I hope she gets the seat. It's going to be a Dem seat anyhow--may as well be entertaining.

I don't care who they are as long as they are liberal. Senate seats no matter how qualified should never be filled by a greedy conservative again.

Great - another empty suit Kennedy senator, and an empty suit conman homeboy POTUS, (with homeboy backwards hat - how cute)...

Hannity sucks

Great - another empty suit Kennedy senator, and an empty suit conman homeboy POTUS, (with homeboy backwards hat - how cute)...

#3 | Posted by Greatamerican at 2008-12-29 01:26 AM

This coming from someone who probably hopes Moosilini runs in '12.

She's unqualified. Period.

Is the establishment trying to make america think all women are intellectual midgets?

Where are the women that have a brain? Why are we always presented with some cutesy piece of fluffy stupid?

Actually now that i think about it, the men with a brain have been noticably absent too.

If coherent public speaking were a job requirement for U.S. senators, then most currently employed as such would be out of a job.

PLEASE! No more Kennedys, Clintons, Bushes...they and some others have been there for decades and have built empires. Put'em all in the back pages of history and let's see if we can't get some kind of fresh start.

You know 143 times in this short interview.

Almost as bad as Obama's "ah.ah.ah.ah.ah.ah.wa.wa.wa.wa
it"

Lippy...Because the best and the brightest, men and women, are smart enough to stay away from the meat grinder that passes as politics in this country.

I mean, just look at what happened to Jar Jar Binks.

"...they and some others have been there for decades and have built empires."

For fourteen presidential elections, 1952 through 2004, with the single exception of 1964, there was a Nixon, Dole or Bush on every Republican presidential/vice presidential ticket.

Hans

Sounds as dumb as Sarah Palin.

To Palin's credit, she managed to get elected to a few jobs, Caroline never got elected to anything.

Let her earn it.
No royalty for America.

"For fourteen presidential elections, 1952 through 2004, with the single exception of 1964, there was a Nixon, Dole or Bush on every Republican presidential/vice presidential ticket."

I've noticed that...the Nixon and Dole empires are some kind of powerful up there in D.C.! I'm glad no democrats have empires up there, aren't you?

Jest-well the Dole empire slipped on a peal this November. Apparently not all Republicans are stupid enough to believe everything the RNC says anymore.

Let her earn it. No royalty for America. -- #13 | Posted by skizziks

Amen to that.

"I don't care who they are as long as they are liberal. Senate seats no matter how qualified should never be filled by a greedy conservative again"

Yes, liberals are go giving, with other peoples' money which is what I like to refer to as "hypocritical greed". This woman is an idiot with a famous name. I thought libs hated those?

If New Yorkers are stupid enough to elect her, they deserve her. She is apparently a lawyer though I can't seem to find any accomplishments in that regard, and she has also sat on a few boards. If that and a last name is enough to qualify you to be a senator of the United States, so be it.

"well the Dole empire slipped on a peal this November."

Dole had an empire??? Must have been a hidden one...kinda like the Nixon empire up there right now. Of course, there are no Kennedys or Clintons gonna be in government after January...right? There haven't been any Kennedys for the last forty or so years either...right? Maybe the Bushes will stay gone now that they are all out.

Like I said...clear 'em ALL out, republicans, independents, and yes, your beloved democrats too. Get some new blood with term limits. No more empires..

If New Yorkers are stupid enough to elect her, they deserve her. She is apparently a lawyer though I can't seem to find any accomplishments in that regard, and she has also sat on a few boards. If that and a last name is enough to qualify you to be a senator of the United States, so be it.
#18 | Posted by JOE

As a NY'er here, all I'll say is that compared to some senators that get elected in this country, we could do worse than Caroline Kennedy. Since HRC's replacement will be selected by the Governor, I won't have the opportunity to vote for her or anyone else for another 4 years.

The one thing she does have going for her is access to the President. That can't be discounted in weighing the strengths of a potential Senator.

"She is apparently a lawyer though I can't seem to find any accomplishments in that regard"

YEAH! Government needs more lawyers doesn't it? Uh... NO!

"Get some new blood with term limits."

Another name for term limits is "elections."

The problem is always with everyone else's (Senator, Congressman, etc.). Never with "mine." He/she is GREAT. It it always the "other guys" who are the problems.

Now, if you want real reform, take the ability to redistrict away from those who have a vested interest in same.

Hans

But she's a Kennedy! Obviously she should be elected based on that alone!

Right????

But she's a Kennedy! Obviously she should be elected based on that alone!

Right????

#23 | Posted by Kinger

No, because she's not running for election. She should be appointed if she fulfills whatever criteria Paterson establishes for the appointment.

Then the people of New York can decide if she, or whoever is appointed, has done a good enough job to deserve to be elected to a full term of office.

I like the idea of Caroline Kennedy as a senator, but I think she should run in '10 and earn it.

I like the idea of Caroline Kennedy as a senator, but I think she should run in '10 and earn it.
#25 | Posted by rcade

LOL... against Schumer?

If New Yorkers are stupid enough to elect her, they deserve her. She is apparently a lawyer though I can't seem to find any accomplishments in that regard.

#18 | Posted by JOE at 2008-12-29 11:02 AM

Lemme guess. You didn't vote for Rod.

As far as accomplishments, start a few of your own before attacking.

Wanna Be.

"Lemme guess. You didn't vote for Rod."

Good guess. Any other stupid observations?

"As a NY'er here, all I'll say is that compared to some senators that get elected in this country, we could do worse than Caroline Kennedy."

Then, of course, she'll have Unk Teddy and a shitload of cousins to tell her what to do...right? You know what....we should just authorize a Kennedy dynasty in the U.S. and have them rule. I bet it would last at least as long as the Hapsburgs in Europe or the Romanoffs in Russia. Whatta ya' think? We damn sure ain't gonna run outta Kennedys in THIS millineum.

LOL... against Schumer?

#26 | Posted by Hagbard_Celine

Hag-

If Caroline is appointed for Hillary's seat, she has to run in 2010 and then again in 2012.

The only thing Patersen is concerned with is who can raise money and who will help him when he runs for Gov in 2010.

Any other stupid observations?

