Caroline Kennedy: "No Drama" Before "No Drama" Was Cool

The reports that Caroline Kennedy is interested in New York Governor David Paterson's appointment to replace Senator Hillary Clinton in the US Senate have created a fascinating set of reactions that in some cases have resonated inversely with the dynamics of the Democratic presidential primaries of 2008.

Let's tug at the threads of some debates regarding the possible Kennedy appointment to demonstrate that there is an ongoing battle over the heart, soul and future of the Democratic party that did not end or disappear with Obama's November 4 victory, and that is part of what is at play with the coming appointment in New York.

On a purely political level, if it is true that Attorney Kennedy would like to serve in her uncle Bobby's old senate seat, we can probably consider her appointment - whether one loves it or hates it - a lead-pipe cinch. For Governor Paterson - thrust into the job of Governor after Elliot Spitzer crashed and burned from personal and legal scandal - his first political priority is to get himself elected to continue as Governor in 2010. By appointing Kennedy, New York Democrats would get a junior US Senator that would coast to reelection without diverting significant resources from the governor's contest. And Paterson would curry goodwill from many New Yorkers, downstate, upstate and suburban, that would be thrilled with the choice of the Irish-American daughter of President John F. Kennedy.

The truth is, no matter who Paterson picks - be it Andrew Cuomo or any number of members of Congress - there will be grumbling from the camps of those that didn't get it, with many legitimate arguments about why one deserved it or would have been better than the other. (This is why the tea leaves suggest that over in Illinois, Governor Rod Blagojevich may appoint a "caretaker" in 73-year-old Emil Jones to fill Obama's Senate seat, so as not to raise the ire of various powerful pols and factions with their eyes on it, allowing them to fight it out in the 2010 primary and him to duck the blowback from the also-rans.) Paterson won't have that problem if he chooses Kennedy. She is in a league of her own. And, at least in public, all the other clans and factions in Empire State politics will have to recognize it and live with it.

On a policy level, it would be an even more brilliant move from the perspective of liberalism and progressivism: Attorney Kennedy is underestimated by some only because she's lived by the "no drama" approach to politics long before Obama made it popular. Most people have little idea of her accomplishments because her style has been to seek results not credit for them. I know, because in the 1990s, as political reporter for the Boston Phoenix, I covered the Kennedy family and all its doings - including Ted Kennedys 1994 reelection battle against Mitt Romney - very closely. Caroline, at the helm of the Kennedy library, has served as the true executive director of the family and all its political and policy interests. She has also been the family's ambassador nationwide and around the world: the one that attended funerals and other matters of statesmanship on the family's behalf. That she generally avoided the spotlight in doing so, and always avoided personal scandal - a particularly difficult challenge for anybody named Kennedy - is testimony to her skill and finesse at the political game.

The Kennedy policy machine is nothing to shake a stick at: Senator Ted Kennedy has, during 46 years in the Senate, installed a generation of policy wonks as lead staffers on almost all the key committees in the upper house of the Capitol dome, and no small number in the lower one. When Teddy nods his head subtly in a given policy direction that network marches as an army and has steamrolled over Republican and business interests time and time again. When progressive legislation has been passed - when reactionary legislation has been killed - on civil rights and liberties, health care, jobs and wages, education, and on other issues, the fingerprints of current and former Kennedy staffers have been on each and every one, even as Teddy shined the spotlight on other legislators who took the public lead. Joe Biden and John Kerry are among the Senate veterans that have benefited from Kennedy's generosity when it comes to sharing or assigning credit.

Paterson and New York, thus, would not just be getting a Senator. They would get, with Caroline, the driver with the keys to the most finely tuned and influential progressive national political network in American politics, reaching (in many cases invisibly) into levers of power in all branches of government and in many states far from Massachusetts, including among the networks planted by the Southern Civil Rights movement and among Hispanic-American political leaders and organizations from Texas to California for whom "Tio Ted" has been mentor and unflinching ally. (The Kennedys have long been central to the push for multi-racial movements in US politics, one that just became realized with Obama's election as never before: that will also serve Attorney Kennedy and so many of her constituents well in New York.)

