The Shameful Bloviation About Whether Caroline Kennedy Is "Qualified" To Be A Senator

I've been sadly amused today watching the cable news bloviators discuss whether Caroline Kennedy is "qualified" to replace Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) in the U.S. Senate and, frankly, the whole debate shows how disconnected and self-absorbed the pretentious inside-the-Beltway crowd is about who they wish to admit into their society.

So, allow me to be brutally honest about this Congressional qualifications stuff, for whatever my opinion is worth.

Without a doubt, we would all be much better served if all 535 Senators and Representatives were the smartest, most insightful, courageous, selfless people we could find. That would be ideal. But the truth is they aren't. Not even close. And having spent more than a decade around these people -- there's nothing so difficult about the job Representative or Senator that someone as impressive as Caroline Kennedy couldn't master in short order, if not on Day 1.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying anyone is suited to serve in Congress. The job is demanding, it takes a particular skill set to master things like debate, public speaking, digesting information and analyses, campaigning, and asking strangers for money. And the work they do is of critical importance. 

But I find it insulting and annoying that these political and media blowhards even think for a moment that the job is so complicated and technically difficult that a Caroline Kennedy might be out-of-her league if appointed. It's such utter nonsense that I find myself annoyed by it all.

The truth is, the real hard part of Congress is done by the staffers and career people. They do the tough work. They do the numbers crunching, the public policy analysis, the writing of crucial and complicated legislation, the constituent outreach and case work. That's the hard part. Serving as a member of Congress is not like being a governor of a state or, obviously, President of the United States. Those are hard jobs where the elected official is largely responsible for running an actual government on his/her own. (Side note: the effort by some to compare her to Gov. Sarah Palin (R-AK) is equally misplaced. Palin was running to be the possible next president [i.e., the hardest job of all], not one of 100 senators.).

I have had the honor of working with and getting to know some incredibly talented and brilliant people who serve in the House or Senate. My political career was built on the lessons learned from spending years with people like Sen. Tim Johnson (D-SD) and Rep. Ben Chandler (D-KY). But we should not confuse the fact that while there are many brilliant people in Congress, who bring a distinct skill set, the job itself doesn't require a Ph.D. to master. There are, unfortunately, more than a handful of especially unimpressive members of Congress who demonstrate daily that you can get by with limited skills, if not thrive.

After all, we are talking about a Congress that sent us into a war that cost us more than 4,000 American military lives and about a trillion dollars, even though no weapons of mass destruction existed. That same Congress can't balance a budget, stand-up to an abysmally unpopular president who happily skirted the boundaries of lawfulness for many years, and who seem wholly incapable of making tough and courageous decisions that the American public expects of them.

Nevertheless, despite the remarkable life that Caroline Kennedy has lived...despite her Harvard undergraduate degree and Columbia Law School degree...despite her being an attorney, an editor, and a published author...despite that our next president trusted her to co-lead his search for a vice president...despite coming from one of the greatest families ever to serve in the United States Congress... we have to sit and listen to members of this Beltway fraternity (and sorority) bluster that she might not be qualified to become 1 of 100 in the Senate. Seriously?

The pundits spew a great deal of nonsense on any given day. But this one might actually take the cake. And if I didn't know better, I might think there was a bit of misogyny wrapped-up in the analysis. Not only do I not recall the same criticism being leveled at the idea that her cousin -- Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. -- might seek the appointment, or someday run for the job -- but I sort of recall some of the same arguments made about Hillary Clinton's own run for this seat eight years ago.

Finally, I'm not saying that experience doesn't matter. Clearly, it does. We want the best experience we can get in a candidate for any public office, and Kennedy would have to defend hers in a 2010 special election. That is a legitimate question for her opponent to raise. But when it comes to filling a Senate vacancy in New York, I find this whole discussion more than nauseating, especially considering the sources.

Mark Nickolas is the Managing Editor of Political Base, and this story was from his original post, "Honestly, It's Not Rocket Science"

Follow Mark Nickolas on Twitter: www.twitter.com/mnickolas

Comments

[hopeless277]

Where was she in 2000? 2004? 2006? When did she decide that she wanted to run for the Senate? Who is her campaign manager? How much money has she raised? Where will she campaign? How long has she lived in New York? What other political or volunteer offices has she held? What are her views on the important issues of the day?

Oh, you say you don't know? Neither do I. Do the voters of New York know? Probably not. So why would anyone pick her? Her FAMILY???? Kind of like Bush??? So you're telling me that if your family was in politics then you deserve to be APPOINTED TO A SENATE SEAT???? Wow. Sounds kind of monarchial to me. But then we do have a King now. On the other hand, now that we do have a King, the Senate is powerless, right? So why bother to appoint anyone?