#28 | Posted by JOE at 2008-12-29 11:41 AM |

By yourself? Sure. You claim to be going to "Law Skool".

I've finished law school, just like Caroline Kennedy. The difference is that I don't claim to be qualified to be a US Senator.

Stop the presses - a child of the '60s and '70s has a speech tic left over from the '60s and '70s! And worse, she didn't hire a media consultancy firm to smooth it out!

I would much rather hear Caroline Kennedy say "you know" than hear Sarah Palin say "you betcha."

P.S.: I do wish that all of you who are posting that Caroline Kennedy is some child of privilege who has never done an honest day's work in her life would do a little Googling before you open your ignorant yaps.

"Get some new blood with term limits"

I completely support term limits. I like Chuck Schumer, I hope he's our senator for a while, but after several terms in office I think Senators and Representatives start looking at their positions as a career instead of service to their nation. They start to act in ways to best keep their career and not in ways that would best serve the nation. Two or three terms as Senator is a long time to be in office, after that they should move on. Maybe it could even be set up that they can run again after one term off, but I like getting new faces and new ideas in Washington.

As for Caroline Kennedy, I personally like her, but NY outside of NYC isn't doing so well (hasn't been for a long long time). Maybe someone with their interests in mind would be better for the state.

"I would much rather hear Caroline Kennedy say "you know" than hear Sarah Palin say "you betcha."

The difference is that Palin didn't say "you betcha" as a substitute for actual words in the middle of a sentence when she couldn't think of what to say. Try coming up with an actual comparison and perhaps you will be taken seriously.

Joe:

Once again, wearily:

The use of "you know" is common to Caroline Kennedy's generation, like "fer sure" and other space-fillers are to later ones. It doesn't mean a thing, except to those among us who are looking for negative attributes to fill column inches.

I would like to see anything on Sarah Palin's resume that shows the concern for Americans and their rights that Caroline Kennedy's books, In Our Defense: The Bill of Rights in Action and The Right to Privacy, do.

Being a citizen is all the "qualification" you need to be a representative of the people.

Does she get any credit for taking a job for no salary and helping raise $65 million in private funds for NYC schools?

"Joe:

Once again, wearily:

The use of "you know" is common to Caroline Kennedy's generation..."

Joe the Mouth is just looking to attack liberals with any whiny, nitpicking, petty-ass non-point he can, as usual. You can pretty much ignore his posts if you're looking for any substance.

Did she get into Uncle Ted's Liquor Cabinet?

"I would like to see anything on Sarah Palin's resume that shows the concern for Americans and their rights that Caroline Kennedy's books, In Our Defense: The Bill of Rights in Action and The Right to Privacy, do."

How about her actual performance of public service as a governor of a state, as opposed to simply writing books about it. Does writing a book qualify you to be a U.S. Senator?

Spud actually likes Caroline Kennedy (and RFK Jr) and thinks she would make a swell NY Senator.

Somebody has to appointed in that position and if she can impress the people enuff in the two years she has to get ready fer the 2010 elections she will have earned her seat.

I've finished law school, just like Caroline Kennedy. The difference is that I don't claim to be qualified to be a US Senator

~Joe the Lawyer

You've very recently finished Law School and besides you graduated bottom of yer class at the "Regent University and School fer Fine Lawyerin'".

Caroline, otoh...

She graduated from Concord Academy in Massachusetts in 1975,[11] and received her A.B. from Radcliffe College[12] at Harvard University in 1979. She earned a J.D. from Columbia Law School in 1988, graduating in the top ten percent of her class, several weeks before giving birth to her first child.[13]

She's a lawyer and an author, a mother and a political animal.

She makes Sarah Palin look like the retarded Barbie Doll assclown she really is in direct comparison.

Spud sez give her the gig and fuck the rightwing noisemakers who'll balk at the appointment.

Vastly preferable to li'l Andy Cuomo.

Be Well.

"Does she get any credit for taking a job for no salary"

Considering the fact that she grew up in a 5th Avenue penthouse apartment in Manhattan, she probably didn't need the money. Do all millionaires get credit for working for free? Does working for free even if you do need the money qualify you to be a US Senator?

That whizzing sound you heard was the point flying ungrasped above your head.

"you graduated bottom of yer class blah blah blah blah"

You have no clue what you are talking about. Perhaps you should stick to topics you are more familiar with, i.e. which candy attracts the most children to your windowless van.

Explain your point, SA, if you have one. If not, STFU. Why does anyone deserve credit for working for free when they are rich? What does working for free have to do with being qualified for a job as US Senator?

They say Caroline is very shy. I think her stumbling, tongue-tied response could be a symptom of that shyness. As a New Yorker, I hope Patterson picks her to fill Hillary's seat. I say give her a chance. If she doesn't do a good job in the Senate, she'll be voted out in due course.

"If not, STFU."

Internet tough guy mode so early, Petulant Child?

So here's the deal. She's qualified. Period.

"No Person shall be a Senator who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty Years, and been nine Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State for which he shall be chosen. [U.S. Constitution, Article I, section 3, clause 3]"

If you don't like her or don't want her in the Senate, fine., whatever.

Oh, and I think my previous point was crystal clear to all except those who deliberately choose not to get it.

"She's qualified. Period."

Great argument, very convincing.

"No Person shall be a Senator who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty Years, and been nine Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State for which he shall be chosen. [U.S. Constitution, Article I, section 3, clause 3]"

Every citizen of the US who is over 30 is now qualified to be a US Senator according to Sanantonio. Great progress we are making in this thread.

"Oh, and I think my previous point was crystal clear to all except those who deliberately choose not to get it."

For those that don't think like you, please answer the following questions. Why does anyone deserve credit for working for free when they are rich? What does working for free have to do with being qualified for a job as US Senator?

Not surprising you'd deliberately avoid these questions - same tactic used by your favorite president elect.

The point, Petulant Child, was that she helped raise $65 million for underfunded schools. See, many of you claim she hasn't "done anything". When you have "done something" equivalent, get back to us.

And yes, ANYONE deserves credit for working for free when they don't have to.

"Every citizen of the US who is over 30 is now qualified to be a US Senator according to Sanantonio."

