Not so sweet on Caroline

[cali]

By BEN SMITH & GLENN THRUSH | 12/12/08 5:01 AM EST

It's been a week since Caroline Kennedy's name vaulted to the top of the list of candidates to replace Hillary Rodham Clinton in the Senate, and already the bloom is coming off the boomlet.

Kennedy, the 51-year-old lawyer, education advocate and daughter of President John F. Kennedy, has done little more than express interest in the job during a phone call with Gov. David Paterson — but that doesn't mean the woman who inspired "Sweet Caroline" is being spared the elbow-to-the-teeth New York treatment.

Rivals — including at least three members of the New York congressional delegation — are starting to doubt Kennedy's viability and experience, and Paterson is said to be less than enthusiastic about picking her, people close to him say. Critics are even questioning the substance of her accomplishments in education, her most high profile issue.

"There is no frontrunner - period," snapped a person close to Paterson, when asked about Kennedy's prospects.

<snip>

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1208/16512.html

[Captain Hilts]

1. New York's congresssional delegation want the spot and don't want to be eclipsed. nt

[KamaAina]

2. Oh, that's right. The song is about her.

The song that's played over and over again at Fenway Park.

Hardly bodes well for her being a Senator from New York! (although she would be replacing a declared Cubs fan, but it isn't quite the same)

[kiva]

3. I think this is a big part of the issue:

"The attacks on Kennedy were probably inevitable, considering that her emergence as a contender immediately overshadowed a dozen or so toiling lesser-knowns who saw Clinton's seat as the reward for careers spent on the Empire State's political greased pole, the only path to power available to non-Kennedys."

This seems to be at the heart of the argument--not that Caroline hasn't done good things, but that other Dems who have worked their way up from the political bottom are being brushed off in favor of a name.

[hedgehog]

6. Trust me, NO New York Dem has worked himself or herself very far up

from the political bottom! Our people may not get indicted, but overall with all the horsetrading that goes on down in Albany, we have a very corrupt system. The day after the Dems finally achieved a 1 vote majority in the NYS Senate, about a dozen of them threatened to vote with the Republicans unless they got what they wanted. Several even backed down on supporting equal rights for same-sex marriages.

[kiva]

8. Thanks for responding.

I've not said much about this, mostly because I think it's a matter for Paterson and the input he should listen to is that from NY residents. I have wondered, though, how people who have spent their lives in NY politics see this possible nomination. Is is similar to having someone promoted in your company who isn't seen as having worked their way up, or are politicians simply more pragmatic about the system?

[onenote]

11. they survived it when HRC was catapaulted over them for the nomination in 2000

and they'll survive it if Caroline Kennedy moves ahead of them now. BTW, I was in favor of HRC getting the NY nomination,despite the fact it pushed aside Nita Lowey, a deserving, experienced member of Congress who had expected to run for the seat, because I felt HRC would be a stronger general election candidate. At this point, I also see Caroline Kennedy as likely to be the strongest candidate in the general and since someone has to be appointed, I see no reason for it not to be her. If I'm wrong, she can and will be challenged in the primary.

[kiva]

14. I've read a bit here on upstate/downstate politics in NY.

Do you think that Caroline Kennedy has an advantage because she has not been involved in this bickering and might be more acceptable to both sides? I'm curious, because in Nevada we also have a north/south division that really is evident during elections.

[hedgehog]

19. Politics in NYS is very disfunctional. Upstate is divided between Democrats in the larger cities

(Buffalo, Rochester, Syracuse) and Republicans in the rural and suburban areas. The Republicans run against the "corrupt city politicians" and/or all those "welfare people". They also play up the Upstate/Downstate divide.

The Democratic Party is overwhelmingly based in NYC. (That's where all the people are, duh.) The problem is that instead of a state-wide party, we have a party dominated by a small group in NYC that pretty much does ignore Upstate. At the same time, Upstate Democrats have no idea who all the players are in NYC. Toss in the concentration of big money donors, and you can begin to see the problem we have. There really isn't much of a grass roots party.

[kiva]

20. Our problem is similar, but the division here is largely D/R,

which makes it somewhat easier to criticize the opposition. The north is largely both conservative and Republican (exceptions are Reno and Carson City), while the Dems are stronger in the south. This has been an advantage since our growth is primarily urban, but it's still proven difficult to achieve economic equity in areas such as higher education.

[EFerrari]

10. That's the difference between the House and the Senate, though,

isn't it?

[hedgehog]

17. I'm referring specifically to the NYS legislature. There are 62 Senators in

the upper House, 150 Assembly members in the lower house. The districts have been gerrymandered for something like 100 years to give the lower house to the Democrats and the upper house to the Republicans. All members gets a base wage plus "lulus"; additional pay for being on this or that committee. Because the party leaders make the committee assignments and control member items (i.e. pork barrel), the party leaders dictate how each house votes. In effect then, the budget and any legislation that passes depends on what is agreed to by the House Leader, the Senate leader and the governor. This time around, the Democrats took the Senate, so it looked like things could start changing. Instead, a bunch of Democratic State Senators saw a chance to grab power for themselves.

[Octafish]

4. The fact she would bring her late father's ideas to the Senate would be good thing.

He was a Liberal Democrat who really believed in peace.

[Captain Hilts]

7. Um...not quite. nt

[Octafish]

13. What makes you say she wouldn't support what her father stood for?

From what we know about Caroline Kennedy Schlossberg, she's supported good government, using the power of the state to better life for all Americans, and wouldn't be corrupted by power.

Come to think of it, maybe she wouldn't fit in.

[bigtree]

5. So, Jonathan Martin and Roger Simon at Politico aren't 'sweet' on Caroline

Their rag isn't in any position to call that appointment, they're just geared to exploit the process until the end.

[JuniperLea]

18. Hear hear!

Politico is on my "not a good source" list. I call them The Concern Troll Rag.

[EFerrari]

9. That article completely elides her stumping for Obama.

[kiva]

12. But what does that have to do with her qualifications to be a senator?

Does this mean that any political figure who supported other Dem candidates in the primaries should be eliminated? Why? This is about appointing a senator to represent the residents of NY.

[onenote]

15. what exactly do you think are the qualifications to be senator?

[kiva]

16. Legally or politically?

As I've said above, I have no objections to CK as a senator--that's for Paterson to decide, hopefully with input from the residents of NY. I just find this argument--that her support for Obama should even be a factor in the decision--pretty silly.

[EFerrari]

22. It's not a small thing for a senator to have a close relationship with the president.

It's not silly at all.

[kiva]

23. So senate seats should be awarded based on the

spoils system--you scratched my back, so I'll scratch yours? No thanks, it really works better when the best candidate is selected. If Paterson decides it CK, that's fine. If he decides on someone else, that's fine too.

[EFerrari]

24. You're leaping to a conclusion that I didn't draw at all.

:)

[sohndrsmith]

25. well, according to the Constitution, qualifications for Senator are:

1. AGE: must be 30 years old

2. CITIZENSHIP: must be a US citizen for a minimum of 9 years

3. STATE RESIDENCY: resident/inhabitant at the time of election/appointment


(as far as being qualified to represent NY, Caroline Kennedy is pretty hard to beat, considering she was born there, lived most of her life there, has worked there for years, got her law degree there and works hard for public education, she just doesn't crow about it...)

She didn't just fly in a week before showing interest in the seat (or running for it), and she has other qualifications far and above what is constitutionally required...

[EFerrari]

21. No. I mean, this article tries to make her look disengaged polotically

and she certainly wasn't. Not only that, but she led the VP search, too.