Caroline Kennedy...Hrmph
Caroline Kennedy eyeing Hillary Clinton's Senate seat without having run for something, even the president of the PTA, smacks of hubris, audacity and braggadocio.
The truth be told, she wouldn't have generated all the media hype had last name been Marley, Reynolds or another name along those lines. Even so, the unenlightened feel that her resume has provided her with ample experience including a three-hour a week fundraising stint for the New York City public school system and board positions on non-profit organizations like the Kennedy Library, the Commission on Presidential Debates and the New York City Ballet. (Guess how she got those.)
If it really is her resume, then I'd like to toss my hat in the ring as well because mine includes the following:
Wrangled a bus for a fieldtrip that produced one diesel-burning coach and one short-tempered driver.
Worked 40 hours a week, though some may say it is only really three. As of now, those people will not get any holiday cards from me.
Tolerated coworkers who always hold meetings over with one last question when it is time to go home. (They're not getting any cards, either.)
Minded my manners and didn't eat more than two slices of pizza at the luncheon hosted by some financial advisors to promote their services.
Basically, I am patient, a nice dresser and don't have any files at the DMV, and I would be willing to move to NYC as long as I could get discounted theatre tickets. So what do you say, Al Sharpton and the New York union honchos? Want to go for some grub?
There are so many things that bother me about this. Perhaps first and foremost is the forgone conclusion that a Senate seat will soon be available - Hillary will get confirmed as Secretary of State despite potential conflicts of interest propounded by Bill as well as zero experience in foreign affairs ("dodging bullets" in Bosnia doesn't count). This was a terrible selection by Obama because he, too, lacks any foreign policy experience. On a side note, one has to wonder how many chits the Clintons have.
I'm also bothered by the fact that a single person, and not the electorate, selects a representative of the people in these sorts of situations; special elections should be held if we want to be truly democratic.
But you're right, Caroline is a serious "candidate" only because her last name is Kennedy. It's interesting that Sarah Palin - who got elected as a mayor and then as a governor, thereby making a name for herself whereas Caroline's name was made for her - received far more scrutiny and criticism. I'm sure Caroline Kennedy is yet another nice fascist, but New York should select someone who has earned some public trust and been in the arena.
"Another nice fascist" -- John, can you elaborate...?
This is exactly what you and I have previously talked about - "another nice fascist" is the least relevant portion of my comment, but it's phrases like this that get people's attention and generate further comments. This is primarily why I snuck it in. This site needs more action.
However, I will also say this, Rob - the liberal Democratic agenda is eerily similar to the European fascist agendas (particularly Italy) from the twenties and thirties, so "another nice fascist" wasn't pulled out of thin air. The idea that fascism is a right-wing ideology is false. Fascism and communism, of course, were once in conflict with one another; so maybe that's how we got the idea that fascism is right-wing. Communism, at least in the beginning, was meant to be an international movement, whereas fascism was nationalistic - otherwise, what are/were the differences?
Anyway, do you support Kennedy or do you think New York's governor should look elsewhere?