Caroline Kennedy to seek Senate seat

[Sbaraglia]

A lot of the outrage regarding Caroline comes from ignorance of American history.

Regarding nepotism: going back to John and John Quincy Adams it was ever thus.

Regarding qualifications for appointment to the U. S. Senate: it used to be common to appoint the widow of a senator who died in office, especially in the South - and that survives into the present day, with Jean Carnahan selected to replace her husband Mel in the 2000 Missouri senate race. Selecting the most qualified person has rarely been the deciding factor.

Finally, regarding all the outrage over her supposed "presumption" in seeking an appointment rather than winning it in an election: whoever fills Hillary's senate seat will be appointed. Are all the others who want the appointment also presumptous?

Gov. Paterson has two main concerns: 1) who will help him win the 2010 election, and 2) who can raise enough money to run in both 2010 and 2012. Caroline Kennedy potentially provides a solution to both concerns. I imagine that he's giving her a chance to get out there and show her chops; he has until Hillary is confirmed as Secretary of State to make up his mind, so until then he can let Caroline try out her political skills.

My own instinct is to go for a politician who has won an election or two - but Gov. Paterson's concerns are valid ones, and I would probably also choose Caroline Kennedy, providing she shows she can walk, talk, and continue to rack up endorsements.

By the way, there is a very apt quotation that underlines some of the concerns many of us have expressed about appointing a cipher to the U.S. Senate: when LBJ raved about the brilliance of the best and the brightest of JFK's appointees, House Speaker Sam Rayburn responded, “They may be just as intelligent as you say. But I'd feel a helluva lot better if just one of them had ever run for sheriff.” Odd to be applying that quote to JFK's own daughter many years later. (To ward off any charges of confusion on my part: yes, I have concerns about Caroline's lack of political experience; yes, I would probably appoint her if I were Gov. Paterson. And I'd cross my fingers.)

 

[Sbaraglia]

Interesting points. But those past choices were not necesarily good ones. How many sons have gone on to replace their fathers in business even if they were no where near the best person for the job? We need to start holding politicans to high standards. Famous dad, ivy league education, being rich, D.C. insider has got to stop being the grounds for becoming an offical in high office. Just because it has been done in the past doesn't mean it should continue. I encourage you to go to www.senate.gov and read the bios of the senators. Most of them have had years of elected service at a state level or in the U.S. House before becoming senator. What was done with John Quincy Adams is hardly relevant to 2008-9. The fact that this is up to the governor and the governor only should also be questioned and perhaps changed in the laws of NY.

I agree that nepotism is not something to be encouraged, and that family connections by themselves do not qualify anyone for public office. In referring to John and John Quincy Adams, I wrote "it was ever thus": we don't jump from the Adamses to today; instead, each intervening year was chock full of political families serving in office. Check this out, and cry:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._political_families

I agree also that experience is good; thus my Sam Rayburn quote. (Although I would point out that Rod Blagojevich, like Richard Nixon and a multitude of others who ended up badly, had lots of political experience before attaining his highest position; experience doesn't ensure good service.) I am saying that to express shock and horror over the Caroline Kennedy selection is a bit ahistoric. Anyway, trying to stamp out nepotism in politics is like trying to stamp out prostitution, a waste of time. And one could argue that just as a family of bakers or a family of barbers or a family of actors is understandable, so is a family of politicians: you grow up knowing the life, the business, the players, and it seems a natural profession to follow (whereas to most of the rest of us it seems outlandish). In Caroline's defence, she has led a life that doesn't make her sound like a completely ridiculous choice; here are some bits of wikipedia's writeup on her professional life (I edited out a longish portion about state funerals she's attended):

Kennedy is an attorney, writer, editor and serves on the boards of numerous non-profit organizations. Kennedy is a member of the New York and Washington, D.C. bar associations. She is also a member of the boards of directors of the Commission on Presidential Debates and the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund.... Kennedy and other members of her family created the Profiles in Courage Award in 1989. The award is given to a public official or officials at the federal, state or local level whose actions best demonstrate the qualities of politically courageous leadership in the spirit of John F. Kennedy's book, Profiles in Courage. In addition, Kennedy is currently president of the Kennedy Library Foundation. She is also an adviser to the Harvard Institute of Politics, a living memorial to her father.... From 2002 through 2004 Kennedy worked as director of the Office of Strategic Partnerships for the the New York City Department of Education. The three-day-a week job paid her a salary of $1 and had the goal of raising private money for the New York City public schools. In her capacity, she helped raise more than $65 million for the city’s public schools. She currently serves as one of two vice chairs of the board of directors of The Fund for Public Schools, a public-private partnership founded in 2002 to attract private funding for public schools in New York City. She has also served on the board of trustees of Concord Academy, which she attended as a child.

