Posted on 12/17/2008 1:03:29 PM PST by AIM Freeper
Who’s qualified to hold high political office? According to The New York Times, that depends on whether you’re a Kennedy or a mere mortal.
A December 16 news story, “Caroline Kennedy Is Seeking Seat Held by Clinton,” couldn’t have been more fawning if it was written by a public relations firm.
In terms of breathless wonder, The Times revealed that Ms. Kennedy, “the deeply private daughter of America’s most storied political dynasty, will seek the United States Senate seat in New York being vacated by Hillary Rodham Clinton” (emphasis added). David Paterson, who became Governor of New York when his predecessor resigned in disgrace, will make a two-year appointment to fill that vacancy.
With her uncle Ted (the senior Senator from Massachusetts) suffering from terminal brain cancer, we were told that the Kennedy clan had to contemplate the daunting possibility that the Senate “could be left without a Kennedy for the first time in half a century” — which The Times counts a tragedy of unparalleled magnitude.
In a gooey, gushing story of several thousand words, the paper forgot to tell us the most important detail — that the daughter of the late President John F. Kennedy has absolutely no qualifications (none, nada, zilch).
She’s never held public office, elective or appointive. She’s never run for political office, including state legislature, city council or dog-catcher. Her positions on most issues are unknown.
But for The Times, the mere fact that she’s a Kennedy — the holy family of the American left — makes her eminently qualified to hold any office in the land.
In the past campaign, The Times expressed outrage that someone with Sarah Palin’s background (ex-mayor, Alaska Governor for two years) could become the Vice President of the United States, an office with no intrinsic power. Yet it’s entirely sanguine about Ms. Kennedy becoming a member of the world’s most powerful club, based on an accident of birth.
Perhaps two or three Senate seats should be designated Kennedy seats, to be held by the Clan in perpetuity. Don’t say it too loudly, or The New York Times might begin pushing the notion in editorials and news stories.
I don’t imagine the MSM will have any stories about how much Ms. Kennedy spends on clothes.
I’m sorry: I have more intelligence, foreign affairs, governmental, business and military experience and education than Caroline Kenndy, and I don’t see anyone beating down my door to install me in Hillary Clinton’s Senate seat!! Is this a Republic or a Monarchy/Oligarchy?!
Now, about the New York Times editorial board ~ some of them imagine that gay life would have been freer had JFK lived to serve two terms.
I don't think so!
If Obama is actually qualified to be the President, Caroline is probably overqualified to be a Senator. That’s how much the left has degraded leadership in America.
I’m more interested in how much she pays in Property Taxes for the 365 acre Red Gate Farm in Aquinnah, Martha’s Vinyard that she inherited from Jackie O.
But, I can’t find any records.
Watch the biasness that will follow when another Kennedy takes center stage. MSM will print only the finest. BARF!
The dictionary defines "storied" as: illustrious. If you define "storied" as "the butt of many stories", the Kennedys certainly qualify. I think, however, that the bulk of these stories are anything but illustrious.
Oligarchy = rule by a few.
And you ain't one of 'em. (Me neither.)
I was think perhaps of:
How DARE you wonder about such things, peasant! She’s a “deeply private” person and “American Royalty”! Have you no respect?!;))
Neither--it's a Celibritocracy.
Caroline Kennedy probably doesn’t spend much on clothes, given what she could afford to spend. She seems like a pretty normal person. She seems also like an intelligent person who would show up when and where she’s supposed to. You know what? She should RUN for office and make the case to liberals and RINOs that she would represent her views. If CK actually ran for office, I’d respect her (although I wouldn’t vote for her). But her being appointed to office when she’s never really been involved in politics herself is galling. If I were a Democrat, I’d be ticked off. Since I’m a conservative Republican, I just shake my head and say, “What do you expect from that party?â€
Is the land held by some trust, nonprofit, or corporation?
Let's face it. FReepers need not apply. So the choice is between some "experienced" Democrat pol and someone who comes to Washington with a clean slate. Sure. They'll probably corrupt her, but at least there's a shot that the Lady Kennedy has a mind of her own. And if she does, it could be an amusing time in New York State politics. She is a Kennedy, you know.
ML/NJ
I don’t know why they should bother with Caroline Kennedy when they could have someone truly distinguished for the US Senate.... how about Whoopi Goldberg!!!
I’m starting my campaign to get Whoopi selected for the vacated Senate seat. She’s not too much nuttier than most Democrats, after all.
I suspect that Ms. Schlossberg has ‘donated’ her land to the Nature Conservancy.
No taxes on those acres. Just a typical elitist scam.
The neat think about Kennedy is that she seems to be a political blank slate. Whoopi is not. So, no thanks.
ML/NJ
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.