Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

NY Senate: Another Kennedy in the Senate?



Is Caroline Kennedy coming to the Senate? Photo by Brian Snyder of Reuters.

Updated, 7 a.m. ET: Gov. David Paterson and Caroline Kennedy have spoken by phone about the possibility that she could be named to the seat being vacated by Hillary Rodham Clinton, according to a source familiar with the conversation. The source would not say whether Kennedy expressed an interest in being appointed by Paterson but an Associated Press story quotes Robert F. Kennedy Jr., her cousin, as saying it is something she is genuinely considering.

The plot thickens....

Original Post

There's nothing more appealing in politics than a storybook ending.

And so, the idea that Caroline Kennedy might be appointed by New York Gov. David Paterson to replace Hillary Rodham Clinton in the Senate, the same chamber in which her late father -- John F. Kennedy -- served and the same seat her uncle -- Robert Kennedy -- held, is drawing huge amounts of attention.

ABC News's Jonathan Karl reported today that Kennedy and Paterson have talked about the opening and cited "sources" who insist she is seriously considering it.

Our own conversations with New York politicos in the know suggest that Caroline Kennedy is genuinely interested in the Senate but express puzzlement about how deep that interest runs. The sources also note that Paterson is notoriously unpredictable and largely keeps his own counsel -- two factors that make predicting who he will pick nearly impossible.

Why not Kennedy? We return to our basic formulation about her as laid out in our handicapping of the field of potential appointees: she has NEVER expressed any interest in public life, much less elected office. For those who cite her work on the vice presidential vetting committee for Obama, we remind you that her role was as behind-the-scenes as you can get in such a high-profile job.

Is it possible that the Obama campaign coupled with the illness of her uncle Sen. Ted Kennedy (Mass.) has made Caroline Kennedy rethink her opposition to elected office? Maybe. But, as Ben Smith (the oracle of New York politics) points out, whoever gets this appointment will not only have to run in a 2010 special election but also again in 2012 for the full six-year term. Kennedy's last name and national celebrity would lessen the fundraising burden but she would still need to spend the next four years of her life running for office.

Here are our latest odds on the appointment -- sans Rep. Nita Lowey and Robert F. Kennedy Jr. who have taken their names out of consideration in recent days:

5-1: Andrew Cuomo -- Chatter about Cuomo appears to be picking up steam of late, probably due to the fact that he checks the most boxes. He carries a legendary last name, would have no problem raising the money and has the résumé (former Cabinet secretary, current state attorney general) to recommend him.

6-1: Kirstin Gillibrand -- Paterson has made clear he would like to pick someone from Upstate and someone who represents the diversity of the state. Enter Gillibrand who represents an Albany-area congressional seat and would mark a natural evolution from Clinton in the Senate. Gillibrand's problems? She is very young (won't turn 42 until Tuesday), isn't the famous face some New Yorkers want out of their senator, and represents a district that Democrats would struggle to hold on to if she was to vacate it.

15-1: Thomas Suozzi -- The buzz around Suozzi has soured over the past 10 days. He still has strong ties to Paterson, a base of support in the battleground of Long Island and the ability to raise tens of millions of dollars. But, has his moment passed?

20-1: Caroline Kennedy -- Count us skeptical (see above) but our sense from New York politicos is that she is genuinely considering the job. If Kennedy wants it, it seems like it would be hers for the asking.

25-1: Reps. Steve Israel/Brian Higgins -- Both Israel and Higgins would be geographic picks. Higgins has a base in western New York while Israel is strong on Long Island. But, for a governor who has emphasized diversity so strongly, is a white male not named Cuomo or Suozzi a real option?

30-1: Jerry Nadler -- Nadler, who has held the New York City-based 8th district, since 1992 is the darkhorse in the field. Nadler is unquestionably bright and a serious policy thinker; he also has a very liberal voting record that could jeopardize his ability to win a statewide race.

45-1: Carolyn Maloney -- A newcomer to the speculation, Maloney netted the endorsements of the National Organization of Women and Feminist Majority this week. She is clearly trying to stake a claim as the female heir to the Clinton legacy. Most people we talk to are skeptical it will work.

50-1: Reps. Greg Meeks/Nydia Velasquez -- Both members are interested in the seat and no one who knows New York politics thinks they have a real chance at the appointment.

1,000,000-1: Former Gov. Eliot Spitzer -- Now that he's got a column in Slate, why not a Senate seat?

By Chris Cillizza  |  December 5, 2008; 4:05 PM ET
Categories:  Senate  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Obama's Mighty Economic Challenge
Next: 1,000 Words: The Winners

Comments

Andrew Cuomo too has been mentioned.

BTW, did Cuomo ever apologize for his "shuck and jive" depiction of Obama?

Posted by: FirstMouse1 | December 8, 2008 2:25 PM | Report abuse

Carolyn Kennedy KNOWS politics from the guts, having lived it since a kid. It's not about having seen it on TV, read it newspapers, or being able to see Putin's rear from her backyard. It's because she has lived it. Compare to Sarah Palin who was a fart-beat away from being VP or even President!

Posted by: ElMugroso | December 8, 2008 1:34 PM | Report abuse

People do know that Caroline Kennedy fundraises professionally for living.

My bet is that in 2010/2012, the GOP is going run a "Princess Caroline versus Joe the Plumber"-type campaign.

Posted by: Corey_NY | December 7, 2008 10:05 PM | Report abuse

I won't make the case for Caroline Kennedy based solely on who her relatives are if you don't make the case against her based solely on who her relatives are... The two ought to cancel each other out.

Really bugs me that people are post "What has she done?" as a sincere question. Go to Wikipedia or wherever and look it up and then based your opinions on something empirical.

Her life isn't exactly a secretive affair and while for decades the press was obsessed with her late brother, John F. Kennedy, Jr. aka Sexist Man Alive, she did have a life.

Posted by: Corey_NY | December 7, 2008 9:00 PM | Report abuse

Caroline Kennedy would be an excellent senator (she should have been vp) and a living symbol that her father's dream continues. Jerome Nadler would also be an excellent selection...