Here's what I find so interesting about some of the early reactions: Some Clinton loyalists and others are not happy at all with this development. The arguments they deploy, in the Daily Kos comment threads and elsewhere, to disparage the possible appointment are identical in many cases to those they defended against during the presidential primaries (and even more so in 2000 during Clinton's first campaign for Senate): They say: Why should a member of a political dynasty get the job? She's never held elected office (some of us, on the other hand, see that as a plus, just as we saw Obama's lack of "beltway boiling and seasoning" as positive). Attorney Kennedy, some say, hasn't enough "experience."

And you can also feel the bile rise up their throats as they cut to the real thing they're upset about: That such an appointment would supposedly constitute a political payback for her (and the Kennedy family's) support for Obama, or a matter of "patronage" or nepotism, or "aristocracy," or that she represents, to some, the same politics of "celebrity" that some (wishfully) want to believe explains Obama's primary victories. (And, yes, it is very funny to listen to complaints from some of the same mouths about Attorney Kennedy not being "charismatic" enough. They're really scraping the barrel to come up with a legitimate reason for what is evidently more of an emotional revulsion.)

The possible Kennedy appointment also opens up some wounds from some (including some former Edwards enthusiasts) that see all things Obama through the lens of "Dear Leader-ism," one writer's never-ending suggestion that Obama's base is somehow made up of dupes more into cult of personality than policy (an attempted insult that is so obviously born of sour grapes that its not worthy of response other than perhaps by quoting Alex Haley: "History is written by the winners.")

I'm not saying that these superficial contradictions make for anything hypocritical: to the contrary, the critics of a possible appointment of Attorney Kennedy to the US Senate are essentially correct in perceiving that something much bigger than symbolism would occur through it. The Kennedy and Clinton tendencies in the Democratic Party have embodied two distinct magnetic poles each trying to pull the party in different directions for the past 16 years, and before that between Kennedy and Carter tendencies.

This was very much at play with Senator and Attorney Kennedy's endorsement of Obama early in the primaries, and intentionally signaled as such. The Kennedy organization was not happy - many of us were not - with the change in direction that the Clinton administration brought to the party, toward a blatant acquiescence to corporate interests, away from the New Deal and the Great Society. And while both families have had their share of public personal scandal, for the Kennedys that hasn't bled much at all into the political or policy realms: we just have never seen Ted Kennedy, for example, go to Malaysia and collect $200,000 for a speech from a corporate power broker, lavishing his benefactor's company with praise, as occurred on Friday with Bill Clinton, now getting a few last international paydays in before his ethics agreement with the Obama administration kicks in to prevent future such embarrassments.

The problem isn't really - on either side of the debate - one of "dynasty" per se but, rather, of which one. There are dramatic policy and ideological differences between the Kennedy organization's vision of the Democratic Party and the Clinton organization's. In the end, one side or another's pleasure or distaste is more for what a particular dynasty has done, than merely that it happens to be one. So it's natural that people that prefer the Clinton over the Kennedy formula for doing politics would object to an appointment to a member the latter organization whereas those more ideologically in harmony with the Kennedys (and particularly Ted Kennedy, giving his final months or years his all for the same causes for which he has lived) tend to be excited by the suggestion of Caroline as Senator.

An appointment of Caroline Kennedy to the US Senate from New York is qualitatively different than it would be, say, for Robert Kennedy Jr. or another member of the family: She, more than any other of her generation, brings the reins and detailed knowledge of the family organization for which she has been (I'll use a phrase that's provocative but not to be scoffed at once you've given it a minute's thought) the "community organizer" among the Kennedys, the administrator and attaché that has been most responsible, among them, for complying with the details once Ted Kennedy has exercised the broad stroke leadership.

Finally: Anybody who underestimates Attorney Caroline Kennedy, who wants to view her as somehow lightweight or just a celebrity name inside a business suit, does so at the risk to his and her sense of reality. Her skill sets are not merely adequate, but, rather exceptional and extraordinary. She was "no drama" before "no drama" was cool. And her appointment, if it comes, will be a gift that keeps on giving before and after Ted Kennedy moves on to the great battleground beyond.