No, that would be according to the Constitution of the United States, silly. Any other requirements beyond that are constructs of politics.

"ANYONE deserves credit for working for free when they don't have to."

Including millionaires who have zero need for the money. Glad to see you care about context.

"Any other requirements beyond that are constructs of politics."

And should be ignored?

San makes a very good argument--

Too bad it's hypocritical when talking about the qualifications for Sarah Palin.

The Dems have a lower bar for everything it seems.

Caroline is apolitical--she is not in politics. Oh her family is but she is not. She had the stutters with that question too.

I suppose the bad press is coming from folks who like Cuomo or any of the other Dem hopefuls truly qualified to step in and be senator.

Pedigree counts for something. She is not part of the Dem party--one contribution for 1,000 to one person in a city council position is all she has contributed to the party.

The only voter is Paterson and all he cares about is getting re-elected in 2010 and who can best help him to that.

And should be ignored?

#51 | Posted by JOE

No. Work and life experience can always be considered to rank one individual as more qualified than another. But it is a subjective measurement. She's qualified by definition. And you have no way of knowing that what she's done in her life and the kind of person she is wouldn't lead to her being an outstanding Senator. Someday, when you're a big boy, and have some real responsibilities, you'll figure out that sometimes you hire people based on a lot of intangibles, not just who looks the best on paper.

And for the last time... yes, anyone who works for free, especially serving the public, deserves credit for doing so.

You could apply post #53 to Sarah Palin.

Too bad it's hypocritical when talking about the qualifications for Sarah Palin.

The Dems have a lower bar for everything it seems.

#52 | Posted by MURPHY

I don't think I ever really argued based on Palin's experience, except maybe to needle somebody.

I do think the bar is different for a Senator vs. a VP. I, for one, wouldn't have been very comfortable with Caroline Kennedy as a VP candidate.

"And yes, ANYONE deserves credit for working for free when they don't have to."

To some extent yes, but I'm not going to sing Bill Gates' praises if he decides to set up some schools with wireless networks and waives the charges.

Like I said, I like the lady, but NYC's interests are already covered with Schumer being born and raised there. As someone who sees everyday the hardships of upstate, I'd really like to see someone from the upper or western areas get the nod. Get us some of that earmark money (by some I mean a bunch).

Yes San--you did a lot of needling then--;o)

You could apply post #53 to Sarah Palin.

#54 | Posted by MURPHY

So could the last part of your #52.

Why does anyone deserve credit for working for free when they are rich? What does working for free have to do with being qualified for a job as US Senator?

~Joe

Are you really that stupid, Joe?

** Spud considers the source **

Okay, maybe you are.

Here's the deal, US politics are corrupt beyond fucking belief. Sad thing is that most of the corruption is legal. Getting paid a quarter of a million dollars fer a twenty minute speech by a group who wants you to pay attention to their agenda is legal, likewise lobbyists who outnumber the politicos ten to one offering "campaign contributions" that the modern pol needs to survive and, of course, the old fashioned illegal "pay fer play" typa corruption like we've seen with Jefferson down in LA and Stevens up in AK and them defense contractors plying Randy Cunningham with cash, whores, trips, meals and machinegun lessons in CA etc etc ad nauseum.

Ergo, if someone takes on a gig pro bono in politics it means either one of two things. Either A) They are more concerned with effective governing of the country than a paycheque or B) They think they can get so stinking rich off the kickbacks and other largesse available that the piffling paycheque is meaningless.

Caroline, as you point out, doesn't really need the cheque and Spud would posit that her work fer free ethic is more alligned to answer A) than B).

Besides, wot in yer mind qualifies someone to be a Senator? Previous experience as a Senator? Cos there's a problem with that type of illogic and if you sit down and think about it fer a bit it may come to you.

Should a rich lawyer get any "credit" fer doing pro bono cases of causes they believe in (like the Innocence Project) or should everyone just cynically assume that cos their rich they deserve none?

Be Well.

Green--the only money you are going to see is for a Woodstock 1 million dollar memorial.

Do you have roads and bridges in need of repairs? Go get a job with the local union--because that is the only thing anyone is going to get from the next WH.

She's qualified by definition.
#53 | Posted by SanAntonioRogue

That's only minimally qualified. Constitutionally speaking, I'm qualified to be Senator too. Whether or not she's the most qualified candidate is entirely up to debate.

Ah, screw it. I'm throwing my hat into the ring. I'm gonna call my friend who used to babysit for Gov. Patterson to put in a good word.

Hagbard Celine for NY Senate!

"But it is a subjective measurement. She's qualified by definition"

So is a retarded person, as long as they're 30 and a citizen of the US. Perhaps you'd get behind them as well.

"you have no way of knowing that what she's done in her life and the kind of person she is wouldn't lead to her being an outstanding Senator"

I can go by the biographies I've read. She went to law school, sat on a few boards and wrote a few books. There are thousands of Americans who do those things - are they all qualified to be senator?

"Someday, when you're a big boy, and have some real responsibilities"

Blah blah blah. Stay on topic and speak about topics with which you are familiar.

"yes, anyone who works for free, especially serving the public, deserves credit for doing so."

Even people who can afford to do so, because they are millionaires. Good to know. Do they deserve the same credit as a person who chooses to work for free that scrapes by and doesn't live in a penthouse in manhattan?

"I do think the bar is different for a Senator vs. a VP."

All of a sudden, the "subjective constructs of politics" matter when it comes to VP - not just the constitutional requirements. Good to know.

She is qualified in most people's eyes because her last name is "Kennedy." Kennedy is to the left as Reagan were to the right and DNA is all that is needed to make their side love them.

That's what I have been saying--

Pedigree counts for soemthing.

"Do you have roads and bridges in need of repairs? Go get a job with the local union--because that is the only thing anyone is going to get from the next WH.

#60 | Posted by MURPHY"

I'm one of the lucky ones here with a decent wage and fairly secure employment. I would just like to see the community and yes the infrastructure helped out. Some of our bridges are pretty scarey. Having a Senator from outside NYC could really help out I think (hope). They always come up here on their "listening" tours, we always tell them we need help, it rarely seems to come. Its frustrating.