Winners of the week
B.H. Obama
Caroline Kennedy
Mrs. Wm. J. Clinton
Hillarians Nos. 1-18
Bill Richardson
Eugene Robinson (lifetime winner for his column "Where Wright Went Wrong")
"Dean" Broder (back in form)
Dean Smith
Professional OJ haters (do you need a license for that?)
Phalin's wardrobe ($200,000 and counting)
William Ayers (for his excellent series of newspaper opeds about the fallacy of guilt by association)
Al Cowlings (for always being there for your friend Orenthal)
Robert Downey Jr. (for Iron Man)

Losers

37andOalley and quadruple-spaced bigoted rants
Fools who keep challenging O's citizenship
Orenthal James (brought down by the Man this week)
Peggy Noonan (for her endless pompous stream of consciousness drivel; can't we outsource her column space to India?)
Sean Avery (nuff said)
Phalin (for deciding not to return to Alaska but continue her tiresome hatemongering roadshow through the lower 48, latest stop: GA)
E.D. Hill
Noted hysterian D. K. Goodwin (for "writing" the Lincoln mythology "Team of Rivals" and sending O's agenda totally off course as he seeks out enemies rather than friends to appoint to his Administration)
Ed Norton (for the Incredible Hulk -- what a waste of $4.99)
Posted by: broadwayjoe | December 6, 2008 4:28 PM |
====================================

you forgot Plaxico.... in your round-up of those that had a bad week. Shoot off your wiener, AND lose your job... although if he ends up on the same prison team as Michael Vick.....

Posted by: angriestdogintheworld | December 7, 2008 1:26 PM | Report abuse

Paterson would disappoint this Brooklynite if he chooses birth right to pick Clinton's replacement.

Posted by: smmsanders | December 7, 2008 9:26 AM | Report abuse

Aristocracy!! Whether it's Kennedy or Bush. There should be no family birth right in this country. Elsewhere on this sight Alec MacGillis writes of Obama's appointees and frequently describes or those interviewed refer to "meritocracy". If Caroline Kennedy is appointed, it will demonstrate the hypocrisy of the Democratic party -- "What party of the people?" Oh yeah, the money People. If she weren't "Kennedy" and related to a Senator, a Congressman, a former President, would she be under consideration? Ask the other 10,000,000 New Yorkers!

Posted by: jpc1 | December 6, 2008 8:10 PM | Report abuse

I guess the state of politics in New York is so dismal that they're reduced to electing folks with little experience.

Now if she came to Maryland she'd find that the fix had been in for the next Senate slot open for a couple of years and they'd be running someone who'd paid their dues in local and national gov't for years.

Posted by: RedBird27 | December 6, 2008 7:10 PM | Report abuse

Officermancuso: I've been staying off the boards a bit myself since the election is over. Yaaah!

Getting ready for Christmas :-)

Posted by: toritto | December 6, 2008 5:57 PM | Report abuse

how does one make investments in an


economy which has been propagandized?


Where's the DP in GDP?


the big brains here still haven't figured out that no jobs in_country


somehow might be connected to no liquidity...


they kill all the sheep to make mutton and say: what happened to wool production?


you don't kill the golden goose to get all the eggs inside of it...


the middle class is the golden goose, that is the only thing that made AMERICA special...

60-80 PerCent of the population in the middle Class...

3rd World countries have the curve we do _now_.....we imported it, we killed our citizens future.

.

Posted by: tesser_actsoflove1 | December 6, 2008 5:13 PM | Report abuse

SO, why is Article about LBJ accusing Nixon of treason important?

because it points to a steady way of doing business by the Republicans and partisan INTELLIGENCE officers...

interfering with the electoral process, and presidents in office...

a consistent evidence of using the CIA to interfere with the electoral process....

what a surprise....and CONSISTENTLY by republicans too.

let's see, how did Kennedy die? CIA/Cuban mafia....somehow tied to Bay of Pigs people...as is George H.W. Bush, Nixon, Watergate Burglars....crime family sticking together for 68 years...

Nixon/Cheney/George H.W. Bush/Rove/Rumsfeld/James Baker III

all worked together didn't they...

and this is all just a theory isn't it????

we don't have any evidence of republican lying and interference with the electoral process....

no wonder democrats can't keep the presidency longer than one term without being shot, bxxxfxxxed or slimed....


you do know that George W. Bushes lawyer is Ken Starr don't you? and the Whitewater Prosecutor is head of DHS....he also interfered with those tasked with following the money trail for 9/11. That investigation was called "Green Quest," the interfering person? Michael Chertoff....Ken Starr/Michael Chertoff clinton hasselers extraordinaire...

dirty tricks squad.

Exposing Karl Rove

by WAYNE MADSEN

He's America's Joseph Goebbels. As a 21-year old Young Republican in Texas, Karl Rove not only pimped for Richard Nixon's chief political dirty tricks strategist Donald Segretti but soon caught the eye of the incoming Republican National Committee Chairman, George H. W. Bush. Rove's dirty tricks on behalf of Nixon's 1972 campaign catapulted Rove onto the national stage. From his Eagle's Nest in the West Wing of the White House, Rove now directs a formidable political dirty tricks operation and disinformation mill.

Posted by: tesser_actsoflove1 | December 6, 2008 5:05 PM | Report abuse

this was a little too important to be released late at night, but just goes to show yah...

Tapes Show LBJ's Anger at Nixon Aides Over Vietnam Peace Talks
By Kelley Shannon
Associated Press
Friday, December 5, 2008; Page A02

AUSTIN, Dec. 4 -- In the final months of his administration, President Lyndon B. Johnson voiced worry over the Vietnam War peace talks and stridently suggested that associates of Richard M. Nixon were trying to keep South Vietnam away from the table until after the 1968 election, recordings of telephone conversations released Thursday show.

"This is treason," Johnson said, referring to people close to Nixon, during a conversation with Senate Republican leader Everett Dirksen. The Democratic president never accused the Republican who would succeed him of treason, but Johnson said, "If Nixon keeps the South Vietnamese away from the [peace] conference, well, that's going to be his responsibility."

Nixon spoke with Johnson in another recorded phone conversation in November 1968 and tried to assure him that he supported Johnson's efforts to bring South Vietnam to a Paris peace conference with North Vietnam. He said he would do whatever Johnson wanted him to do to help.

"I just wanted you to know that I feel very, very strongly about this," Nixon said. "We've got to get them to Paris, or we can't have a peace."
ad_icon

Johnson agreed. He had cited news articles and private information he'd been given that he said made him think Nixon's associates were trying to persuade the South Vietnamese government not to join the peace talks until after the election. Progress on peace in Vietnam before the November election presumably would have given Hubert H. Humphrey -- the Democratic presidential nominee and Johnson's vice president -- a boost with voters.

Allegations of Nixon's influence in the peace conference have been reported before, but the tapes provide a look at how Johnson handled the issue behind the scenes, said Bruce Buchanan, an expert on the presidency and a professor of government at the University of Texas in Austin.

