Bwak Scratch Fever?

Ya know I agree with ya on this Destor despite being a lifelong, 100% Kennedy supporter. But in fairness here, it isn't as though this would be either the first or last time such a thing occured. We could do worse in terms of having members of the nobility appointed as a result of their membership in the nobility. I do think it would be better for all concerned, including Caroline, if she actually ran for office instead of having office bestowed upon her.

As I've noted elsewhere, it is without question that it is her pedigree alone and nothing she has ever done that gets her considered for this office and that is what gets under my skin. Others, with similar "achievements" none of which would have been a result of the accident of birth (which much of hers are of necessity--it simply cannot be helped), would be given even cursory consideration.

I would add one thing... I don't think it either proper or decent, however, to hurl insults at her as a person as some inevitably will. She had no more control over who her parents were than anyone else and my guess is that if appointed she will do a very, very good job. Seh seems a model of propriety and represents the very, very best of the Kennedy tradition. She certainly would add another vote to the liberal wing of the party, particularly in comparison to Hillary.

Yes, there would have been outrage, but if a seat had been open is there any doubt Hillary would have done her best to get appointed to it? And in the case of HIllary, there's always outrage no matter what she does good or bad or otherwise.

Just to clarify -- I'm *not* defending the 'strong-arming' that Uncle Ted is reported to be doing. Privately I doubt he has to do or say anything. It isn't like his views on the issue would be a mystery.)

Speaking as a New Yorker, my interest in this isn't theoretical. I'd LIKE to have a good Senator there, and I think Caroline K-S would be hard-working, ethical and have an impact that I would support.

You say there are better people but, sitting here and looking around, I'm not sure who? A very cynical part of me has been hoping Paterson would name Andrew Cuomo .... just to get him out of New York!! He (AC) really is bad news - that isn't rumor, that is knowledge. And, I hate saying it, because I thought/think the world of his father. (If the Kennedys don't care for Andrew - and they don't - there is quite a bit more to it that the original poster suggests, if in fact that suggestion is even correct. I've heard just the contrary, from people who reasonably would be 'in the know.') On a more concernd-citizen level, I was hoping for RFK, Jr., although I understand, and respect, his reluctance.

Who else? I know or know of most of the people on the Capital Confidential list. There are a two who would be very good (would also have a very uphill battle two years from now in any primary) ... there are some that make Caroline Kennedy look OVERqualified ... and there are a couple that make me shudder!!! Plus, their background is 'limited' in a different way: they are all Representatives .. and, like it or not, none of whom would carry the clout for our state in the Senate that Caroline would (something Uncle Teddy doesn't even have to say). Aside from these people I haven't heard any other names except Cuomo's and some LI local official about whom I really do know nothing.

I guess that's another thing that probably goes into my thinking: the feeling that selecting someone who wouldn't ordinarily run for office, who hasn't spent their life in electoral politics, isn't necessarily a bad idea. In fact, I probably - if I'm honest - view it as a positive. I've long worked in the Court system and have come to have a higher regard for appointed judges over elected ones. The simple fact is that there are some some people who would never be attracted to a life of competitive electoral politics but who bring *other* qualities to their work, qualities that in many cases make for very wise exercise of power.

Now, I'm sure there are also 1,000s of non-elected officials in New York who also would contribute a great deal if selected for the Senate. I could name some - respected State officials, mostly in appointive posts. None of them have the political clout to be seriously considered or acceptable to all the elected politicians who want the spot. And a few of them already have A. Cuomo tire tracks across their forehead and are NOT eager for a second run-over by getting in his way. Whoever is appointed now is going to most likely have a serious challenge from him in the primary two years from now. Not a pleasant experience being Andy's competition.)

With those things rumbling around in my head, Caroline K-S appears to me to be someone worthy of consideration. I like that she chose to raise her children in privacy (the greatest gift a Kennedy child can be given!) even if it cost her those years in which to 'make a public record,'; I like her commitment to and knowledge of Constitutional issues, civil rights (NAACP Legal Defense Fund) and esp. public education (which I think is going to be a "hot" issue in coming years). I particularly like the insight she has on public service and leadership as a result of her work on the Profiles in Courage award. And, if it has to be said, I'm comfortable that any Kennedy is probably going to push for an agenda that I would like to see put forward.