"wot in yer mind qualifies someone to be a Senator? Previous experience as a Senator?"

How about experience writing laws, rules or regulations? How about experience having to own up to some sort of constituency? How about leadership experience and a proven ability to accomplish stated objectives in a difficult partisan environment? How about a plan for the state of New York?

I hope The Blind Bat appoint this loon to the Senate. It should make the debates in 2010 a blast. It is rather sad that this loon graduated from Law school yet still talks like a public high school dropout. You Know, You know, YOu know like WOW!!!

"I can go by the biographies I've read. She went to law school, sat on a few boards and wrote a few books. There are thousands of Americans who do those things - are they all qualified to be senator?

Yes.

"Blah blah blah. Stay on topic and speak about topics with which you are familiar."

Petulant Child, I've hired and fired more people that you ever will so I'm quite familiar with the psychology of why you hire some people, and not others.

"Even people who can afford to do so, because they are millionaires."

Yes. Unless you're arguing that because they are successful they are no longer entitled to be compensated for their work. That would be touching dangerously close to that "redistribution of wealth" issue that I'm sure you would never advocate.

He doesn't really talk like that--does he?

------

Green--

Who is from upper NY that is in the running?

If the person can't deliver the 3 to 5 million votes in NYC--they should forgetaboutit...

-yet still talks like a public high school dropout.

The self-retorting still rule.

"Unless you're arguing that because they are successful they are no longer entitled to be compensated for their work"

Nope. The only argument is whether someone deserves "credit" for "working for nothing" when they already have everything, and whether working for free when you are already a millionaire qualifies you to be a Senator.

So you are saying that a person's character is not a consideration as a qualification for a position?

Rich people who work for free are suckers. Greed is good. What we need in Washington are more greedy people, not bleeding hearts like Caroline.

Sincerely,
Joe the Mouth

"How about her actual performance of public service as a governor of a state, as opposed to simply writing books about it. Does writing a book qualify you to be a U.S. Senator?"

Joe:

Caroline Kennedy is a Constitutional scholar, a volunteer for the NYC public school system, and an attorney. Sarah Palin is Governor of a state. There are all kinds of ways to serve the public and make everyone's life better.

In your case, not posting to these boards should do nicely.

Joe,
It is a selling point used most often by Republicans. Ross Perot and Forbes both ran for President claiming they would not take pay and their supporters used this as a major draw of support. Personally, it means nothing to me and, considering how successful Perot and Forbes were, it means nothign to the people in general.

Give it to, you know, Spitzer.

"you are saying that a person's character is not a consideration as a qualification for a position?"

Nope. I'm asking whether working for free when you have no use for the money is good evidence of one's character, and whether that small piece of character evidence is a qualification to be a Senator of the United States.

"The only argument is whether someone deserves 'credit' for 'working for nothing' when they already have everything..."

And my answer is still yes. When you do something that you don't have to do you deserve credit. She could have chosen to just be a society maven having tea and gossiping with the other 5th Avenue ladies.

"Caroline Kennedy is a Constitutional scholar"

Proof?

"my answer is still yes"

I'm wondering whether your answer would still be "yes" if you didn't know the person behind the question, and what letter they want to put after their name.

Caroline Kennedy fumbles a MEDIA interview?

Oh NO!!!

Wake me when she fumbles both PRESS CONFERENCES and talks with WORLD LEADERS routinely.

Like these: (BTW, these are just in the last 6 months)

"I've abandoned free market principles to save the free market system." --George W. Bush, Washington, D.C., Dec. 16, 2008

"....people will realize a lot of the decisions that were made on Wall Street took place over a decade or so, before I arrived in President, during I arrived in President." --George W. Bush, ABC News interview, Dec. 1, 2008

"I've been in the Bible every day since I've been the president." --George W. Bush, Washington, D.C., Nov. 12, 2008

"He was a great father before politics, a great father during politics and a great father after politics." --George W. Bush, on his father, George H.W. Bush, Washington, D.C., Nov. 12, 2008

"Yesterday, you made note of my -- the lack of my talent when it came to dancing. But nevertheless, I want you to know I danced with joy. And no question Liberia has gone through very difficult times." --George W. Bush, speaking with the president of Liberia, Washington, D.C., Oct. 22, 2008

"I want to share with you an interesting program -- for two reasons, one, it's interesting, and two, my wife thought of it -- or has actually been involved with it; she didn't think of it. But she thought of it for this speech." --George W. Bush, discussing a company that improves access to clean water in Africa, Washington D.C., Oct. 21, 2008

"This thaw -- took a while to thaw, it's going to take a while to unthaw." --George W. Bush, on liquidity in the markets, Alexandria, La., Oct. 20, 2008

"I didn't grow up in the ocean -- as a matter of fact -- near the ocean -- I grew up in the desert. Therefore, it was a pleasant contrast to see the ocean. And I particularly like it when I'm fishing." --George W. Bush, Washington, D.C., Sept. 26, 2008

"Anyone engaging in illegal financial transactions will be caught and persecuted." --George W. Bush, Washington, D.C., Sept. 19, 2008

"We're fixing to go down to Galveston and obviously are going to see a devastated part of this fantastic state." --George W. Bush, Houston, Sept. 16, 2008

"The people in Louisiana must know that all across our country there's a lot of prayer -- prayer for those whose lives have been turned upside down. And I'm one of them." --George W. Bush, Baton Rouge, La., Sept. 3, 2008

"First of all, I don't see America having problems." --George W. Bush, interview with Bob Costas at the 2008 Olympics, Beijing, China, Aug. 10, 2008

"I'm coming as the president of a friend, and I'm coming as a sportsman." --George W. Bush, on his trip to the Olympics in China, Washington, D.C., July 30, 2008

"I think it was in the Rose Garden where I issued this brilliant statement: If I had a magic wand -- but the president doesn't have a magic wand. You just can't say, 'low gas.'" --George W. Bush, Washington D.C., July 15, 2008

"Goodbye from the world's biggest polluter." --George W. Bush, in parting words to British Prime Minister Gordon Brown and French President Nicolas Sarkozy at his final G-8 Summit, punching the air and grinning widely as the two leaders looked on in shock, Rusutsu, Japan, July 10, 2008

"Amigo! Amigo!" --George W. Bush, calling out to Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi in Spanish at the G-8 Summit, Rusutsu, Japan, July 10, 2008

What's more important?