By the way, Arizona has one political family that is especially proud this year, the Udalls: just this year, TWO Udall cousins were elected to the U.S. Senate, from Colorado and New Mexico - their fathers, Stewart and Morris, like an astonishing number of their clan, were Arizona politicians:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Udall_family

 

[Sbaraglia]

None of those quoted qualifications really convince me she would be a good senator.

Well, no - that wasn't really the point. I won't repeat everything I've written, but (weary sigh) the point is that although I would prefer someone with more experience, she doesn't sound like a Paris Hilton, and I can see why Gov. Paterson would be tempted to appoint her. I suppose we'll continue to hear cries of shocking nepotism, outrageous presumption, etc.

By the way -

What was done with John Quincy Adams is hardly relevant to 2008-9

Your professors, if they read that, would be as frustrated as I am... History is for eggheads and Europeans; we're Americans, and we don't need history to understand politics or Iraq or Afghanistan or anything else...I have my certainties, and don't try to confuse me with history...the Bush / Palin mindset has been implanted for generations to come...

 

[justapixel]

I would prefer someone with more experience, she doesn't sound like a Paris Hilton

So you are saying that we should settle for caroline because she is not a Paris Hilton.

Is that the best you can say about a potential US Senator.



I want you on my side for any debates.

 

[smelter]

Well, no - that wasn't really the point. I won't repeat everything I've written, but (weary sigh) the point is that although I would prefer someone with more experience, she doesn't sound like a Paris Hilton, and I can see why Gov. Paterson would be tempted to appoint her. I suppose we'll continue to hear cries of shocking nepotism, outrageous presumption, etc.

So you are saying that we should settle for caroline because she is not a Paris Hilton.
Is that the best you can say about a potential US Senator.

Sbaraglia, justapixel's illogical inferences drawn from your cogent arguments have just entered the fray. I can't speak for anyone else, but your weary sigh is shared by me.

 

[iman]

In today's Salon, Joan Walsh asks about Caroline's stance on abortion. Apparently no one has ever heard Caroline utter a word on the subject, even her bff Kerry. The most important issue for women in the past 50 years and Caroline is mute on the subject?

Maybe we should be glad that she doesn't vote.
________________________________________________

Unlike some, my love of the city extends to the creatures that have thrown their lot in with us.

 

[rowjimmy21]

In today's Salon, Joan Walsh asks about Caroline's stance on abortion. Apparently no one has ever heard Caroline utter a word on the subject, even her bff Kerry. The most important issue for women in the past 50 years and Caroline is mute on the subject?

One of the problems with Caroline is nobody knows where she stands on any issues. She has never had to make a difficult stance and explain herself. She should have a open press conference, not necessarily about her experience but her beliefs and give us an idea how she would vote. She needs to get experience with the media and make herself accessible to interviews and the press even if she is uncomfortable with the idea. If she wants the job she should be convincing the people of NY not just the governor and a few upstate mayors. She could run a little mini campaign to show what she believes and get some grassroots support.

 

[smelter]

^ I suspect her silence on abortion issues is because of her religion and Uncle Ted. I'm not offering it as an excuse but rather as a weak form of explanation for not being on the record before now.

“Caroline supports full equality and marriage rights for gay and lesbian couples,” the statement said.

On social issues, Ms. Kennedy appears to oppose restrictions on abortion rights, including laws that would require young women to notify a parent before obtaining an abortion. But asked if she would support any state or federal restrictions on late-term abortions, Ms. Kennedy did not directly address issues like so-called partial birth abortion, instead simply offering an endorsement of the Supreme Court's Roe v. Wade decision in 1973.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/21/nyregion/21kennedy.html?ref=politics

 

[chance1]

Nice dog, Chance - his coloring reminds me of your politics or maybe the Giants record - spotty or ambiguous, but beautiful nonetheless, the dog I mean.

stanley is great dog too - friendly, loyal and as u can see ........... very handsome

as for ur post nice dog commentary ...........

the giants are playing tonight for the top seed in the NFC I believe - not too shabby

 

[Sbaraglia]

The NY Times' front-page story on Caroline today was a bit of revenge...she insulted the reporters and then dismissed them, so payback is a bitch... But I found this op-ed piece from The Washington Post a tonic, peeling back the nasty "stupid lazy bitch" angle the story has taken. Anne Glusker makes an excellent point - which I'm sure that our diehard rightwing jubbers will be quick to dismiss either harshly or condescendingly: any woman who has taken years off to raise children is going to face an attitude problem when she tries to re-enter the full-time workforce.