___________________________________________

Posted by: tesser_actsoflove1 | December 6, 2008 5:00 PM | Report abuse

the angriest daw gintheworld,

is suffering from the tertiary stages of syphyllis...

antics of the Clintons indeed...


16 years of propagandizing of the CIA/NAZI/RapethePUBLICan's disinformation stream seems to have made a nest in his brain...and eating his spinal cord.


.

what Obama needs to do is start charging import tax on anything made overseas, by any company....gradually increasing it...until making it in the U.S. of A.


seems like a good idea.


we need PERMANENT JOBS, not temp jobs for 3 years...

yes we do need infrastructure, but we also


need a first job for poor families that will enable them to become home owners. BLUE COLLAR FACTORY JOBS, TRADE, FARMING, what have you...

in the 50-70's you could go straight from the farm or the inner city into a well-paying job...

there was a SINGLE STEP to self subsistence.


.

Posted by: tesser_actsoflove1 | December 6, 2008 4:52 PM | Report abuse

"Aspergirl and DDawd....
Both of you are off base in what you say.... Senator Dole, Bob Dole's honey; (thank God she was defeated, I live in NC and she stank!) never held public office nor ran for office; until, using her husband's name she ran for the senate and won."

Hah, I forgot about her. Thanks.

Posted by: DDAWD | December 6, 2008 4:52 PM | Report abuse

kevrobb, thanks for the information you provided in reply to my question about your claim that an OECD survey put the USA last in social mobility. I can't reply sensibly not having followed through the links and arguments you provided, but I do appreciate your help in working through my questions about your arguments.

The prison thing is a whole other issue. You've got your war on drugs (a waste of time IMHO, especially when police departments have unsolved murders they're ignoring); you've got your racial diversity and history of racial antagonism; and you've got, for lack of a better word, your toxic hip-hop culture in the underclass of a society which tolerates greater income disparities than most advanced post-industrial societies.

Aside from those imprisoned for non-violent drug offenses, who I think are wrongly imprisoned, I wouldn't want to suggest that the high rate of imprisonment in the USA means that we need fewer convictions in criminal cases concerning murder, rape, battery, etc.

Posted by: officermancuso | December 6, 2008 4:48 PM | Report abuse

Toritto, thanks for the welcome back! Vacation was fantastic. I didn't touch a computer keyboard for a week, by design, which was a bit like going off heroin cold turkey, but it did me good. Hope you're well too!

Posted by: officermancuso | December 6, 2008 4:37 PM | Report abuse

Caroline Kennedy would be an excellent senator (she should have been vp) and a living symbol that her father's dream continues. Jerome Nadler would also be an excellent selection...

Winners of the week
B.H. Obama
Caroline Kennedy
Mrs. Wm. J. Clinton
Hillarians Nos. 1-18
Bill Richardson
Eugene Robinson (lifetime winner for his column "Where Wright Went Wrong")
"Dean" Broder (back in form)
Dean Smith
Professional OJ haters (do you need a license for that?)
Phalin's wardrobe ($200,000 and counting)
William Ayers (for his excellent series of newspaper opeds about the fallacy of guilt by association)
Al Cowlings (for always being there for your friend Orenthal)
Robert Downey Jr. (for Iron Man)

Losers

37andOalley and quadruple-spaced bigoted rants
Fools who keep challenging O's citizenship
Orenthal James (brought down by the Man this week)
Peggy Noonan (for her endless pompous stream of consciousness drivel; can't we outsource her column space to India?)
Sean Avery (nuff said)
Phalin (for deciding not to return to Alaska but continue her tiresome hatemongering roadshow through the lower 48, latest stop: GA)
E.D. Hill
Noted hysterian D. K. Goodwin (for "writing" the Lincoln mythology "Team of Rivals" and sending O's agenda totally off course as he seeks out enemies rather than friends to appoint to his Administration)
Ed Norton (for the Incredible Hulk -- what a waste of $4.99)

Posted by: broadwayjoe | December 6, 2008 4:28 PM | Report abuse

Gillibrand is too conservative for New York as a whole, and from a seat that the Democrats probably wouldn't hold if she left it; it won't be her.

Posted by: SeanC1 | December 6, 2008 4:02 PM | Report abuse

I know this sounds racist... BUT we live in a racist matrix. I think the governor has no other choice but to name a black Senator. There are none... now that Obama has resigned. It is offensive and insulting... and with Rodham Clinton running her "racist", campaign (hard working white folks) and reducing the African American church as black liberation theology, he needs to send a message against the dispicable antics of the Clintons.

Posted by: angriestdogintheworld | December 6, 2008 3:33 PM | Report abuse

As a resident of a state that has a governor who is doing very well in spite of holding absolutely no political office prior to his election, I do think too much is made of what are "qualifications" for political office.

I would love to see Caroline Kennedy enter the poltical arena. Anyone who has read her books or anything about the exemplary life of selfless service she has led, would know she would be a very good Senator for any state.

Posted by: AlaninMissoula | December 6, 2008 3:26 PM | Report abuse

Thanks for this blog entry, Chris. It reminded me to dash off an e-mail to Gov. Paterson to the effect that the junior Senate seat from New York is not a sinecure for scions of political dynasties -- or the spouses of former politicians, or carpet-bagging venue-shoppers generally. While I have nothing particularly against Ms. Kennedy personally, I can't think of a thing that would make me want her as my senator, either. She seems to have done a creditable job on Obama's vetting committee, but that and 100 cents will get you a dollar.

Posted by: llhanlon | December 6, 2008 1:11 PM | Report abuse

I am so sick and tired of the media telling us what we think. As a New Yorker, I do not think and have never met another NYer who says we need a famous face or "star" to represent us in Congress. I ONLY want someone who works hard for us, tirelessly, explains his or her positions even if I disagree, and knows how to get things done.

I do not want a famous person. I want a person who creates his or her own legacy in the job.

And as someone from northeast New York state, I can't stress enough how our state leaders fail us all the time in remembering there are qualified people outside New York City.

Posted by: kateinNY | December 6, 2008 12:52 PM | Report abuse

It's quite true that Nita Lowey would have had Hillary's Senate seat but for the fact that she was gracious enough to let Hillary take it when she expressed an interest. She would make an excellent Senator. However, even if she doesn't get that, she will still have her Rep seat for life--she's that popular.

Posted by: drindl | December 6, 2008 12:50 PM | Report abuse

Aspergirl and DDawd....
Both of you are off base in what you say.... Senator Dole, Bob Dole's honey; (thank God she was defeated, I live in NC and she stank!) never held public office nor ran for office; until, using her husband's name she ran for the senate and won.
Also, you are a jerk-off AbolhassanBaniSadr
You make an accusation that Caroline Kennedy is a drunk. What proof do you offer? None of course!