Whether a rich person worked for free?

Or whether they have experience writing laws, rules or regulations? Or experience having to own up to some sort of constituency? Or leadership experience and a proven ability to accomplish stated objectives in a difficult partisan environment? Or have a plan for the state of New York?

We hate rich people who work for free. It makes us look bad.

Sincerely,
America's CEOs

"Who is from upper NY that is in the running?"

Of the people getting mentioned outside of Kennedy and Cuomo, Kristen Gillibrand is a rep from upstate who I wouldn't mind seeing as Senator. Brian Higgins is another rep from the Buffalo area who has had his name tossed in the ring.

I would have like to have seen Matt Driscoll, the Mayor of Syracuse get some attention. I've actually met him and he seems extremely nice. On the rare occasion I'm in Syracuse (mainly for their ridiculously huge mall, or the occasional Orange basketball game) I've always had a great time, the city seemed safe and well run to me. But he won't be the Senator.

"Proof?"

Did I not just tell you that Caroline Kennedy has published twocount'emtwo books on Constitutional issues?

Do try to keep up, Toots.

Joe --your point alone would not qualify someone to be a senator on most people's scale.

But it counts for something however small. She has other items on her resume that count for something as well. Like her last name of Kennedy.

Now the crux of the matter is --are there other candidates more qualified?

Yes--by all accounts there are several more infinetely better qualified persons to be appointed senator of NY.

Proof?

#80 | Posted by JOE

Well, let's see. Maybe the books she's written? Maybe the appearances she's made talking about the Constitutional issues she's written about?

"I'm wondering whether your answer would still be 'yes' if you didn't know the person behind the question, and what letter they want to put after their name."

Yes. Now I think I've stated my position on this clearly enough, even for someone who has stated they are willing to base their arguments on whether or not they "like" another poster, rather than the facts of an issue.

"Joe the Mouth is just looking to attack liberals with any whiny, nitpicking, petty-ass non-point he can, as usual. You can pretty much ignore his posts if you're looking for any substance."

Yeah, I'm beginning to think Peter Boyle played him in the movie.

Yes--by all accounts there are several more infinetely better qualified persons to be appointed senator of NY.

#87 | Posted by MURPHY

Were there several more infinitely better qualified persons to be picked as GOP VP candidate this year? ; )

C'mon Patterson have a backbone on appoint This Kennedy heel. I want to see some good debates. Caroline Kennedy vs. Andrew Cuomo would be great in 2010. Maybe that cheating whore Kerry Kennedy can show up. Rudy Guiliani would have to be crazy to run for governor when a Kennedy is just waiting to be taken for a ride. Italian vs. The Irish. A lawyer who actually worked as a lawyer vs. some old woman with bad teeth who claims to be a Consitutional scholar. I can't wait. I can already see the NY Post hedlines.

"Did I not just tell you that Caroline Kennedy has published twocount'emtwo books on Constitutional issues?"

Not surprisingly, she had a co-author on both of them, and the rest of her books are about Christmas and children's poetry. Forgive me for not being convinced of her mastery of our Constitution given that her work experience has nothing to do with it.

"for someone who has stated they are willing to base their arguments on whether or not they "like" another poster"

I never said that - so either post a quote or admit you're a liar.

Still waiting for an answer.

What's more important?

Whether a rich person worked for free and wrote a book about Christmas?

Or whether they have experience writing laws, rules or regulations? Or experience having to own up to some sort of constituency? Or leadership experience and a proven ability to accomplish stated objectives in a difficult partisan environment? Or have a plan for the state of New York?

"A lawyer who actually worked as a lawyer vs. some old woman with bad teeth who claims to be a Consitutional scholar."

Christ - did someone put Rush Limbaugh on the Wheaties box?

I never said that - so either post a quote or admit you're a liar.

#93 | Posted by JOE

Oh, but you did Joe. And the last time we went through this little exercise you conveniently disappeared from the thread as soon as I posted your exact quote.

Then you should have no problem posting it again. Go for it.

In the meantime, for those who don't want to discuss me and would like to discuss Caroline Kennedy, an answer to #94 would be appreciated.

"Or whether they have experience writing laws, rules or regulations? Or experience having to own up to some sort of constituency? Or leadership experience and a proven ability to accomplish stated objectives in a difficult partisan environment? Or have a plan for the state of New York?"

Lissen up, stoopit:

An attorney's field is laws, rules and regulations. Caroline Kennedy is on the board of the Kennedy Library Foundation (President of it, actually), which not only must interface with the National Records and Archives Administration, but is exactly the sort of "difficult partisan environment" you describe; every museum and archives is. If working on behalf of NYC's public school system is not experience with New York politics, I don't know what the hell is.

You are a blithering idiot, you know that?

That was a hilarious exchange on use of the word "quelle," and I'm inclined to think that SanAntonioRogue is wrong, mostly because I don't like him.

#40 | Posted by JOE at 2008-11-19 05:23 PM

The funny thing that even Sheldon Silver can't stand Kennedy. Hmmm.... It is pretty weak when the highest ranking Dem in the Assembly thinks your are a Bloomberg monkey.

I hope Patterson appoints, you know, Kennedy so she can like help out those you known people upstate.

"Not surprisingly, she had a co-author on both of them, and the rest of her books are about Christmas and children's poetry."

Joe: Co-authors are common in fields like law and the sciences. So far as your belittlement of Kennedy's Constitutional scholarship because she wrote books "about Christmas and children's poetry," would you like your candidacy for a job to be based on what you write here, or on the skills demonstrated in your actual field?

And that, dear DR'ers, concludes today's Feeding of the Troll.

I can't believe you just tried to equate working in a museum with being in the Us Senate. Maybe we should look in the Smithsonian for a NY resident that could like you know represent umm NEw York

""Not surprisingly, she had a co-author on both of them, and the rest of her books are about Christmas and children's poetry."

Jesus Christ, can't somebody stop Joe's incessant whining? It's like fingernails across a blackboard. Maybe he could be paid not to blog.