Amid all the recent buzz about Caroline Kennedy's bid for a U.S. Senate seat, there has been a great deal of talk about her connections, her power, her wealth. But the way I see it, if you strip away the glamour, the name and the money, then Caroline is . . . me. And many of my friends. Maybe even you. If, that is, you happen to be a midlife woman raising kids and returning -- or thinking of returning, or hoping one day to return -- to the full-time workforce.

A great deal of the criticism around Kennedy's interest in Hillary Rodham Clinton's soon-to-be-vacated Senate seat sounds an alarm for women like me. We've been at home with the kids, sure, but we've also been busy with lots of other things. We've been working part-time, consulting, freelancing. Like Kennedy's, our resumes don't conform to the conventional, one-job-after-the-other sequence that recruiters expect. When I read a sniping post on Gawker.com that "Caroline has been a happy housewife since getting her law degree, published a few ghost-written books and sat on a few boards that used her celebrity to draw donations," I thought, hmm, wait a minute. Couldn't there be a more inventive way to look at her CV?

Anyway, check out the full piece - whether or not you think Caroline is the right choice, it might give a different perspective on the attitudes that are shaping the coverage of, and the reactions to, Caroline Kennedy:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/12/26/AR2008122601118_pf.html

 

[justapixel]

You know, I dont think she very smart, you know. She claims, you know, to be not of, you know, the system.

Also, you know, she claims to be, you know, her own person. However, you know, she only got this far, you know, by being a, you know, Kennedy.

For a taste of how she talks:

"I'm really coming into this as somebody who isn't, you know, part of the system, who obviously, you know, stands for the values of, you know, the Democratic Party," Kennedy told the Daily News

What is she 12 years old??? She should learn how to speak like an adult, you know.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/pol...caroline_kennedy_tells_daily_news_i_woul.html

 

[letme]

And her name is.....

Caroline Kennedy Schlossberg.

Why does the media not call her by her married name ?

I called her by her last name and some here Thought I was nuts.

Is She is using her maiden name for only gains ?

Least HRC uses her married name.

Her 3 children use the Schlossberg name proudly

She and her husband have two daughters and one son: Rose Kennedy Schlossberg, born June 25, 1988 in New York City, Tatiana Celia Kennedy Schlossberg, born May 5, 1990 in New York City and John "Jack" Bouvier Kennedy Schlossberg, born January 19, 1993

 

[G-Lexington]

Because "Caroline Schlossberg Seeks Senate Seat" isn't a story.

"Caroline Kennedy Seeks Senate Seat" is.

Lex

 

[letme]

My Point.......... WTF is this Schlossberg person.. She is only a name.

If she used her name..there is no fame.

 

[Sbaraglia]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/12/26/AR2008122601118_pf.html

Just re-posting in case anyone actually wants to read the article...I know, I know, there's no point in reading something when your minds are made up - but in case anyone wanders in here who might actually want to read it here it is again, risen from the avalanche of "stupid lazy bitch" postings!

In case it might forestall the next avalanche of "stupid lazy bitch" postings: I'm not advocating that Caroline Kennedy be appointed. I would probably choose Carolyn Maloney. I just think that it might be interesting to get another perspective on her, while the bloodthirsty crowd rushes after Caroline Kennedy, snatching up reasons-to-hate-her cudgels out of the gutter...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/12/26/AR2008122601118_pf.html

 

[justapixel]

Please, her Senate bid, you know, is dead.

Everyone is mocking her, you know.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/poli...ws_i_woul.html

Read, you know, her own words, you know.

 

[justapixel]

^ Page Not Found.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/pol...caroline_kennedy_tells_daily_news_i_woul.html

 

[justapixel]

I see that Drudge has now picked up on the 'you know, you know' story.

 

[JayHawk]

Hey if Kennedy is qualified cuz she is a Mom and cuz she really thinks schools are neato then I must be qualified cuz i have several dogs and a parent and i think the police are neato.

 

[JayHawk]

Bill O Reilly is from New York....make him Senator.