Preliminary thoughts on Caroline and the Senate...

[gcomeau]

Thought #1: I frown on this whole "dynasty" concept. We should not be appointing people to some of the highest positions that exist in the national government based on who they are related to, no matter what those relations are. You can argue that the family involved has sacrificed, you can argue that they are owed a debt... but nobody is EVER, through association, "owed" a position of governance. They can be owed respect. They can be owed sympathy. They can be owed compassion. They are NEVER owed power.

That said...

Thought#2: You don't just automatically rule out someone because of family associations either. Quite frankly, I've never really paid as much attention to the Kennedy's as many here seem to. I honestly have no idea what Caroline has been doing with herself or what experience and qualifications she may have accumulated. The first instinct for many here upon hearing the talk of her possibly being up for Hillary's seat was to cry nepotism and automatically assume that the name was the ONLY reason the offer was possibly being considered. I don't know if that's the case, and I doubt anyone here really does either. Perhaps it's not so much nepotism as taking advantage of name recognition for electability considerations? And no, that's not a great evil in this situation... see next thought.

Thought #3 (this would be the most important one): There is a difference between the Senate and the Presidency. Frankly, when dealing with the Presidency qualifications are very very high on my priority list. When dealing with the Senate, ideology moves way higher on the list. Why? Because there is one President, and when they screw up because they have no idea what they're doing it can have truly monumental disastrous consequences. There are 100 Senators. If one of them really screws up the other 99 are usually not letting them run with it. There is a hell of a lot more forgiving a learning curve involved in the Senate than there is in the presidency... so picking someone you're confident will TRY to do the right things but maybe won't quite know how to do that effectively right away, is not necessarily a bad thing. So, while there is possibly a case to be made by those here who are pushing the "What experience does she have!?!?!?" line of argument, consider how important that actually is in a Senate candidate. Really. I mean, have we all looked around at other Senate candidates and the experience they have in governance when THEY are elected? Hello, are we not all rooting for Al Franken to take Minnesota as we speak? And it's not because of his extensive government service resume, it's because we know he'll vote our way and that's the bottom line. I'm pretty confident Caroline Kennedy has at least as much experience in politics and governance as Al does, I don't see how you could possibly grow up in the environment she must have been raised in and not pick up a few things. So let's try to tone down the hypocrisy a bit, experience is a nice thing to have in a Senator, but it's not the vital qualifying criteria it is when we're dealing with something like the presidency.

So basically, based on what I do know of the situation, I can think of worse people to be considering for the seat than Caroline Kennedy. I don't know if she's the best choice available, but if you don't have an objection to her policy stances or electability you probably shouldn't expend too much energy getting all upset over the name thing unless there's clear evidence that the only reason she's being considered is because family is pulling strings. And based on the last public opinion poll out of NY I just saw posted I doubt that's all she's got going for her right now.

[pnwmom]

1. Yes! Al Franken is the best answer to those who say she doesn't have enough

experience. Another good answer is Patty Murray, the Senator from Washington, who campaigned as the "mom in tennis shoes." She has high approval ratings both in Washington and even here on DU.

Caroline Kennedy is an accomplished woman with progressive views who had the foresight and political insight to endorse Obama early on. I think NYers would be lucky to have her representing them.