"An attorney's field is laws, rules and regulations"

And a senator's field is writing them. Do you know the difference? And how long and in what context has Caroline Kennedy practiced law?

"Caroline Kennedy is on the board of the Kennedy Library Foundation"

Great point - they hold meetings three times a year. Sounds exhausting and certainly qualifies her to be a Senator. How did I miss that?

"is exactly the sort of "difficult partisan environment" you describe"

Yes - sitting on a board and holding meetings three times per year to decide who should get an award is certainly on par with working in, say, a state legislature or even a city council, where you have to draft legislation, serve thousands of constituents and convince representatives who want to tank your projects to change their votes.

"would you like your candidacy for a job to be based on what you write here, or on the skills demonstrated in your actual field?"

Actual field experience, please - does Caroline Kennedy have any actual constitutional work experience?

#100 | Posted by SanAntonioRogue

I would have had to base an argument on that thought for your characterization to be correct. Thinking someone is wrong and basing an argument on that thought are two different things. Any other quotes or are you ready to admit you are a liar?

Still waiting for an answer.

What's more important?

Whether a rich person worked for free and wrote a book about Christmas?

Or whether they have experience writing laws, rules or regulations? Or experience having to own up to some sort of constituency? Or leadership experience and a proven ability to accomplish stated objectives in a difficult partisan environment? Or have a plan for the state of New York?

"I can't believe you just tried to equate working in a museum with being in the Us Senate."

If you don't understand that the Kennedy Library is a National Archives and Records Administration repository with enormous responsibility for maintaining White House records, some of which are still classified, and that its budget, personnel, and premises take enormous expertise and effort to administer, then you're too stupid to talk to. You could not possibly run it, trust me.

She does not "work in a museum." She is running the equivalent of a fair-sized corporation.

"She is running the equivalent of a fair-sized corporation."

A photo of a young Caroline with Macaroni in a news article inspired singer-songwriter Neil Diamond to write his hit song "Sweet Caroline," a fact he revealed only when performing it for her 50th birthday in November 2007. source: wikipedia

I say give her a seat at the big table. She is more than qualified to be a Senator. She couldn't be any worse than der Hildebeast.

But her political views are troubling: she supports legislation legalizing same-sex marriage, is pro-choice, is a strong supporter of gun control, and favors restoring the Federal Assault Weapons Ban, which expired in 2004

Joe:

She has as much experience as is required by law for the job, and much more than the journalism degree Sarah Palin brought to her governorship of Alaska. The rest is up to Governor Paterson for now, and later, to the voters of New York State.

Better run, Joe - the librarian needs to free that computer for the next patron.

There are thousands of rich Americans who sit around on the boards of 501(c)(3) organizations and collect checks. The difference is that most people aren't stupid enough to say that doing so qualifies them to be a US Senator. MTW excluded.

But her political views are troubling: she supports legislation legalizing same-sex marriage, is pro-choice, is a strong supporter of gun control, and favors restoring the Federal Assault Weapons Ban, which expired in 2004

#111 | Posted by Beachbuzz at 2008-12-29 02:42 PM

Actually, this post is the first time I have considered her seriously. I agree with 100% of that.

"She has as much experience as is required by law for the job"

I'm glad to see you only focus on the Constituional requirements which fit about 150 million other Americans. Back to the questions that matter:

What's more important?

Whether a rich person worked for free and wrote a book about Christmas?

Or whether they have experience writing laws, rules or regulations? Or experience having to own up to some sort of constituency? Or leadership experience and a proven ability to accomplish stated objectives in a difficult partisan environment? Or have a plan for the state of New York?

Does Caroline Kennedy have any actual constitutional work experience? Has she ever practiced law in that area?>

Joe:

I know the Kennedy Library inside and out from my work, and trust me, it does not run on 21 people, nor are those three board meetings a year the entire extent of Ms. Kennedy's participation.

You are the most savagely ignorant person I have ever met on this board, and I have seen some lulus.

Yes--by all accounts there are several more infinetely better qualified persons to be appointed senator of NY.

My representative, Kristin Gillibrand, is someone I've heard who is being considered. I have to admit I hope the governor picks a woman. I like Gillibrand, voted for her twice (she was recently re-elected), but is someone who has been in Congress for two years more qualifed than Caroline? I can't say that she is. When Kristin first ran back in 2006, her incumbent challenger referred to her mockingly as "a little girl." Well, she's done alright for a little girl, which just goes to show that you never know what kind of politician someone will turn out to be until they're actually doing the job. I still say give Kennedy a chance.

All she has to offer is her name. You know, if she voted consistently the last 20 years and hadn't been such a public recluse, maybe she would have been taken seriously.

'You know' is the new 'You Betcha.'

" it does not run on 21 people"

The foundation's own website says they employ 21 people. I'll trust them over you.

Even if Caroline Kennedy is an active member of the Kennedy library foundation's board - can you answer these questions, or not? Does she have experience writing laws, rules or regulations? Or experience having to own up to some sort of constituency? Or leadership experience and a proven ability to accomplish stated objectives in a difficult partisan environment? Or have a plan for the state of New York?

Are any of those things important to you? What is it about serving on a non-profit board that qualifies her?

There are only 2 qualifications required to be appointed to any normally elected position:

1. Must tow the party line
2. Must have the popularity to raise large amounts of money for a reelection bid.

Beyond that, there really isn't anything else that can't be managed or dealt with, short of a major scandal.

I look forward to when her handlers actually don't request the media submit questions in writing. You Know,you know, you know she is a joke. I really hope the "Blind One" appoints her so that the NY tabloids have someone to pick on daily. Andrew Cuomo is too serious and Spitzer story is old.

Does Caroline Kennedy have any actual constitutional work experience? Has she ever practiced law in that area?

She has written two two Law Books on the subject: "In Our Defense: The Bill of Rights In Action" and "The Right to Privacy".

Which is two more books than Sarah Palin has ever read on the subject.

Funny how high you set the bar fer Sweet Caroline but not fer others.

Does Sarah Palin's "journalism degree" that took her years and four schools to aquire make her fit to be a Mayor? A Governor? A 72 yo heartbeat away from the presidency?

