Okay, it’s not the kind of source you want to put in a term paper, but here’s the professional biography for Caroline Kennedy from Wikipedia.
Kennedy is an attorney, editor, writer and member of the New York and Washington, D.C. bar associations. She is one of the founders of the Profiles in Courage Award, given annually since 1990 to a person who exemplifies the type of courage examined in her father’s Pulitzer Prize-winning book of the same name. The award is generally given to elected officials who, acting in accord with their conscience, risk their careers by pursuing a larger vision of the national, state or local interest in opposition to popular opinion or powerful pressures from their constituents. In May 2002, she presented an unprecedented Profiles in Courage Award to representatives of the NYPD, the New York City Fire Department, and the military as representatives of all of the people who acted to save the lives of others during the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001.[4]
From 2002 to 2004, Kennedy worked as chief executive for the Office of Strategic Partnerships for the New York City Department of Education. During this time, she helped raise more than $65 million for the city’s public schools.[3] She currently serves as the Vice Chair of The Fund for Public Schools, a public-private partnership founded in 2002 to attract private funding for public schools in New York City. [5]
In addition, Kennedy is currently President of the Kennedy Library Foundation,[3] a director of both the Commission on Presidential Debates and the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, and Honorary Chairman of the American Ballet Theatre. She is also an adviser to the Harvard Institute of Politics, a living memorial to her father.Kennedy has represented her family at the funeral services of former Presidents Ronald Reagan in 2004 and Gerald Ford in 2007, and at the funeral service of former First Lady Lady Bird Johnson in 2007. She also represented her family at the dedication of the William J. Clinton Presidential Center and Park in Little Rock, Arkansas in November 2004.
I placed the education qualifications in bold, as this is another reason why I am offended by the prospects of Senator Caroline Kennedy. She had the celebrity status to raise a ton of money for a public-private partnership. However, this is a person who had not one day’s worth of experience with public education before she parachuted into the central administration of the NYC Public Schools. It is particularly disturbing that her passion is now public education, and wants to be a major force in dictating education policy to those of us in the field.
She received her A.B. from Harvard University and her J.D. from Columbia Law School, after attending the Brearley School, and Convent of the Sacred Heart in Manhattan, and Concord Academy in Massachusetts.
So now we have a woman, born with a silver spoon in her mouth, living on Park Avenue and Martha’s Vineyard, not really in touch with your average New Yorker. She was born on third base with a silver spoon in her mouth, and an appointment to the senate would be the political equivalent of scoring on a balk.
Who do I want in the senate? We need someone with extensive experience in government, particularly on the local level. We need someone who has struggled with federal mandates. We need someone who has gone before the voters on a smaller scale, who has knocked on doors and dealt with complaints and problems on a retail level. We need someone who has worked his or her way up the ladder by being smart and responsive. We need someone more like Barack Obama than legacy-admit George W. Bush.
So, Governor Paterson, there are plenty of folks who have toiled in local government. Plenty of people who have gotten where they are by being scrappy and talented. Plenty of people who would be a great senator, but won’t get there without a little help. Forget the big names. Go find the best candidate.
I’m still waiting for People Opposed to Caroline Kennedy (POCKs) to name who they do support for the job.
<
p>pablo, Bob is so far mum on his preference. Care to beat him to it? Who would be best for the job, and why? If no one can make a case for a better alternative, than maybe you all just need to swallow your bile.
I’m going to start referring to people who oppose Kennedy but aren’t willing to recommend and defend an alternative as Chicken POCKs. đŸ˜€
Can’t someone make an argument that Kennedy is not qualified without a rant? We all know Mitt Romney is unqualified without having to generate a long list of the folks who are better.
Calling Kennedy “Marie Antoinette”, as Editor Bob did in his diary is real name-calling. I’m only following his august example.
<
p>Perhaps you didn’t notice when Willard’s merits were being debated, but we all had our alternate favorites. I don’t recall him being called a land shark and leaving it at that. But for some reason, people feel free to dump on a progressive without making the slightest effort to prove that they can come up with that mythical “up by the bootstraps” alternative they all seem to desire (as if there is nothing “bootstraps” about surviving the crush of your father and uncle being asaasinated; and the world constantly peeking through your blinds; and being a woman in an old boy’s world).
<
p>and finally, “Chicken POCK” is just plain clever. laugh and enjoy the fun, then come up with a good alternative to Kennedy, IF YOU CAN
Pablo didn’t call Kennedy “Marie Antoinette.” Perhaps the other diary is out of line, but Pablo makes a valid point.
<
p>I like the skinny black kid from the South Side of Chicago. Any skinny black kids out there in New York? Women who worked their way from welfare? Poor kids from immigrant families? You mean they don’t have those folks in New York any more, or are we doing that good a job of keeping them down.
OK, is that enough?
I am pleased, however, that my choice of title seems to have gotten across the point I wanted to make about aristocrats versus the meritocracy, such as it may be.
