy about the Democrats taking back our government, FINALLY! :bounce:

refreshingly practical and realistic assessments of this topic I've seen in days and days and days.

If you are not currently serving a public office, ma'am, I hope you will consider it.

Thank you, Old Crusoe. Coming from someone I respect as much as you, that's a real compliment.

I'm more of a behind-the-scenes person, but I have noticed how things get done. One of my favorite teachers in high school was a member of a highly successful political family, so I've been paying attention to this for a very long time.

I don't think anyone believes that Obama won because his resume was so much thicker than Biden's, or (Kerry's or Gore's). But he offered even greater intangibles -- and Caroline recognized this right away. I hope she has a great future ahead of her . . . as the Senator from New York.

Offering "greater intangibles" as a way of gauging import and inspirational lift. And the promise of meaningful reform where it's most needed.

Thank you for that.

Being a Kennedy shouldn't be held against her, especially given her understanding of Constitutional law (which puts her way above many standing members of congress in my eyes) and her intellectual capacity.

Why exactly? It seems it would be a fitting replacement for another competent and liberal woman.

I am not saying she is the only one worth nominating, just that you are selling her abilities short. That she did not think she deserved being elected at 30 without qualifications because she was a Kennedy should not be held against her, but for her. She is indeed qualified, has taken interest in things outside her golden circle, and is liberal. This is definitively way superior to some people who were just elected or reelected.

You're generalizing about my feminist views because I oppose special privileges to the landed elite. Sure there are worse people than her, but why choose someone who apparently has never been among the people or run for office, and primarily serves her family name or the glorification of other individuals, not the needs of the oppressed? Aren't there people with names other than "Kennedy" who have devoted their lives to helping the poor, minority communities, women, and other oppressed groups? Why the hero worship?

If she is appointed, she will have to run in both 2010, to finish out Hillary's term, and then in 2012 for a full six year term. In a state like New York that will require a lot of money.

she's used to meeting people "of substance," so she's comfortable and not intimidated by supposedly powerful people.

Those are, after all, some of the credits that Hillary Clinton brought to her campaign for President (she counted her First Lady experience of rubbing elbows with foreign dignitaries, and discussing politics and issues in and around the White House and in foreign countries).

The Kennedys are raised as political animals and to discuss all matters of issues. It's in their blood. They are used to rubbing elbows with powerful, knowledgeable people, so that doesn't faze them. Carolyn Kennedy seems to be a very diplomatic person, as are most Kennedys (seeing as how they rub elbows with all sorts of people from all walks of life, and therefore, learn to be diplomatic).

She has had some of the best teachers in our country (Ted Kennedy being one).

It's just a two-year stint where someone has to vote the "right" way. And that's it, unless she decides to run on her own for election (which I doubt....I don't see her as a campaigner, as you obviously don't).

So what's the big deal?

just taking the people's money to do work for anyone but the people. Caroline seems very intelligent and would be there for the right reasons, to carry on the legacy of her father and uncles before her.

the New York and Washington D.C. bars. "...worked as chief executive for the Office of Strategic Partnerships for the New York City Department of Education. During this time, she helped raise more than $65 million for the city’s public schools. <5> She currently serves as the Vice Chair of The Fund for Public Schools, a public-private partnership founded in 2002 to attract private funding for public schools in New York City. " "...a director of both the Commission on Presidential Debates and the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund,"

Also co-wrote * In Our Defense: The Bill of Rights In Action (1990) and * The Right to Privacy (1995)



Also wrote * A Patriot’s Handbook

Looks a lot less impressive when you dismiss the above three as "a couple of good books on civil liberties.." and enumerate the ones on poems, then dismiss helping to raise more than 65 million dollars as "dabbling."

You may have a point that there are better qualified for the job, but the way you made it stinks.

This is a disgusting post and you should be ashamed. :puke:

She has not demonstrated a serious interest in electoral politics until now when she hopes it will simply be handed to her on a silver platter.

demonstrated a serious interest in electoral politics?

