For those who don’t know, Caroline Kennedy (daughter of Jackie and JFK, sister of John-John) is actively seeking the Senate seat being vacated by Hillary Clinton. I have nothing against her on a personal level, and generally have a good impression of her based on what little I know about her, but she’s not qualified for this seat. I think NY Times piece gets it right.
Now, on the plus side, she does have a law degree and she hasn’t done absolutely nothing – she has been involved in a number of public causes as a civilian, and she has had somewhat of an inside view of the Democratic Party machine. But I still don’t think she’s don’t think she’s earned a right to just be handed a Senate seat without campaigning. I think there is more than a hint of name entitlement here, and I also think that if her name were Reagan or Bush, that Democrats would be having conniptions.
As much as it pains me to say this, I think Caroline Kennedy is probably less qualified to hold a major political office than Sarah Palin.
Looking at this objectively and without partisan sentiment, I think that if CK wants a major political office, she needs to do what Hillary did – go out and run for it properly and earn it.
An appointment to a vacated seat should go to an experienced politician (how you would qualify that is the trick) as a a fill in. They are essentially a substitute teacher, and need to be able to get in there and get going immediately. The next election the voters can put a political neophyte in if they want.
Caroline looks like she wants the seat without actually going through he work of getting it.
It absolutely reeks of entitlement because of her name.
Less qualified than Sarah Palin? Come on now. She has a law degree, she’s been a public servant nearly her entire life and has been able to observe the political process from a very inside seat.
I like Caroline Kennedy. She’d probably win the seat easily in an election. But I agree that appointing her over a more experienced politician makes me a little uncomfortable.
As a New Yorker who opposed Hilary’s Senate candidacy on the grounds that she was an unqualified hack of a nepotistic carpetbagger (and still does) I have to admit I don’t mind Caroline Kennedy nearly so much. As far as I’m concerned, the biggest qualification for a NY U.S. Senate seat is that it go to a New Yorker, and I think we’ve got all too many career politicians in higher office. Not specifically C. Kennedy, but ANY New Yorker who’s a published author or a business-person or a union leader or a military officer or any of a dozen professions that are NOT elected offices would be welcome. I think we need lots more citizens from all walks of life running for office.
Er…yes, a lot less qualified. She’s never held an elected office. Lots of people have law degrees and it doesn’t make them even good lawyer much less qualified to be a Senator. Good civil servants don’t often make good politicians. Other than her support of Obama she has no credible claim to the seat.
I’m trying to think of how somebody who has never held elected office is less qualified than somebody who has repeatedly been elected to office. Actually, I’m trying to figure out what the fuck this has to do with Sarah Palin at all.
I strongly dislike it when people run for public office based on name recognition - especially major public office, since few celebrities seem to think mere local office is worth their time. Compared to Kennedy, I guess I should be glad that the Schwarzeneggers and Frankens of the world at least asked the voters to elect them instead of just asking for an appointment.
Is holding previous elected office the sole qualification for a Senate seat? Not in my opinion. In terms of overall intelligence and knowledge of both national and foreign affairs, Palin is clearly the loser.
You have no way of telling which one of them are more intelligent. Kennedy was clearly raised differently than Palin. She was exposed to differnt things but in no way does that make her any more “intelligent”. Sorry but that’s just an arrogant, simplistic comment to make.
She would be a junior Senator so foreign affairs would not be a high prioriity. Having a basic understanding of how government actually works would help. Kennedy doesn’t have that. Also, at least Palin ran for election. Kennedy should run for election and take her chances that way. Just because she was lucky enough to be born into privilege doesn’t make her worthy of anything.
She would be replacing Hillary Clinton in that seat, who also had no experience before getting it, also hadn’t had a job in years, and wasn’t even a New Yorker. I don’t see how anyone who supported Hillary Clinton for that seat could complain about Caroline Kennedy.
It’s rare that I’m able to say this, but I agree with Diogenes completely. I’ve thought about starting a thread myself to ask if people thought Caroline was suited for that office, but since no one else had I figured no one was really that interested in her one way or the other.
Just for the record though, I think she’s probably a fine person with a good heart. And like so many Kennedys, she’s had to suffer many painful losses of loved ones. But these factors don’t mean that she could or would function effectively as a U.S. senator.
And like to some of the other posters to this thread, it does smack somewhat of entitlement, and given my previous impression of her it seems somewhat out of character. Perhaps she’s being prodded by her family and circle of acquaintances and doesn’t really expect to be named.
ETA: I started to mention Hillary but then omitted it as unnecessary. However, since IW has brought her up I would point out how lame and ineffectual she was, despite her devious, manipulative nature and the savvy she gained while riding Bill’s coattails, and yet Caroline doesn’t appear to have been blessed even with any of these qualities.
What, precisely, are the job requirements to be a US Senator besides an age and residency requirement?
I am amazed at the credit being given to being elected as indicative of anything other than being able to get elected. We have the likes of Blagojevich or Bush as examples of just how good being elected proves a person is capable for that position.
Heck, I think we could make a valid case for Kennedy not being a part of the existing internal beltway clique as a virtue.