Posted by: easysoul | December 6, 2008 12:27 PM | Report abuse

I figured that was coming. Good move, all the way around.

Posted by: jrob822 | December 6, 2008 12:17 PM | Report abuse

Caroline Kennedy - darn, there goes upstate NY's chance at representation again. What does she know about agriculture?

I was hoping Gillibrand would get it. She beat the Republican incumbent in a Republican majority district in 2006 and this year trounced the Republican, a former head of the NY State Republican party and an heir to the GE fortune who put at least 5 million of his own money into the campaign. She also was a very effective freshman congressman: Despite no seniority, she was able to get amendments to the agriculture bill to help our farmers, particularly during the transition period to organic farming and for help for our dairy farmers. Hooray for that - fresher milk is better milk, milk from pastured cows is better milk. I never want to have to drink milk from huge industrial farms or China. Veterans and law enforcement groups also praise her for her fine constituent work.

However, stardom will probably win out over hard work and competence.

But if Caroline ever says the cure for upstate NY's economic problems is the arts (the aquarium solution of the day), I just won't vote for her.

Posted by: fran426 | December 6, 2008 11:44 AM | Report abuse

There's no reason for New Yorkers to be forced to accept an inexperienced, unqualified person like Caroline Kennedy as our Senator, and I hope that our political establishment doesn't try to bully Governor Paterson into appointing her. Why not pick Rep. Kirsten Gillibrand? She is far more highly qualified than Kennedy, she's personable, attractive and will be that rarity -- a Senator from outside the New York City Metro area. It's been forty years since New York has sent an upstater to the Senate. Frankly, I think Caroline Kennedy has a lot of nerve in asking to be appointed to the job.

Posted by: bobbiewick | December 6, 2008 11:09 AM | Report abuse

I know of at least 533,000 people who lost jobs recently that are more more deserving than ANY of the above.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/06/business/economy/06jobs.html?hp
Make it a Merry Christmas for one of them, Governor Paterson!

Posted by: lockmallup | December 6, 2008 11:09 AM | Report abuse

For all those complaining about nepotism, are we forgetting how the CURRENT holder of the seat got there?

Not saying Hillary wasn't qualified, but no one else gets a Senate seat without ever being elected to anything.

Posted by: DDAWD | December 6, 2008 10:55 AM | Report abuse

"Kennedy could not hold the seat. Her campaign skills aren't that good and are certainly not well-practiced. She would draw many competent Republicans into the race just when Obama is facing re-election."

I seriously doubt that; the Kennedy brand would scare off competent Republicans. She'd be a political star, would raise millions and millions of dollars from around the country, and inspire a strong following being of the romantic view of her father's presidency.

Posted by: SeanC1 | December 6, 2008 10:19 AM | Report abuse

Maybe we can appoint a Kennedy 13-year-old to be head of FEMA?

Posted by: AsperGirl | December 6, 2008 10:15 AM | Report abuse

I'm sorry. I admire the whole Kennedy thing.

But appointing Caroline Kennedy, a totally unqualified woman, to by a United States senator for one of the most important constituencies in the country, is blatant nepotism and elitism.

Caroline Kennedy is less qualified to be a United States senator than Sarah Palin is qualified to be Empress of the World.

Posted by: AsperGirl | December 6, 2008 9:42 AM | Report abuse

For a country that BOASTS to the globe about all "created equal"...certainly have our leadership narrowed down to a hand full of "chosen individuals"....New York is big state...send someone out on a search for someone the rest of us can relate to and have our best interests in mind..
Vil

Posted by: villid | December 6, 2008 9:42 AM | Report abuse

So we now need to fill the seat because she is a Kennedy and her father had the seat?

This is getting to be ridiculous. My father was General Manager of a company. Maybe I should go there and request his old position.

It seems the Kennedy's have this sense of entitlement. Why not simply cut through the bs and assign permanent political seats to the Kennedy clan?

Posted by: MikeOLeary | December 6, 2008 9:33 AM | Report abuse

Ah, the mandatory Ivy League Northeast slot MUST be filled. How can we not have a Kennedy-Clinton-Bush legacy slot go unfilled?
Muffy would be so upset.

The long history of New York as a doormat, er, welcome mat, for aspiring politicians of the "elites" must be continued.

And, now, Fix, dearie, where will we find the Rockefeller replacement in the future?

Some change.

Vote Democratic: Back to the 60's.

Posted by: wpfree | December 6, 2008 9:23 AM | Report abuse

Kennedy could not hold the seat. Her campaign skills aren't that good and are certainly not well-practiced. She would draw many competent Republicans into the race just when Obama is facing re-election. It would make New York a battleground, and Obama would have to win it for her.

Posted by: blasmaic | December 6, 2008 8:44 AM | Report abuse

Chris, check your history. Two of the most effective and distinguised current Senators were just over 30 when taking office. They are Joe Biden and Ted Kennedy.

Kirstin Gillibrand was elected and reelected by a 24% margin in 2008. If Patterson and the N.Y. Democratic Party want drawing power upstate while keeping a handle on New York, Westchester, Putnam, Nassau and Suffolk Counties, look no further than Gillibrand.

Posted by: NotBubba | December 6, 2008 7:48 AM | Report abuse

what is it about California (Swartzenager) and New York (Rodham Clinton) where there is a "need" for celebrity. Actually, isn't Angelina Jolie a New Yorker. I might perk up for an overview by Angelina, nude, except for tatoos.

Posted by: angriestdogintheworld | December 6, 2008 3:27 AM | Report abuse

SENATOR CAROLINE KENNEDY HAS A NICE RING TO IT.
Caroline Kennedy is extremely well qualified to be a United States Senator. She is a Constitutional lawyer who has written books on the subject. She has written a book on patriots of the past. She is extremely well educated. She even spoke at the Profile in Courage Award when Sen. McCain received the honor. She has the clout to get things done.

Her personal fortune would keep her from having to bend to special interests.

Posted by: mharwick | December 6, 2008 12:51 AM | Report abuse

Most of the posters here are missing the politics of this thing. Chris is also a tad oblivious on that score (his last post on this topic said the choice of Caroline was 100 to 1, and that it simply wasn't happening...WRONG.

Paterson can't pick a sitting member of the NY congressional delegation for the upstate/downstate dynamic I've mentioned before. Also, if you're talking about Gillibrand, the woman is strongly pro-gun rights and considers herself a Blue Dog Democrat. Do you know what that means? It means a primary challenge every time she runs again, which opens the door to a Republican winning the seat. Paterson also comes out of the Harlem Democratic machine. He will not pick a pro-gun US Senator. Simply. Will. Never. Happen.