Update: Here's another reason I'm fond of this idea. Attorney Kennedy, at 51, would be younger than 90 out of 100 US senators. That the upper house is stale and stodgy is an understatement.

Follow Al Giordano on Twitter: www.twitter.com/AlGiordano

Comments

[meko]

She is only in consideration because of her last name, money and family connections. No one with her resume (non-practicing attorney, co-author of a few books, charity board member, part-time volunteer on behalf of NY public schools) would be considered otherwise.

But perhaps all those people talking about the cost of reelection have a point. Perhaps only the very wealthy and people with relatives in government can win the senate seat in New York. Caroline Kennedy never raised money for anyone who wasn't a family member (excepting her 6-weeks on behalf of Obama). I think she'll continue to refuse to throw herself behind other democratic candidates in New York. And I expect her wealthy friends will follow.

The New York senate seat, may not be available to anyone but the wealthy. Maybe all the press releases and Kennedy sycophants are right and best the common people can hope for is that the best plutocrat wins.

Hillary sold the "Obama can't raise the money and can't win the general election line" and in NY it worked. So maybe the same line works for the NY senate seat. But I'm not giving them any of my time or money. I don't do volunteer work to further line the pockets of the wealthy and further aggrandize the famous. If the senate is going to be bought by someone, they can buy it themselves.

[BigGuy]

No one's mentioned something Caroline Kennedy shares in common with Hilary: a willingness to work very long hours and put up with a lot of aggravation in order to get things done.

[meko]

What full-time job, where she wasn't her own boss, did she have? When did she have a job where she didn't write her own job description?

[BigGuy]

Many opposed to Caroline as well as those in favor doubt her political skills. She has tremendous skills at getting people together and getting things done. She's done that behind the scenes for years, just like her mom did.

Jackie Kennedy got the NYC landmarks bill passed. She was able to see Grand Central Station preserved and the Time Warner Center designed so Central Park was not cast into shadows all day long. Caroline learned well when her mom got stuff accomplished.

Keep in mind that Jackie was able to manipulate LBJ anytime she wanted, and very few people could ever do that.

Don't "misunderestimate" Caroline.

[lily31]

Thanks for the enlightening post. You make excellent points as to what she could do for NY and for her country.

I hope the Gov. taps her and soon!

[Vinquus]

I love this phrase: "The problem isn't really - on either side of the debate - one of "dynasty" per se but, rather, of which one" - setting up a false choice between the grasping Clintons and the noble Kennedys, who don't need to grasp because their fortune was earned during prohibition.

Actually it's bad enough that Hillary parachuted herself, quite unqualified, into New York and took the senate seat. At least she ran for it, rather than being appointed. How about we go back to letting people earn a place in the senate.

[timm553]

Good grief. Have you seen the way some of them have "earned" their place there? Lying, cheating and backstabbing don't equate with "earning" to me.

[lily31]

"At least she ran for it, rather than being appointed. How about we go back to letting people earn a place in the senate."

I don't get your logic! Anyone who fills this vacancy will be appointed but will have to run in order to complete the Clinton term and then of course again to begin a term of her own .... one that she earned!

[standard]

"[Y]ou can also feel the bile rise up their throats as they cut to the real thing they're upset about: That such an appointment would supposedly constitute a political payback . . . The problem isn't really. . . one of 'dynasty" per se but, rather, of which one. "

Boy, can you EVER detect that bile! Although we've not seen a statement on HuffPo by one of Mrs. Clinton's most prolific toadies here, the similarity of the talking points that have reached the Internet, and the incoherency of the attacks they embody, imply an orchestrated effort--possibly by a single original author.

Thank you for your respectful and insightful post about Caroline Kennedy, a very fine next junior Senator from New York indeed for Gov. Paterson to consider selecting.

[emjay1954]

It's interesting to see that the Huffington Post has been infiltrated by the Caroline Kennedy for Appointed Senator Committee.

