Kennedelicious 0
Hard to disagree with this:
She shouldn’t be. Think about it.
Her qualifications? Her name is Kennedy and she can raise a lot of fat-cat money for herself and for New York democrats who support her.
Her strategy? Ignore the voters and the press and meet with the political bosses behind closed doors to convince them to pressure Governor David Patterson to appoint her to Hillary Clinton’s seat.
Is there a more cynical message in the Age of Obama?
Who’s supporting her? Among her chief backers is New York City’s billionaire Republican Mayor Michael Bloomberg who recently decided to ignore a legitimate and binding citywide referendum that prohibited him from seeking a third term. In one of the most appalling examples of an arrogant “the public be damned” attitude, Bloomberg convinced the City Council to overrule the will of the people so he could stay in City Hall. He’s a big contributor to many of the folks who supported this brazen move.
Legendary Tammany Hall boss Carmine De Sapio would love both Bloomberg and Caroline for bringing back the old “power to the bosses” style of politics.
The columnist goes on to point out that Kennedy has voted in only about half the contested elections in New York since 1988. She appears to have no political vision (as opposed to political leanings), not even a defective one.
The columnists suggest that Governor Patterson will likely name Andrew Cuomo, just to get him out of the political landscape of New York state and away from being in a position to oppose any future ambitions that Mr. Patterson may have.
Aside: One of the characteristics of the very rich is that they get used to getting things without working for them.
As an appointed Senator, Caroline Kennedy would probably be no worse than most elected Senators and better than many (can anyone say, “Norm Coleman”?), but jeez oh man.