Andrew Cuomo: The problem with Cuomo is that his goal in life is to vindicate the "Hamlet on the Hudson" legacy of his father. Mario Cuomo had two serious shots at the presidency and a virtually guaranteed Supreme Court seat and turned them all down. His son wants to be president to redeem the family name. So he's run for governor (lost), and state AG (won). He'd happily go from NY AG to the Senate, but then he'd run either for governor again or directly for president.

If Paterson wants to make sure that the RFK/Moynihan/Hillary seat remains in the Democratic column for the long term, it's going to be Caroline.

Get used to it.

Posted by: Bondosan | December 6, 2008 12:51 AM | Report abuse

I'm torn on this one. I think CK would make a great Senator and allow the Dems to keep that seat safe for another generation (let's face it, this IS politics, and keeping that seat in the Dem column is the primary concern right now, especially since the person will have to run for office 2 times in the next 4 years).

On the other hand, it would be yet another political legacy, which, if she ran in the primary and won, would not be so much of an issue, but to be appointed, that's something else. I guess I'm just tired of seeing the same people/families being recycled through our government at the expense of people who have the desire to serve the people and are willing to achieve these positions through the sweat of their brow.

Oh well, I'm not from NY, so I'll defer to the people of the great state of NY on this issue.

Posted by: PeixeGato1 | December 6, 2008 12:42 AM | Report abuse

When the senate seat in NY became vacant with Moynihan's decision not to run for re-election, Rep. Nita Lowey was seriously interested in the seat. She was going to be the party nominee, when then First Lady Hillary Clinton expressed an interest in it. She took her own sweet time in finally deciding to run. All the while, Rep. Lowey suuported her, encurgaed her, and went along with her on 'exploration" tours to various parts of New York. Such an act is unheard of in politics.

Of course another thing unheard of in politics is any sense of recognition for such a magnanimous gesture.

Gov. Paterson, would do well to appoint Rep. Nita Lowey for the interim; notwithstanding her decision to take herself out.

Caroline Kennedy has conducted herself amazingly well thus far; this power-grab out of the blue, does not suit her. There is such a thing as paying your dues in politics.

But then again, we have the neophyte president who has no idea of "paying your dues". It is all the "fierce urgency of now".

Posted by: pKrishna43 | December 6, 2008 12:11 AM | Report abuse


caroline kennedy for ny us senate?

wow.

i like it!

:D

Posted by: DriveByPoster | December 5, 2008 11:37 PM | Report abuse

Look idiots, she's a person that has not yet accepted a bribe. That puts her way ahead of 99% of politicians, 89% of judges, 79% of cops, and 69% of doctors.
The priests are in a league of their own!

Posted by: mudbone | December 5, 2008 11:17 PM | Report abuse

"Anointing an utterly unqualified, vacuous, over-privileged super-rich white woman for the SOLE REASON that her daddy got shot"

I think her dad being famous would be enough, actually; plenty of legacy pols have living parents.

And "vacuous"? Please, she's by all accounts sharp.

Posted by: SeanC1 | December 5, 2008 11:12 PM | Report abuse

She's never run for or been elected to any political office and now she might get a Senate seat plopped in her lap without having to run for it either? Absurd. I'm just about sick of this whole Kennedy business.

Posted by: brewstercounty | December 5, 2008 10:58 PM | Report abuse
______________________________

You sound like the ghost of J. Edgar Hoover.
BTW did you know that the J in J. Edgar Hoover was an abbreviation for Jabonni?
Do you wear gowns in your private moments?

Posted by: mudbone | December 5, 2008 11:09 PM | Report abuse

And to the people who say she has no previous political experience, are you the same ones that turn around and complain about "career politicians?"

Posted by: dotellen | December 5, 2008 10:39 PM | Report abuse
___________________________

YES! They have the cliche that "A STICH IN TIME SAVES NINE" when you tarry and "HASTE MAKES WASTE" when you hurry. Of course they decide when you've tarried or hurried.

Posted by: mudbone | December 5, 2008 10:59 PM | Report abuse

She's never run for or been elected to any political office and now she might get a Senate seat plopped in her lap without having to run for it either? Absurd. I'm just about sick of this whole Kennedy business.

Posted by: brewstercounty | December 5, 2008 10:58 PM | Report abuse

I think Caroline Kennedy is qualified, and I really don't want to see any more political shuffling than is already going on.

And to the people who say she has no previous political experience, are you the same ones that turn around and complain about "career politicians?"

Posted by: dotellen | December 5, 2008 10:39 PM | Report abuse

Anointing an utterly unqualified, vacuous, over-privileged super-rich white woman for the SOLE REASON that her daddy got shot -- for crying out loud, is this what democracy has come to in 21st century America? Heaven help us.

Look, I'm sorry about her daddy. I truly am. I'm torn up about it. But HOW does that qualify her for one out of a hundred votes in the U.S. Senate?

Is Brittany Spears unavailable?

Posted by: zjr78xva | December 5, 2008 10:38 PM | Report abuse

Officermancuso: Welcome back! How was your vacation?

Posted by: toritto | December 5, 2008 10:08 PM | Report abuse

officermancuso, I googled the surveys I remember, but they're hard to find right now, for the simple reason that OECD has a new one out two weeks ago, and Google turns up endless stories about that.

I haven't actually had time to go through this 2008 report for the US ranking. OECD doesn't put in their press releases or summaries the fact that America comes last because they don't want to be seen America-bashing. The summary does say that Britain, Italy and the US fared poorly.
You can look yourself, it's here: http://www.oecd.org/document/25/0,3343,en_2649_201185_41530009_1_1_1_1,00.html

But I save you going through it, and guarantee that the US will again be rated the least socially mobile, it is in every year's survey by a long chalk.

The measure of social mobility they use is a standard and very simple one: how close is the correlation between what your parents earned when you were a child, and what you earn today?

In the developed world, the country where your parents' income in your childhood most closely predicts your own income today is the United States. Therefore the US is the least socially mobile country.

Britain also does poorly, but it's not an Anglo-Saxon thing. Canada and Australia have plenty of social mobility. The least mobile countries tend to be those where income disparity is highest to start with. Those where there's no minimum wage or a low one, and where the top people make the most. The US fits both those requirements perfectly. An average Fortune 500 CEO in the US makes as much as 400 of his workers, up from 80 workers' worth 20 years ago. And the US poor are poor as muck. With terrible public education to seal the deal, your peasants are better fixed in place than medieval serfs.