<
p>I stand by that point.
I am not up on NY politics, so I don’t have a broad list to work from. However, the following folks seem to be far more qualified.
<
p>Rep. Steve Israel, former town councilman from Huntington.
Rep. Louise Slaughter, former county legislator from Monroe County.
Mayor Byron Brown (former state senator and city councillor) of Buffalo.
<
p>I am sure there are many more hard-working strivers in the Democratic ranks in New York State. Let’s give someone who has worked their way up the ladder of public service a chance.
so far, i’ve only heard that kennedy has sent the governor her resume. but that might be just a matter of press filtering the data, not a reflection of reality.
<
p>thank you for taking the first bold step into the POCK pool! đŸ˜€
If David Paterson called any of them and asked, do you want to be US Senator? What do you think would be the response.
<
p>I could establish residency at my childhood home tomorrow. I would take the job in a New York minute.
i’m not asking if the gov called them, i’m asking if any of them have shown even a glimmer of interest.
…therefore they glimmer.
is not golden dome-worthy. đŸ˜€
He can’t tell if anyone is “showing” a “glimmer” of interest. Give the guy a break.
but apparently you are up enough to be qualified to talk about why someone isn’t right for the NY senate seat? Talk about lacking qualification!
<
p>Along with a link to a profile of Gillibrand. Any one of them is more qualified than Ms. Kennedy, in my opinion. There are many, many other New Yorkers who also who are more qualified than she is.
let the people decide.
<
p>Appoint an elder states(wo)man placeholder who promises to not run in 2012. Then, let the Democratic [big D] primary work, and then the democractic [small d] process work to choose a US Senator by will of the people, with nobody getting a 2 year head start because he or she was blessed by the guv.
I thought you were just parroting someone else’s list. My mistake. I’m surprised you didn’t go further and work up a bio of any of them, but rather left the page wide open for people to lay out Kennedy’s resume all by its lonesome. It does leave the impression that trashing Kennedy seems more important than seeing to it that an alternate is identified, publicized and supported. “Tiresome” is certainly the right word.
The United States Senate seat for New York is a political… let me repeat… political office. The Governor should fill the seat with someone who can enter the Senate mid-term and quickly find their way to do the best job possible for the citizens of New York.
<
p>If that is Caroline Kennedy because of her lineage and her background and the immediate credibility she may bring to the job, so be it. And it doesn’t hurt that she will have the fundraising power to defend the seat.
<
p>In fact, now that I think about it, she may be the candidate with the most merit.
is that if you’ve got lineage but no direct political experience, and if you’ve never proven your ability in this game, that you’re not capable of “the best job possible for the citizens of New York”, or at the very least, certainly haven’t demonstrated that potential up to this point.
Would Caroline Kennedy even be considered for this or even the other positions she has held (e.g., chief executive for the Office of Strategic Partnerships for the New York City Department of Education) if she did not have the Kennedy name or the money? NO.
I think we need more than that.
I said her name and money alone does not qualify her… something entirely different. And yes, I agree, the person needs to have more than that to be considered for appointment to the U.S. Senate.
Spitzer couldn’t resurrect his career by himself, but he could if he was forced back into public service by Patterson.
The guy’s a callous jerk, and a sharp mind. Like LBJ.
Sadly, given the high profile this news has gotten and the incredible fluff, promotion piece in the NYT this morning, this looks like a done deal. The Kennedy machine apparently has jumped into high gear. I find this so depressing. It sends the absolute wrong message to any young person, especially from the working class, who is watching this; i.e., that family connections and money matter more than qualifications, hard work, and dedication.
I am thrilled by the prospect of Kennedy’s appointment. No family (wealthy or otherwise) has done more to benefit blue collar American workers then the Kennedys. Caroline’s appointment will contine that traditional role in the U.S. Senate.
<
p>A couple of other points. This whole if her name weren’t Kennedy lame line was used against Ted Kennedy when he first ran for U.S. Senate in 1962. (I believe his opponent’s quote was something like “if his name was Edmore Moore, he wouldn’t be in this race” – something to that effect) so the anti-Kennedy crowd seems unable to muster any new arguments in 45 plus years.
<
p>Second. CO Senator Ken Salazar has accepted the Interior Secretary’s post. His bother, Congressman John Salazar, is being considered by Governor Ritter as an appointed replacement. A limited experienced congressman from the same family!!!! OMG. I await Bob’s rant, oops, post on why this family connected potential appointment is wrong.
<
p>Finally – the Kennedy name and fundraising potential will be vital in keeping the NY seat Democratic in 2010. You could expect to see a serious and already successful Republican challenge any State Senator or Congressperson appointed, but I suspect that Caroline Kennedy running for re-election will avopid both a brusing Democratic primary and have a real advantage in a November 2010 final.
