Comments on: Caroline Kennedy’s Senate Bid

By: Jamie

Jamie — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 03:19:22 +0000

First, Caroline Kennedy’s last name is Kennedy–no hyphenated last name; she did not take her husband’s name when she married. Yay Caroline!

Second, NH’s comments are not relevant to Caroline. She had no control over those events, and the remarks are hateful. Her uncle and brother she loves. Perhaps NH is too mean spirited to know love or to feel empathy. (By the way, I am a liberal from Massachusetts, and have NOT voted for Ted because that misogynous tragedy is HIS doing, not Caroline’s!!!)

Third, the Canadian Fred is so astute. He’s right, and this is a reason to support Caroline. She would have two years to earn the voters’ respect–or not–and then face election.

By: NH

NH — Mon, 29 Dec 2008 08:07:55 +0000

At first I thought — wow this woman has no qualifications to be the liberal candidate for Senate.

But wait — her uncle got a woman pregnant then drowned her, and her brother killed two sisters because he was an incompetent pilot…

I guess she has plenty of skeletons and corruption behind her and is a wealthy celebrity so she automatically qualifies for the immoral Democrats as their candidate.

By: joel

joel — Sat, 27 Dec 2008 05:23:52 +0000

I think that it is terrific that Caroline Kennedy is seeking the appointment of U.S. Senator from New York. I feel that every American has a right to serve their country regardless of how much political experience they have. When a man or woman joins the military and is deployed into harm’s way, they don’t have prior experience of being shot at or bombs going off around them, yet they do a fantastic for us. Our country needs people like her who truly want to make a difference and are not in public service for a career, money, or power.

By: jeff

jeff — Fri, 26 Dec 2008 02:10:45 +0000

David the Nation is a progressive magazine and they are hardly what one would call Bolsheviks. They, and readers such as myself are no more Bolsheviks than your a fascist.

By: Michael

Michael — Fri, 26 Dec 2008 01:39:04 +0000

Yet another example of how symbolism trumps substance in the US.

By: David

David — Wed, 24 Dec 2008 17:46:09 +0000

By American standards,Caroline is qualified simply because she is a “Kennedy”. She may very well be the only Kennedy without skeletons in her closet. America needs to get over electing people from the upper crust. The Kennedy’s have a long record of political service, yet some of their personal exploits leave me sick. But, we Americans have never considered personal failures as a disqualifier for office.

By: David

David — Wed, 24 Dec 2008 16:52:45 +0000

I am sick and tried of hearing thugs from The Nation magazine being offered as “expert on any topic.”

These Bolsheviks wannabes all express the same propagandistic views.

By: Mike

Mike — Wed, 24 Dec 2008 07:17:27 +0000

This Maloney should be watched. She is obviously Hillary’s surrogate in this struggle; her name is on the lips of nearly every major opponent of the Kennedy option. She is evidently (from above comments) a tool of liberal/feminist special interests (which is better than the alternative, but independence is still preferable). With one Senator hailing from Brooklyn already and a primary objection to Kennedy being her lack of connection to Upsate, it is unclear why Maloney, a Representative from Queens/Manhattan is getting such traction. That she is should be a signal of elite support in the (still soft) anti-Obama wing of the Dems.

By: Fred Di Spirito

Fred Di Spirito — Wed, 24 Dec 2008 02:20:57 +0000

As a Canadian observing this from the outside, I can see that within one month after the Obama victory that Democrats have already gone back to forming their circular firing squad. Challenging the Republicans in New York State will take alot of money for advertising in the New York City market. I can’t see any of the other names mentioned Maloney?? Nadler?? matching the fundraising giants in the Republican Party like Mitt Romney or Rudy Giuliani who are also quite interested in this seat. For the Democratic party to retain this seat in the Senate, considering anyone other than Caroline Kennedy is laughable. Leave it to Democrats to never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity.

By: Anne Fischer

Anne Fischer — Wed, 24 Dec 2008 01:57:29 +0000

I am surprised that NPR hasn’t come forth to interview US Rep Caroline Maloney who has been in Congress for 16 years; served on a city council for several years before that. (You did interview Nita Lowery who is NOT interested). She has been endorsed by National Organization for Women and also the Feminist Majority. She is a hard worker; has provided nothing but public service, and she knows Washington of course! She has written a terrific book abt her life and what is needed in Congress. She is genuine, personable, sincere, and I hope Gov. Patterson sees the light (no pun intended). All this publicity for Caroline Kennedy is totally unjustified.

By: Tom Keefe

Tom Keefe — Wed, 24 Dec 2008 00:46:10 +0000

On the shy issue… my senator IS the most shy member of the body and he is highly respected and effective. In fact, he was discussed as possibly the democratic VP or SecDef nominee… Jack Reed of Rhode Island.