The arguments are familiar: She's not an embarrassment. She's photogenic. She went to law school (gee, where we will EVER find another New Yorker who can say that?). Oh, she's a published author (which makes her as qualified as Joe the Plumber soon will be).

And oh, yeah. The current U.S. Senate isn't exactly overrun with people who are statesmanlike or great humanitarians or Mensa members. And it's true that any of the individuals currently under discussion won't alter the ecology of that swamp.

But I am curious. If your only qualification is being no worse than sitting Senators, aren't there about ten million New Yorkers who fit the bill? And why Kennedy over any of them? Unless you're part of the Kennedy family--or the Kennedy cult.

[lily31]

One doesn't have to be one of the "Kennedy Cult" to recognize excellence and honor it,

Give me a senator with a good brain, who uses it well on behalf of others, and is a "no drama" person ~ just a hard worker anytime! Someone who has proven that ability as well!

Did it occur to you that the number of pro posts could be that Mrs. Kennedy has qualities they value even it you don't!!

[melponeme k]

Ah, all the little Royalists coming out of the woodwork to push "Princess" Caroline.

Why?

Why is the media so gungho to push this woman on us? Especially since we know most of them work for corporations who want their agendas pushed.

So who will truly benefit from another Kennedy? We have had a whole lot of Kennedy family in various positions and we still ended up where we are now.

No more Dynasties.

[beaupritchard]

Actually she's not being pushed on me ... I welcome Caroline Kennedy ... I encourage her to add that missing touch of what use to be called "New York class" to the senate.

[melponeme k]

What used to be New York Class was known as the Old Knickerbocker line of which the Caroline Kennedy clan was not a part of.

They tried to marry into it.

Know your New York history. I know because I had family that had presentiments towards the old English/Dutch bloodlines.

[bayside]

I love the idea of caroline as senator..We cant afford any more cheney , rumsfield kind of experience..I would like to have all govt. employees vetted to assure honesty in our govt. again and if you get felony you cannot be in congress. I realize there goes half of our congress, nevertheless,we cant vote and neither should they be able ..

[TheIndependenceParty]

Thank you, Al. New York has a unique opportunity and a fine candidate to select for its replacement of HRC. Mrs. Schlossberg has done the work for years that prepares her for he position as Senator. That others were not watching her is their fault and not hers.

I am hoping we hear sooner rather than later that Caroline will be serving New York in this capacity.

[beaupritchard]

Absolutely brilliant ... offering Clinton Secretary of State to get Caroline Kennedy into the senate ... the Obama team does not cease to amaze me.

[larry278]

Yes, team Obama is amazing. Politicians from Chicago can be devious.

[tel8034]

I guess the politicians from Chigago learnt the inside tricks of the trade from the politicians from Texas.

[Piatt]

Thanks for the article. I'm a New Yorker and have been continually impressed by her low key, productive approach to NYC school issues and her consititutional expertise. I think she'd be a fine U.S. Senator and hope Governor Patterson appoints her.

[beaupritchard]

So do we want a constituency that looks like it came out of the movie Deliverance or Saks Fifth Avenue.

I'm a Saks man myself ... and that Caroline Kennedy is one classy lady.

[orangepetal]

You are right we do not like it, not even because of her, but whatever. It's already been pre-decided, we get it. Your arrogance matches the Republicans you claim not to like. You are just as authoritarian. No problemo. I live where schools are fabulous, my life is just dandy. I really like Nissan, so what do I care about American manufacturing. Fight for a more progressive America, bullet trains, a better healthcare, no, I'll refrain. Maybe join the opposition. But then you never needed us. I hope for you, you never do.

[allonfla]

I haven't followed her career so thank you for sharing that information. When I first heard the news, I only thought about her last name. Maybe it had something to do with Jeb Bush possibly running for the Senate. But after reading a couple of articles like these, I say why not. Hey, in a country that has a history of electing celebrities - actual celebrities like Reagan and Arnold - why not someone with bonafide credentials?