Dick Cheney in his capacity of Veep has been the President of the Senate since 2001.

Wot are his qualifications?

A BA and an MA in poli-sci?

From Wyo-U after he flunked out of Yale?

Have you ever won an argument in yer life, Joe?

Not just in court but EVAR?

Be Well.

"Which is two more books than Sarah Palin has ever read on the subject."

Funny how you morons keep using Sarah Palin as a benchmark - the most unqualified person to ever run for office has suddenly become the only person you need to be better than to be qualified.

"She has written two two Law Books on the subject:"

They aren't "law books" - nobody uses them as textbooks - they are novels at best. I'll ask again - has she ever practiced law in the area?

"I'll ask again - has she ever practiced law in the area?"

Who cares? We don't need any more stinkin' lawyers in the Senate anyway.

"We don't need any more stinkin' lawyers"

Weird - her position as a supposed attorney has been hailed as a qualification in this thread. When it comes into question whether she's done any actual work in the area, suddenly it becomes a positive that she hasn't.

Who cares? We don't need any more stinkin' lawyers in the Senate anyway.

Instead we get the last two dems to win the White House.

The governor fills the seat when the seat is vacated. In Clinton's case she is leaving before her term expires to work for Obama, so Gov. Patterson gets to fill the seat.

Does anybody doubt that if Caroline was a Losertarian, Joe would be defending her as eminently qualified?

Great imaginary scenario. When you'd like to deal in reality, let me know.

I just, um, read, um, you know, read for the first time, um, Caroline Kennedy's, you know, her tv interview. And, um, it's kind of, um, hard, you know, to think this, um, woman who's actually a lawyer, you know, has never, um,, never even, um, been taught how to speak, you know.

It's too bad Caroline Kennedy wasn't as glib and articulate as that former governor of Texas, George Whats-his-name. Whatever happened to him, anyways?

It's too bad Caroline Kennedy wasn't as glib and articulate as that former governor of Texas, George Whats-his-name

Too bad she is not a drunk like her uncle or a drug addict like her cousin? Keeping Camelot real.

I normally try not to pay any attention to what goes on in New York but this Kennedy thing is getting a little too much like the Palin disaster to ignore any more.

Perhaps Ms. Kennedy is not the best person for the temp position after all. It is not our place to second guess the New York governor but he would have to be blind or totally senile to miss the all the embarrassing bullshit going on around this circus.

(Okay,okay, that was a lame jab at McNasty and I should be ashamed of myself.)

The only reason she is being considered is money. The Democrats want someone who can win re-election without them dipping into the DNC pot.

This is sexism, plain and simple! Why are you right wing women's rights activists who found your voice during the latest election cycle so silent on this??????????????????????????
?????????

The only reason she is being considered is money. The Democrats want someone who can win re-election without them dipping into the DNC pot.

Very profound and very accurate.

Righties, FACE IT! Either way, the seat is going to a democrat. Keep arguing though! It sure is amusing.

Shee needs to check herself in to a spa. Her skin is horrible. It needs some major work. Some Botox around they eyes would help. Maybe Joe Biden can give her some tips. Will someone for cring out loud give her a number for a good cosmetic dentist. Has she ever looked in the mirror. Her brother would have never been caugth dead looking so old anf haggard. Really embarassing

Her brother would have never been caugth dead looking so old anf haggard.

Is sounds like the Sicilian swish had quite the hankering for John-John.

It is not our place to second guess the New York governor but he would have to be blind...

At least if Caroline gets drunk and drops her pants in front of friends it won't be as disgusting as the times her uncle Ted did it!

But I still don't want to see her exiting a limo ala Courtney, Brittainy, or Paris.

Keep the drawers on, girl!

She makes Sarah Palin look like Winston Churchill.

She makes Sarah Palin look like Winston Churchill.

#145 | Posted by visitor_

Dead and mouldering?

She makes Sarah Palin look like Winston Churchill.

Brandy shots and Cuba cigars?

#146 Well, Palin's hotness does burn with the light of 1000 suns more brightly than Princess Caroline.

But actually I was comparing intellectual and oratory skills. Caroline comes off as being functionally retarded.

She makes Sarah Palin look like Winston Churchill

Sarah "Word Salad" Palin?

Sarah makes a Chia Pet look like Winston Churchill.

Caroline may be a bit of a neophyte, a welterweight if you will, but Scary Failin' is a perma newb who'd hafta put on mucho extra gravitas poundage in order to be considered a fly weight or even a paper weight.

Be Well.

I was comparing intellectual and oratory skills

Oratory?

Scary gave a decent enuff speech if someone else got to write it and she had plenty of time to try and memorise it but in an interview she was a trainwreck.

Intellectual?

Spud's got stuff growing at the back of his fridge with a higher IQ than Sarah "Dino played with Jesus" Palin.

That sed, when it comes to the talent portion of the program Sarah does play a pretty mean flute.

Gotta give her cred fer that much.

Be Well.

Sarah wiped the floor with Biden in the debate.

And who says the senate seat would go to a Republican? Ratherrrr..

Of course it is going to a Dem--Folks are debating the qualifications of Caroline.

She never ran for office--who knows how much, if any, money she could raise.

Her circle of friends might be different from the educational liberals that donate to schools.

They might be as apolitical as her.

Sarah wiped the floor with Biden in the debate.

Yeah, right, ya betcha, hey, say it ain't so, Joe, ya betcha, yeah, right, uh huh, uh huh, ahummma, hummma, hummma.

Sarah wiped the floor with Biden in the debate.

#151 | Posted by MURPHY

She certainly exceeded all expectations in that debate, but virtually every poll and focus group said Biden won the debate.

That's Hilarious Murphy. What did She wipe Him with?? Her eye lashes perhaps??

Larry

Biden had trouble just keeping facts straight.

Only 14 truly awful mistakes by Biden.

And the biggest audience ever.

They didn't tune in to see Joe.

But he still won the debate. Go figure.

Mangy Minge scores the debate as Caribou Barbie ahead by a cunt hair. What a drubbing!!!

Hillbilly Moms agree, Skanks Know BEST!!!!

Sarah wiped the floor with Biden in the debate.