By: Bobako

Bobako — Tue, 23 Dec 2008 22:36:25 +0000

There is no school for senators nor for presidents. All you need to be is a lawful US citizen over a certain age!Career politicians are way overated!!The nation voted for Bush, let’s all remember that…Caroline is probably the best candidate for NY, she’s not in there for fame and fortune, she’ll be a breath of fresh air, believe me

By: Bob Gardner

Bob Gardner — Tue, 23 Dec 2008 22:23:36 +0000

After last sunday it’s obvious that Caroline Kennedy should be the new quarterback for the Jets this week.
1) It’s obvious that a lot of athletic males in their 20’s and 30’s have done the Jet’s little good. Why not give a non-athletic 51 year old woman a chance? It would be refreshing.
2) She knows the new york area. Presumably that includes the Meadowlands.
3) She has written two books, I think.
4) She would automatically become the most interesting player in the NFL. And she knows a lot of influencial people.
5) Her lifelong interest in playing football parallels her lifelong interest in politics.
(If these points seem familiar, it’s because I have cribbed them from some of the people who are still supporting Caroline for the Senate–sorry for the lack of originality)
(

By: George Wagner

George Wagner — Tue, 23 Dec 2008 21:45:28 +0000

Elizabeth Holtzman for the NY Senate seat please. She was the most qualified in 1980 when Jacob Javits decided to run after not getting the Republican nomination and getting a small percent of the independent/liberal Republican vote, thus dooming Holtzman’s bid and condemning New York to 18 years of Alphonse DiMatto. Governor Patterson, she’d make a great senator. Don’t be swayed by the Kennedy mystique.

By: Harry

Harry — Tue, 23 Dec 2008 19:14:21 +0000

I also feel that Caroline Kennedy is not a good choice, simply for the fact that she doesn’t seem to have paid her dues. The Kennedys have given a lot to this country and to the Democratic Party but so have others and it sends the wrong message. I didn’t listen to the show, so I may have missed it, but I don’t understand why so few people mention Andrew Cuomo as a qualified and serious candidate for this appointment. Also, Carolyn Maloney, who has experience as a US representative and is strong on womens’ issues. – a former NYC resident (1979 – 1985)

By: Barry Samuels

Barry Samuels — Tue, 23 Dec 2008 17:41:10 +0000

New Yorkers are really being shortsighted. If I lived there I would love to have a Senator who had the ear of the President. I suspect that no one would be closer to President Obama than Caroline Kennedy.

By: Jim

Jim — Tue, 23 Dec 2008 16:33:09 +0000

Caroline Kennedy does not have the experience for the job. She should fit in quite well with the incoming administration. I believe it’s time we, the people move to get rid of legacy politicians and elect non politicians for a change. Apparently there is no requirement for experience or dedication to the American taxpayer. Anyone can sit around and collect an automatic, annual pay raise of around $4,000. Anyone can approve a $700 billion deal to rescue criminals in the financial world. When criminals rescue criminals is it considered a crime? Ted Kennedy is one of the biggest criminals in the senate. I guess because he’s a Kennedy folks just let him keep going.

We really should vote out all the current criminals and elect new folks, non politicians that at least go into the job caring about the American taxpayer. That’s REAL “fire in the belly!!!”

By: Margaret

Margaret — Tue, 23 Dec 2008 16:30:34 +0000

Sorry I couldn’t call this morning, will listen tonight, maybe someone brought this up: I wonder about Caroline Kennedy’s health. Her photos make her look emaciated and exhausted, her hair doesn’t shine — at 51 (still youngish these days). Wondering if she has the energy to be a senator.

By: WNY'er

WNY'er — Tue, 23 Dec 2008 16:20:55 +0000

As a Western New Yorker I am pretty outraged by all the calls from people in GA, VT, etc to appoint Caroline Kennedy. If she’s so darn great why don’t you draft her for your own states? If not, then please butt out!
Caroline might prove to be a great Senator for NY but I really think she should have to run for it. Patterson should get a placeholder in for the next two years and then let the open primary process take care of things in 2010. I was initially VERY skeptical of Hillary but she earned my trust and votes by campainging hard in all 62 counties, learning our issues and working hard. I don’t want a dilletante who is bored with charity work and thinks this job might be fun or stimulating. Caroline might prove to be the best Senator we’ve ever had but she needs to do the work to earn it first!

By: Carolyn

Carolyn — Tue, 23 Dec 2008 16:17:31 +0000

Pardon my ignorance, but if Clinton is NOT confirmed by the Senate, what happens? In order to be scrutinized by the committee, has she already given up her seat?