Which of course explains why America has such an extraordinarynumber of people in prison. Did you know that the Chinese have the world's second-highest prison population, but America breaks all world records, with a US citizen more than five times as likely to be in jail as a Chinese.

Posted by: kevrobb | December 5, 2008 9:54 PM | Report abuse

Aside from her last name, her qualifications to be a United States Senator are......her last name.

Posted by: dwillis917 | December 5, 2008 9:54 PM | Report abuse

....can Mike Bloomberg change parties again?

:-)

Posted by: toritto | December 5, 2008 9:46 PM | Report abuse

The only people pushing (leaking) this story are the usual suspects of Kennedy clan sycophants who have kept the name in the public eye far longer than it deserves to be.

Posted by: idiparker | December 5, 2008 9:39 PM | Report abuse

That would be the Caroline Kennedy who wrote in support of Obama's candidacy that people say he reminds them of Daddy?

No. I think not. I voted for Obama, and if Daddy's girl wants to be senator she can follow the usual path. Win a nomination, and give the public a choice.

Posted by: Farnaz2 | December 5, 2008 9:30 PM | Report abuse

I abhor nepotism because it gives something of importance to those who do not deserve it and who cannot reach a high enough standard.

Until evidence to the contrary is presented by her (and not others) then her appointment to the Senate is unwarranted because it would be another silly and emotional decision that charactrises American politics?

Having a law degree and a famous name and being permitted to work behind the scenes for Obama is nothing.

Let her justify her candidacy to the People of NY. She must show them that she is the best candidate on offer. So far she has not done anything to justify her appointment.

Many Americans supported Bush because he was a 'nice guy'. History shows that he is a walking talking disaster. Nevertheless, when Palin came along she attracted support notwithstanding that she is dopey.

Why should the same mistake be made with Caroline kennedy. I do not suggest that she is dopey (or smart). but I do think that good reasons for her appointment have not been presented by anyone especially her.

Posted by: robertjames1 | December 5, 2008 9:26 PM | Report abuse

Caroline Kennedy would make a gracious, thoughtful, and pragmatic Senator. For God's sake, and New York's, and this country's, please appoint her.

Posted by: ceblakeney | December 5, 2008 9:25 PM | Report abuse

Eliot Spitzer, you're kidding right? Notgonnahappen!

Posted by: jeffcoud1 | December 5, 2008 9:16 PM | Report abuse

Nobody gave Hillary Clinton the NY Senate seat....she won it fair and square, comeongivemeabreak! But anyhow, Caroline Kennedy, great idea! It's not like Robert Kennedy (or Hillary for that matter) lived in NY for more than like 2 weeks before running for the Senate seat. But, much like the original Schumer race, then Clinton, Caroline Kennedy will have to traipse across upstate NY and earn her bona fides. Go visit Binghamton, and Elmira, Albany and Rochester, Buffalo and Utica. She can definitely do it. I think she's a great choice.

Posted by: jeffcoud1 | December 5, 2008 9:14 PM | Report abuse

"No offense to Ms. Kennedy, but from John Quincy Adams to George W. Bush, USA experience with family "dynasties" has not been felicitous."

John Quincy Adams was a brilliant man; not a great president (though a lot of that had to do with his enemies), but a superb diplomat and a legendary Congressman.

And I think you forget Teddy and Franklin Roosevelt, generally both ranked among the top 5 or 6 presidents.

Anyway, CK would be a great choice. She comes from a family with a storied history of public service, and has, for the most part, dedicated her time to doing that in the private sector; she'd bring freshness to the capital. And she's got a level of star-power comparable to Hillary's, which would be good for New York.

Posted by: SeanC1 | December 5, 2008 9:14 PM | Report abuse

Kevrobb wrote:

"America is a very strange country.

"They call it the "Land of the Free" but it has by far the world's highest prison population.

"They talk about the "American Dream", but America's class system resembles nothing so much as 14th-Century France. Or perhaps Rome in the 1st Century BC is a closer example.

"Obama is the first president in nearly 20 years not to come from a great political family. This pleb is a real outlier - with only a few million in the bank, he's a peasant by the standards of US politicians.

"Fortunately this upstart immediately named a dynast from a great patrician family, her Grace Duchess Hillary of Clinton, as his Sec of State. At least Hillary's nine-figure bank account will maintain her in the style that a typical American ruling class politician expects.

"Countess Caroline of Kennedy would score a great coup for her noble clan if she can add New York to their mighty fiefs in Massachusetts and the Grand Duchy of California.

"Let all the plebians, serfs and peasants kneel and pay homage to this gracious lady of noble birth. God has appointed her to rule over you, verily!

"PS did you know that repeated surveys have shown that the US has the lowest social mobility of any OECD nation?

"USA: Born poor - you die poor."

-----------------

I'd be curious how the OECD study to which you implicitly refer (but which you don't cite) measures social mobility.

There's not a politician named Kennedy in the USA who hasn't done everything humanly possibly to improve the chances that a person born poor may get ahead.

I'd guess that, if your thesis that social mobility in the USA lags social mobility in Europe is correct (and I seriously doubt that), the lack of USA mobility is due to 20 or 30 years of worship of the idea that unmitigated capitalism will create a meritocracy.

Posted by: officermancuso | December 5, 2008 9:13 PM | Report abuse

Caroline Kennedy is as good as any of the other choices and better than most. After all, Hillary Clinton had "no experience" other than being an ex-first lady when she was elected.

Besides, we have our own trouble in Florida. With Mel Martinez announcing he will not run in 2010 we might be witnessing the rise of Bush III (the Jeb). Heaven help us all.

:-)

Posted by: toritto | December 5, 2008 9:12 PM | Report abuse

Q: What are Caroline Kennedy's qualifications for being Senator of New York?

A: She's not a politician, that is, she's never held a political seat before. Good enough for me.

Posted by: SGall23241 | December 5, 2008 9:06 PM | Report abuse

We need to have either someone who understands Upstate NY issues or a minority (black or hispanic) due to a dearth of them in the Senate. Someone needs to convince me that her view of New York State is more than the famous New Yorker cover map of the world that essentially stops at Yonkers.

Posted by: raydh | December 5, 2008 9:00 PM | Report abuse

A resounding YES for the appointment. Besides, it's hands down better than any Long Island or Rockland County hack appointment.


Justice.

just yes.


Posted by: jato1 | December 5, 2008 8:58 PM | Report abuse

Give me a break. She has done NOTHING to warrant her being handed a seat in the Senate. If her name was Caroline Kenney, this would not be happening, not with her thin resume.