Re Salazar, it’s hardly unusual for an elected congressperson to be a successor to a Senator. Far more unusual, I’d say, for a private citizen whose principal credential appears to be the ability to raise money.
<
p>Finally, as far as keeping the seat in Democratic hands, I could easily see a Kennedy appointment doing just the opposite of what you say. I see no reason to think that there wouldn’t be a “bruising Democratic primary,” nor do I think a strong Republican would be intimidated by a Gov-appointed no-previous-public-experience candidate, regardless of her last name.
The 2010 midterm election is going to be tough for all incumbent Democrats, especially an appointed one. That always is true, and this one will probably be worse than usual due to the economy. So why sacrifice an up-and-coming star? Maybe Kennedy (or whoever) could be appointed with the understanding that she’d just going to hold the seat for a couple years and just help raise funds for the rising upstate Congressperson to run in 2010 and other incumbents.
I thought you dems loved the Kennedys.
… how will an election be all that different??
<
p>
<
p>If Caroline Kennedy were to just run for the office what would be different? She would have ‘name recognition’, a pile o cash, celebrity cachet and an immediate leg up on the competition. Why would the voters be, all of a sudden, that much smarter than (you apparently think) David Patterson is? Wouldn’t the dangers you speak of be very much in evidence, perhaps even more so, in an election….? What’s to make the electorate, as a whole, more perceptive than the NY Gov as an individual?
<
p>Your problem isn’t with Caroline Kennedy and, I submit, you’ve picked a poor battle to fight here. And you certainly can’t say, with any certainty, that Caroline has stayed away from politics outta some perverse form of ‘lese majeste’.
<
p>
Well, that is the basic assumption behind the direct election of Senators, is it not?
<
p>Further,
<
p>
<
p>In an election, one hopes that there would at least be a public debate or two among the candidates, instead of the current unseemly scrambling to curry favor with the Governor. The Gov appointment procedure has nothing to recommend it, and much to complain about (see Blagojevich, Rod).
… If the same outcome occurs under two different processes, then why do you have a problem in one process but not the other?
<
p>
<
p>I get THAT argument. What I don’t get is the outright level of hostility directed towards Caroline Kennedy. (‘Marie Antoinette’ and ‘entitlement’) This is not some brat laden with ennui and ‘lese majeste’ entitlement. If I had to choose someone who’s the exception, it’s probably her. So why the hostility?
Well, that’s really the question. We have no way of knowing how an election would go. But the problem I have with the Gov-appointment process is the obvious one: it’s completely undemocratic. I mean, for heaven’s sake, the Constitution actually requires that vacancies in the House be filled by special election. Obviously it doesn’t say that for the Senate, because at that time Senators were not directly elected. But when the Constitution was amended to go to direct election, it’s unfortunate that the “provided” clause was included instead of just requiring elections.
… here. Senatorial appointments are ‘undemocratic’.
<
p>What I don’t get is how does ‘saying no to Caroline Kennedy’ fix that? We both agree that appointments are anti-democratic. We have however, at this point, no other options. David Patterson is going to appoint this seat. It could be C Kennedy. It could be Cuomo. It could be somebody else with a potent political network behind them. Whatever the choice the NY Gov makes, it’s going to be an undemocratic choice. Vilifying C Kennedy isn’t going to change that.
<
p>So… A) let’s not throw the progressive baby out with the bathwater and 2) Caroline Kennedy has a very long and distinguished progressive pedigree.
The knock on Obama was his inexperience. If he ends up doing a good job then maybe experience isn’t needed. However, when we see people like Kerry and others running for reelection, experience is always trumpeted as the key reason to reelect them. So, what experience, if any, is required for public office? Can I run for President or US Senator? Do you have to have fund raising experience or have worked at a soup kitchen? Should law makers have to be lawyers or is that too logical?
<
p>Caroline Kennedy has no political experience and has never held a single elected office. Sarah Palin took a beating for her inexperience but at least she was a Mayor and is a Governor. BTW, have you noticed how she has dropped the Schlossberg from here name now that she wants the Kennedy name recognition?
<
p>I like Andrew Cuomo for the job.
… I think..
<
p>
<
p>Well, simply being a Kennedy is kinda like ‘advanced placement’ politics, doncha think?
<
p>
<
p>I don’t know. I think Sarah Palin took a beating for sheer plain dumb, which isn’t the same thing as inexperience.
<
p>
It wasn’t just that Palin appeared dumb. It was the she was dumb, and was convinced that she was a genius.
<
p>Politics is filled with dumb people who keep their mouths shut, cast votes, collect paychecks, sign proclamations, give speeches other people write, cut ribbons, and make biennial stops at all the nursing homes in their district/state. Palin wanted a little more than that.
Get a grip.
<
p>You are offended? What???? Offended at what exactly. It can’t be what you are writing above since you can do a run down at other NY Senators and have a similar grievance. So please clue us in on why you are “disturbed” and “offended”.