So yes, this would be something that wouldn't come her way except for her family connections, but that is also true of HRC. (If Caroline hasn't walked around the streets of upstate NY before being named, she would have to afterwards.) So I honestly don't see a huge difference from Hillary Clinton getting the seat. Clinton was a good Senator. Why was that so acceptable and this so offensive?

(If Teddy is doing arm-twisting, yes, that IS offensive ..... but do you seriously think Bill wasn't, or wouldn't have been in the same situation? -- Or that Hillary would have politely waited her term if there was a chance to be appointed two years before having to run?)

Being connected to prominent parents, spouses, relatives is no guarantee that someone is going to be a good public servant (see, Cuomo, A, above) .... but it doesn't rule it out either. As a New Yorker, I would like to have the best possible Senator (in terms of intelligence, willingness to work, integrity, effectiveness). I'd like it to be someone who could stay on in the Senate, by being good enough to convince the voters and strong enough to withstand the almost-inevitable A. Cuomo steamroller.

So, bottom line, I'm not at all convinced that Caroline Kennedy-Schlossberg is an unacceptable, or even a bad, person for the job. In fact, I believe she might well be a very good one. More to the point of the post, however, it simply doesn't seem offensive that she's being considered.

>>>If she wants the position, then run for it - take the opportunity to let people know what she will do as Senator rather than give it to her because of her name.

Um ...... have you ever followed the process by which someone becomes the nominee of a party for a position such as Senator? It's not exactly "let the people speak freely", you know. Perhaps I'm wrong, but I'm a NY registered Dem. and I don't recall Hillary Clinton having to fight her way to the nomination or that she was chosen by open competition in a hard-fought party primary. In fact, as best I can recall, it was sort of an 'annointing' ... probably due in large part to the influence and perhaps even the persuasion of her ex-President husband. Hillary can be "made" the nominee and then run for the people's votes in the general election -- Caroline can be "made" the Senator and then run for the people's votes in the general election. I'm not sure I see the difference?

As a New Yorker, what I care about is how the person selected will perform as Senator. Hillary did well, and I suspect Caroline would do well. .... and I KNOW Andrew Cuomo would be a disaster!! Since we are talking about a real vacancy that has to be filled by a real person who will be appointed, who then is the best option? We need someone who will be 1) a good Senator, 2) able and willing to run two hard, expensive campaigns within the next four years, 3) someone who will be strong enough to stave off the knives that A. Cuomo will be aiming at their back if they try to get in his way, and 4) someone willing/able to remain in the Senate for long enough to build up some seniority. I'm not wedded to the idea of Caroline Kennedy, but I'd like it to be someone who can meet all those criteria. Suggestions?

I hardly think it appropriate and frankly it's pretty rank, uncalled for and childish to call Ted Kennedy an asshole.

He might be wrong on this particular question in your opinion, but he's a helluva United States Senator and the nation owes him a great deal of gratitude. I'm damn glad that asshole has been in the United States Senate the past 40 some odd years and devoted his life to improving the lives of others, especially those who have no other voice or ally such as the poor, the minorities and the sick. You ought to be too.

I don't hate her. I just don't think she has any special qualifications aside from her name and don't think that's a good reason to appoint her over the better alternatives. Paterson seems to agree - does that make his opinion poisonous?

If she runs for office, I'll greet it with due apathy and nary a complaint.

Hey, Chelsea's available, she has a famous last name, a Stanford grad, has a Master's in International Relations, worked for McKinsey and now for a Wall Street fund, understands trading and finance quite well, serves on the Board of an ex-President's large charity, has plenty of campaigning experience and she has legal residency in Manhattan. Why not appoint her? Who's for, who's against? Perhaps we could pull a Ted Kennedy and appoint a caretaker for the slot for 2 years until she's old enough to take it.

The bit about Jackie ghost-writing her books was a joke, perhaps too subtle.

But her book on the Bill of Rights and the one on Privacy *WERE* co-written by Ellen Alderman - they've done interviews together it's written right there on the covers.