Folks, having the right last name does give anybody a right to a Senatorial appointment. Let's leave dynasties to the Brits.

Posted by: WashingtonDame | December 5, 2008 8:55 PM | Report abuse

Picking Caroline Kennedy would be the smartest thing Governor Paterson could do, which I've posted about previously.

To those who question her qualifications, give me a break. She's an attorney (passed the bar in both NY and DC), an author, and has served on both charitable and educational institutions in NY and nationally. As a senator, she will draft and vote on legislation, which she is eminently qualified to do.

The problem with appointing anyone else on Chris' list is that they will invite a strong Republican challenge. Members of Congress from the city are generally considered too liberal for upstate. Upstate members of Congress are considered too conservative downstate.

No Republican could beat Kennedy and none of them could out-fundraise her.

If she's appointed, she will hold the seat for life (or as long as she wants it).

Posted by: Bondosan | December 5, 2008 8:47 PM | Report abuse

Caroline Kennedy is a "cold person"??? Where have you been for the last hundred years? Ahhh, off in Republican, neo-conservative dreamland....that explains it.
But, we Democrats have our own dreamland, don't we. Wouldn't we just LOVE having her accept a Senate seat! Yes, we would! We love her, for herself. She has been such a treasure to the nation. In every way. And, we respect and love the Kennedy family's service, sacrifice, and soaring hopes for our nation.
I don't think it's going to happen. Caroline has a great life, has contributed so much without this and can continue to do so, and I wonder, if she isn't a lot like her Mother in the end, and recognizes that all this political stuff is just simply that: stuff.
She's got children and, if not already, grandchildren to contemplate and a career of her own. Why would she want all this political trouble in her life?
Nevertheless, what an additional boost it would be to America if she should take on such a job and legacy.

Posted by: cms1 | December 5, 2008 8:24 PM | Report abuse

This is sick! More unqualified people being "given" a Senate seat. First Hillary and now Kennedy. Wouldn't it be nice if candidates had to spend YEARS in the trenches of local politics before being handed the key to the executive washroom???

Posted by: kmccorma | December 5, 2008 8:19 PM | Report abuse

Oh joy. Another Kennedy in the Senate. Oh, and another Clinton in the White House.

Tell me there aren't better qualified people out there than the same 'ol, same 'ol, ad nausium.

Hey, it's my turn, or is it your turn.

Posted by: palmettonajjar | December 5, 2008 8:07 PM | Report abuse

It's about time New York had a non-carpetbagger senator. The run for 2012 is set.

Sarah Palin/Rush Limbaugh
vs.
Barak Obama/Caroline Kennedy

I am black Irish and vote that way.

May the best woman win.

Posted by: senatorsun | December 5, 2008 7:59 PM | Report abuse

America is a very strange country.

They call it the "Land of the Free" but it has by far the world's highest prison population.

They talk about the "American Dream", but America's class system resembles nothing so much as 14th-Century France. Or perhaps Rome in the 1st Century BC is a closer example.

Obama is the first president in nearly 20 years not to come from a great political family. This pleb is a real outlier - with only a few million in the bank, he's a peasant by the standards of US politicians.

Fortunately this upstart immediately named a dynast from a great patrician family, her Grace Duchess Hillary of Clinton, as his Sec of State. At least Hillary's nine-figure bank account will maintain her in the style that a typical American ruling class politician expects.

Countess Caroline of Kennedy would score a great coup for her noble clan if she can add New York to their mighty fiefs in Massachusetts and the Grand Duchy of California.

Let all the plebians, serfs and peasants kneel and pay homage to this gracious lady of noble birth. God has appointed her to rule over you, verily!

PS did you know that repeated surveys have shown that the US has the lowest social mobility of any OECD nation?

USA: Born poor - you die poor.

Posted by: kevrobb | December 5, 2008 7:56 PM | Report abuse

"There's nothing more appealing in politics than a storybook ending."


Oh, yeah, and we know that the Kennedys always have storybook endings. DON'T DO IT!

Posted by: fake1 | December 5, 2008 7:54 PM | Report abuse

Grand to see the brainless comments like "Oh she is so "lovely and gracious"
Yeah like that qualifies her to be what? A social secretary? Hey Obama can create a new cabinet level position - Secretary of Social... ism events.

I would wager that a mayor of a small town (Even a small town in Alaska) is far better qualified for that position than Carolyn Kennedy.

Paterson has shown some smarts so far, we will see if he a typical Dem lefty or if he has a brain and choses someone actually qualified for the job.

Posted by: AmzgGrce | December 5, 2008 7:51 PM | Report abuse

Caroline is an attorney and an editor. Among other things, she runs several charity organizations. I think she is more than qualified even without her pedigree.

Posted by: misstosh | December 5, 2008 7:47 PM | Report abuse

My last name is Kennedy and therefore I am deserving.

Commoners and Subjects,

Appoint me immediately.

Posted by: Texan2007 | December 5, 2008 7:28 PM | Report abuse

How raw is the payback to the earliest Obama supporters? Her limited role in helping NYC schools improve (anything would have been better) is hardly endorsement for this seat.
Have we dropped the pretext that a person needs at least a bare min. of experience to run for a significant national office?
Many others would be preferable.
I am disappointed in yet another entitled person simply assuming that indicating their "interest" is enough for a door to pop open.
Arrogant, smug and under-qualified. Thanks but no thanks.

Posted by: OrlandoNan | December 5, 2008 7:14 PM | Report abuse

At least Caroline is not a member of the CFR. I think she could add some fresh views.

Posted by: angelique1 | December 5, 2008 6:57 PM | Report abuse

Great idea! She is smart and gracious, and I am sure she will be a great public servant to her state and her country.

Posted by: fridaolay | December 5, 2008 6:54 PM | Report abuse

Great idea! She is smart and gracious, and I am sure she will be a great public servant to her state and her country.

Posted by: fridaolay | December 5, 2008 6:51 PM | Report abuse

I like Caroline Kennedy, but has she ever held a job before? I'm tired of things just being handed to people because they come from certain families.

Posted by: sunnyday1 | December 5, 2008 6:46 PM | Report abuse

Gee whiz!

The Democrats do care one bit about performance or qualifications.......it's all about celebrities and personalities.

Simply UNBELIEVEABLE...............

And of course you won't hear one BAD word about this idea for the liberal fascists that generate our MSM news for us.

Folks after 2 years of the Democrats running our economy do we really need MORE unqualified politicians or celebrities?

........Stay tune for a very painful four years.............TWO YEARS IS ENOUGH!!!