I was hesitant to say anything because I didn't want to be virtually stoned to death. Caroline Kennedy is a lovely woman, but what the hell has she done that makes her deserving of a senate seat on a silver platter??????

Granted, that Hillary wouldn't have ran in NY either if she hadn't been Hillary Clinton. But, and this is a big but, she worked her ass off to win the confidence, respect and votes of New Yorkers. She visited every county and didn't take any vote for granted. She did the same when she ran for reelection. People in NY had a choice of voting her into office or not, and they chose her as their senator. Who has chosen Caroline??????

I would prefer the seat went to Bobby Jr., Cuomo or someone else of that ilk.

:(

what NY Democrat do you think would have more influence on NY's behalf than Caroline in the Senate?

What NY Democrat would have more fund raising capability?

What NY Democrat would be closer to Obama?

Pity that Bobby Jr. doesn't want the job, he would have been perfect for it.

of a strike that would be against him, but it would certainly hurt him among some people.

I don't know, but I don't think that it would have bee a big deal. Look at some of the guys who are still serving in the senate, like Craig for example.

The Republicans did not nominate him in his re-election.

A better argument is RFK jr's work as a River Keeper etc - though I think Caroline is better. I suspect that part of the difference from you is that they made different primary endorsements.

I have nothing against Caroline, I just don't think that she deserves to have a senate seat handed to her on a silver platter just because her name is Kennedy. Uncle Teddy is lobbying hard for her, but I think that there are others who are far more deserving. If she wants to run for office, let her do it on her own and earn the votes of the people like Hillary had to do it.

THen tell me what the comnnection between Patterson and Ted Kennedy is.

What did RFK jr do that made him "perfect", while he has done good work on the environment, he is in some ways a weaker candidate than his cousin.

The fact is the NY Democratic party all but gave HRC the nomination - she then simply had to win thegeneral election. That is more than Kennedy will have to do - but that is true of anyone selected. No one has run for the Senate.

and helping elderly people cross the street?

I don't know how to break this to you but Caroline has worked harder than most of the old boys.

MY Senators damned well did work their way up and they were ELECTED not appointed. And Caroline for all he vaunted qualities is hardly to be compared with YOUR senator- Barbara Boxer. Or for that matter my Senators- Pat and Bernie.

I'm a New Yorker. So, why not? Maybe she'll do nothing for 4 years. However, I'm not a fan of Hillary Clinton's, so at least I can say that Caroline won't be a carpet bagger.

She would be perfect as the new senator from New York. I hope it happens.

1) Money: Whoever is appointed will have to raise a LOT of money (maybe as much as $100 million) over the next four years because s/he will need to run in both 2010 and 2012. Of the people who have been suggested for this seat, Kennedy is probably the one who would have the easiest time of it, because of her family and her own connections in New York fund-raising circles.

2) Influence: Thanks to both the Kennedy mystique and the policy people associated over the years with Uncle Ted, Caroline Kennedy wouldn't just be a freshman senator when she started. She would have out-sized influence, if she chose.

3) Obama: Kennedy was an early and prominent supporter of Barack Obama and a member of his VP selection committee. She could be counted on to be a reliable pro-administration voice in the Senate, and she in turn could expect a lot of support from the Obama White House, especially in 2010.

I understand the resistance to a dynastic appointment -- just as I understood the resistance to Hillary Clinton's waltzing into the state in 2000 -- but, given how things really are, I don't think any of the other contenders is as attractive. Cuomo could probably raise money, but he wouldn't have quite the star power and he backed Clinton in the primaries. Lowey? Maloney? Gillibrand? Outside of their own districts, who really knows who these women are? As long as she's reasonably good at constituent services, Kennedy could hold the seat with ease in 2010, allowing New York Democrats to focus more on the governor's race and downballot races.