Biden ate her alive.

There were little chunks of Scary Failin in Biden's stool the day after the debate.

Joe showed gravitas and a statesmanlike demeanour.

Sarah exceeded expectations by not crying or wetting herself but beyond making that low bar she simply showed herself to be the empty snowsuit and airheaded ditz she is.

Scary also showed wot a lightweight she truly is and acted like she was running fer high school class president rather than VP of the USA.

Biden FTW.

Be Well.

Yeah--it's great to pull crap from one's be-hind and claim to have won a debate.

#159 | Posted by MURPHY

Murphy - why is it so tough for you to admit that virtually every poll and focus group said Biden won. Even your beloved Fox said so.

Palin did well, and exceeded expectations by a mile. But she didn't win.

You wouldn't want to become a revisionist, now would you?

So regardless if what the debater says is true or not--they win the debate--is that what you claim?

Just checking...

So regardless if what the debater says is true or not--they win the debate--is that what you claim?

Just checking...

#161 | Posted by MURPHY

I'M not claiming anything Murphy. Just reminding you of the fact of what America said. If it makes you feel better to pretend something different happened, then I won't further disturb your dream world.

Palin mistakenly claimed that troop levels in Iraq had returned to "pre-surge" levels. Levels are gradually coming down but current plans would have levels higher than pre-surge numbers through early next year, at least.

Palin repeated a false claim that Obama once voted in favor of higher taxes on "families" making as little as $42,000 a year. He did not. The budget bill in question called for an increase only on singles making that amount, but a family of four would not have been affected unless they made at least $90,000 a year.
Biden wrongly claimed that McCain "voted the exact same way" as Obama on the budget bill that contained an increase on singles making as little as $42,000 a year. McCain voted against it. Biden was referring to an amendment that didn't address taxes at that income level.
Palin claimed McCain's health care plan would be "budget neutral," costing the government nothing. Independent budget experts estimate McCain's plan would cost tens of billions each year, though details are too fuzzy to allow for exact estimates.

Palin wrongly claimed that "millions of small businesses" would see tax increases under Obama's tax proposals. At most, several hundred thousand business owners would see increases.

Palin said that Obama had accused American troops of doing nothing but killing civilians, a claim she called "reckless" and "untrue."

Palin: Now, Barack Obama had said that all we're doing in Afghanistan is air-raiding villages and killing civilians. And such a reckless, reckless comment and untrue comment, again, hurts our cause.

Obama did say that troops in Afghanistan were killing civilians. Here's the whole quote, from a campaign stop in New Hampshire:

Obama (August 2007): We've got to get the job done there and that requires us to have enough troops so that we're not just air-raiding villages and killing civilians, which is causing enormous problems there.

Yes--by all accounts there are several more infinetely better qualified persons to be appointed senator of NY.

#87 | Posted by MURPHY

Were there several more infinitely better qualified persons to be picked as GOP VP candidate this year? ; )

#90 | Posted by SanAntonioRogue

Touche. Ouch!

They didn't tune in to see Joe.

~Murph

Yes, they did.

They tuned in to see both of them.

That's kind of the point to a debate.

There was an unprecedented interest in seeing Palin talk and that largely had to do with the fact that she had been kept so far away from the press (and with the exception of those disastrous Couric and Gibson interviews was till the bitter end) that people's curiousities were piqued.

It was her one moment to shine and she blew it by mugging fer the camera, winking like she had a tic, and lying through her teeth by regurgitating recently memorised and thoroughly discredited RT talking points.

Be Well.

Yes--by all accounts there are several more infinetely better qualified persons to be appointed senator of NY.

#87 | POSTED BY MURPHY

Years Best "The Pot Calling The Kettle Black" Post of the Year!

Congrats McAnkles!

Maybe she and Palin could split the seat.

Maybe she and Palin could split the seat.

#167 | Posted by Unclesam

That's hot.

Personally, I don't care how she conducted the interview, that's neither here nor there as some are good public speakers and others just plain suck, that shouldn't be a direct measure of their intelligence... what concerns me more is that she never seemed very interested in politics (aside from authoring a couple of books) to even vote... According to various news sources she only voted half of the time since 1988? I am sorry but I would like my politicians to at least appear interested/concerned/paying attention to who is representing them before considering representing others....

But that is my honest opinion.

We need honest people in Washington who care about the American people and America. Caroline Kennedy qualifies, and I would trust her judgment more than 99% of the people in congress.

Does this Zap idiot ever make sense? Ever?

Stupid cunt. Please ski into a tree. It is your legacy.

"Stupid cunt. Please ski into a tree. It is your legacy.
#172 | Posted by PublicTrough
===============
Careful Chairborne!

Just sayin!

I haven't been around for ages.. did 101st get banned?

"
I haven't been around for ages.. did 101st get banned?

Posted by PublicTrough"

He has been placed on "leave" for a couple of weeks. Too bad he lost a little of his sardonic wit there over the Christmas holiday, I enjoy his posts.

Too bad he lost a little of his sardonic wit there over the Christmas holiday

He lost most of that months ago. Lately he's just been a pure asshole who says things that are beyond the pale. He brought up my sister's death from cancer more than a few times just to be an asshole (from a conversation I had late at night with another poster). That isn't wit. It's being an unbridled asshole for no reason but to be an asshole.

Fuck him.

There is a problem with some people "to the manner born" being assigned to positions of power, and that is their unfamiliarity with matters that affect the lives of as the late New York hotelier. Mrs. Helmsley said, "the little people."

For example, we have a Governor, a fellow whom I like, and who is from a billionaire family that is very very charitable, and well-intentioned. The Governor by fiat in response to "the energy crisis," and grandstanding, set a four day work week for most State workers. It was effective immediately with little lead time.

He was apparently either unaware or indifferent to the effect that this change in hours would have for people with established child care resources, and also for people attending college or some other school at night in an effort to improve their skills and secure credentials, who were compromised by this "emergency" change of schedule in the middle of a semester.

This selection of "leaders" from the elites, even by the elective process is a de facto corrosion of democracy by establishing a special class of nobility, which receives entitlement from blood lines and affiliation, and who are unacquainted with the nuances of daily life that affects their constituencies.