Posted by: allenridge | December 5, 2008 6:42 PM | Report abuse

"i'd love to see eliot spitzer there. and give him a seat on the finance committee."

Dude

Posted by: DDAWD | December 5, 2008 6:33 PM | Report abuse

I thought Caroline was from Mass.

Posted by: markandbeth | December 5, 2008 6:32 PM | Report abuse

It is a wonderful idea. I hope this idea comes to full fruition.

What a qualified woman, unlike Palin who was reported to have said that Africa is a country. Moreover, Kennedy comes from an environment that celebrate and cares for the working man's woos.

I look forward to listening to her debate ideas in the Senate well on CSpan.

Posted by: wrock76taolcom | December 5, 2008 6:31 PM | Report abuse

Why a Kennedy? Surely there must be tens of thousands of other individuals out there who are as qualified or more qualified than her.

Posted by: hipshot | December 5, 2008 6:30 PM | Report abuse

Well, she hasn't killed, raped, or maimed anyone like her uncle and cousins. And, as far as we know, she doesn't have sex with thousands of strangers, like her dad. What other recommendations does a liberal need???

Posted by: MYSTICMOUSE44 | December 5, 2008 6:27 PM | Report abuse

Terrible idea. She's a lovely, gracious lady. People actually like her. Because we know nothing about her. She'll join politics, and will become another entirely despicable figure.

Don't do it, Caroline!! Stay a powerful private citizen with immense clout and mystique.

Posted by: viennamom | December 5, 2008 6:21 PM | Report abuse

i'd be perfectly fine with caroline as senator; she's been very involved in nyc educational issues and she's an extremely competent person.

i'd hate to see andy cuomo go to wdc; he's turned out to be a kickass ag here -- he's got his own investigations of the mortgage/wall street collapse. i'd hate to see that lose his mojo; and besides he wouldn't have near the influence as a junior senator.

i'd love to see eliot spitzer there. and give him a seat on the finance committee.

Posted by: mycomment | December 5, 2008 6:06 PM | Report abuse

It's New York. Perhaps its someone the Democratic Party can take a risk with. The successor to Obama? The name factor might be important somewhere else, but NY is heavy Democrat anyways.

Posted by: DDAWD | December 5, 2008 6:04 PM | Report abuse

I this the best NY can do?
No ofeense to JFK but Caroline Kennedy is just a name. No experience, no credentials, needs to be tested.

Posted by: hhkeller | December 5, 2008 5:56 PM | Report abuse

Spitzer, Cuomo, and the whole batch of politicians who've made their names as prosecutors nailing celebrity scalps alongside the moose heads that decorate their fireplace mantles would be the worst possible choices.

They play to ignorant voters' sense that bad things happen because a few (rather than all) politicians are opportunists, and lead prosecutions and persecutions which serve no good or honorable purpose.

The political cult of the hard-charging white knight prosecutor assumes an unrealistic amount of virtue on the part of anyone who has chosen to depend on popular votes for a living, and takes too sanguine a view of human nature in general.

Posted by: officermancuso | December 5, 2008 5:55 PM | Report abuse

Politics is very different in each state, I guess. In TX, one would typically have risen from a local office to a statewide one before running for the Senate, or perhaps have made a name for him/herself in the House or in the TX Lege.

Texans only allow them to run for Prez on daddy's name. :-)

Posted by: mark_in_austin | December 5, 2008 5:53 PM | Report abuse

TQWoods-
As if that ho from Texas will even be ALIVE in 2016!
LOL LOL

Posted by: kase | December 5, 2008 5:50 PM | Report abuse

No offense to Ms. Kennedy, but from John Quincy Adams to George W. Bush, USA experience with family "dynasties" has not been felicitous.

I'm a bit of a JFK-ophile so my feelings are mixed. In part I'd smile with pride to see Caroline in the Senate, and I'd not worry overmuch, as New York's voters will have a Democratic primary and a general election soon enough which they could use to veto her postulated appointment.

My strongest sense, though, is that our nation's founders were right not to establish royalty or aristocracy in their new nation. Their rationalism led them, correctly I think, in this matter.

Posted by: officermancuso | December 5, 2008 5:49 PM | Report abuse

Oops! I forgot to mention what a strong senator Bill Clinton would be for the state of New York and for the nation.

Yeah, people! Get off your high horses. He's smarter and more "political" than most of us.

And I'm glad to hear Nita Lowey has turned down the position. She does a fabulously effective job where she is right now. Somehow she always seemed to be able to walk the fine line among her constituents.

Posted by: jmod35 | December 5, 2008 5:49 PM | Report abuse

Wow, that would be great!! Obama in the WH, Hillary as SOS, OJ in jail and Caroline in the Senate. Sweeeeet.

Who said she's cold? Ha, ha, Ha. She's a class act, that's what she is. Smart and understated. And since when is warmth a qualification for political office?

Posted by: hersbear | December 5, 2008 5:36 PM | Report abuse

I'd like to see Eliot Spitzer first. Then maybe Caroline Kennedy. I'd prefer that Andrew Cuomo who's an awesome NYS AG remain in the place where he can be most effective.

Who's ever sure any, absolutely any, politician hasn't either "fooled around" or employed someone for sex? Not I surely.

Eliot Spitzer is a huge determined brain, he dogged Wall Street for years -- successfully, mind you. If he's not appointed to the cabinet, and I gather he won't be because so many of us are hypocrites, I'd like to see him in the Senate, working hard, as he always has, to make life better for all of us.

Posted by: jmod35 | December 5, 2008 5:35 PM | Report abuse

Oh, my--do you see where this could potentially lead? A contest for the presidency in 2016 between Kay Hutchison on the Republican ticket and Caroline Kennedy for the Democrats!

If Yogi Berra didn't say this, he should have: "History is coming!" (still more history, that is)

Posted by: TQWoods | December 5, 2008 5:18 PM | Report abuse

Hopefully she can lay off the bottle. Bad idea either way.

Posted by: AbolhassanBaniSadr | December 5, 2008 4:48 PM | Report abuse

THAT'S A GREAT IDEA!!!

Posted by: mattadamsdietmanager1014 | December 5, 2008 4:39 PM | Report abuse

I thought the whole point of defeating Hillary Clinton in the primaries was to send the message that we don't accept aristocracy in this country. Caroline Kennedy is a cold person with no political experience. Appointing her would be the worst of manifestation yet of America's increasing obsession with celebrity politics and aristocracy. New Yorkers will not reelect her.

Posted by: freedom41 | December 5, 2008 4:34 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company