Resume
Some people aren't happy with the idea of Caroline Kennedy replacing Hillary Clinton as New York's junior Senator, saying her only qualifcation is her last name. What's the problem? Wasn't that Hillary's qualification as well?
posted by LAGuy @ 12:36 AM
3 Comments:
I agree that it somewhat the same analysis although Hillary had a higher public profile and was to some extent participated in policy-making in the White House for 8 years. I also agree that celebrity is a big factor in political elections and that's not necessarily a bad thing. (Its like money, experience, knowledge, beliefs, etc..., its good or bad depending on what you do with it)
The biggest difference here is the fact that the Senator from NY will be appointed. At least Hillary had to run for the office (If Giuliani had run and had been the old Giuliani, not this year's model, its not so clear she would have won). Whether you like Caroline or not ( I sort of like her in the role but key, don't know enough), being appointed without having to prove chops to the voters is not going to be helpful to her- stinks too much of a governing class having its own way without checking in with the populace.
I would suggest, Paterson appoint an insider aide to the seat through which he could exercise his own influence (If Governor can pick the interim senator, why can't he also control him/her?) and then in 2010, Caroline K can run, and the people can pick a winner.
Hillary was as good as appointed. First she had to decide what state she was from. After that, the other Democrats stepped aside and let her be senator.
Disagee with Anon.-She was a few obnoxious fingerpoints away from losing.
Post a Comment
<< Home