[Apphouse50]

She's lived in New York for decades. She's been very active in city civic affairs, the Metropolitan Museum of Art and more. If you don't know, try Wikipedia -- don't go assuming others are similarly uninformed.

[glorialovelace]

It's you who is uninformed, if you are basing your opinion of whether Governor Paterson should appoint CK to HRC's senate seat on that Wikipedia article.

To have a valid opinion, you also need to research the backgrounds of the other people Paterson is said to be considering.

That is where Ms. Kennedy comes up short. Since there are better people available, why appoint her?

[corkonian]

Kennedy is an attorney, editor, writer, and one of the founders of the Profiles in Courage Award.
She was chief executive for the Office of Strategic Partnerships for the NY City Department of Education; she helped raise more than $65M for the city"s public schools.
Kennedy is Vice Chair of The Fund for Public Schools, President of the Kennedy Library Foundation, a director of the Commission on Presidential Debates and the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, and Honorary Chairman of the American Ballet Theatre. She is adviser to the Harvard Institute of Politics.
Kennedy is a published author. She and Ellen Alderman have written two books:
* In Our Defense: The Bill of Rights In Action
* The Right to Privacy
She has edited:
* A Patriot"s Handbook
* The Best-Loved Poems of Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis
* A Family of Poems: My Favorite Poetry for Children
* Profiles in Courage for Our Time
She is the author of "A Family Christmas" a collection from her family history.
Married to the same man for 23 years, she has lived, raised her family and worked in NY for her entire adult life. Despite her wealth she is a hard worker w/a history of public service, is well educated and intelligent. She knows everyone of political importance.
(with thanks to a previous commentor for this info)

[rbenjamin]

In all seriousness, she's over-qualified to be a freshman senator, which is one step below being a frat pledge. Appoint her to office and she spends 60% of her time raising cash for the next go-round. The NYC schools, the ballet and all those other worthy causes need her more than the US Senate. There are many ways to serve your country, She is doing just fine. Oh yeah, there's that dynasty thang too.

[1shrink]

This resume strikes me as extremely weak for a Senate candidate. Note that the only relevant books were co-written.

[helgathewitch]

I think Caroline would be a great choice and would do a wonderful job. Watching how she has conducted herself through the years she would be a breath of fresh air. She is intelligent and knowledgable about many things. It is not just the Kennedy name that brings her to this but I'm sure having the Kennedy connections would only enhance her job.
She is a great role model and well versed unlike Ms Palin!

[glorialovelace]

As ignorant and unqualified as YOU may think Sarah Palin is, she was chosen by the people of Alaska to lead them, based on her performance as Mayor of Wasilla -- an office to which she was also elected. She didn't have her uncle make arm-twisting phone calls so she would be handed either job.

[rbenjamin]

damn straight gloria. Sarah made her own arm-twisting phone calls!

[citizensrus]

A vacant seat will be filled until there is a special election? Is this how New York fills a Senate vacancy..o­r would the governor's appointment be until Senator Clinton's term would have expired?

[engineer68]

There needs to be a special election in 2010, and then the seat will be filled in a regular election because Sen. Clinton term would have ended in 2012

[jhw22]

I have been annoyed by the questions of her experience as well. Anyone who mocks her as a name or a socialite has been lazy and just hasn't read about her. She is an attorney, an author, sits on boards of foundations, has written books and has served her community gracefully. People who haven't paid more attention to her shouldn't be qualified to talk about her qualifications.

Jennifer

[engineer68]

But what does she know about he entire State of New York? It is a large State with 62 Counties. She probably only knows about the five Counties that make up NYC. This is what concerns me. I live in Monroe County. Has she ever been here? Schumer and Clinton are here quite often, Moynihan hardly ever. I think she may be to much like Moynihan.

[glorialovelace]

Moynihan had a great personality and was a remarkable public speaker -- in addition to his accomplishments as a diplomat, and as a scholar and teacher. Caroline Kennedy is nothing at all like him.

Moynihan -- by the way -- lived most of the time on his farm in Delaware County NY, which is nearer to Buffalo than it is to New York City.

[jhw22]

I wouldn't know where CK has been in NY -- I haven't been stalking her. But I did vote for Barack Obama to be my President even though he never lived in my state -- yet Bush is from my state and look what good that did me.

Jennifer

[glorialovelace]

She's not an attorney. An attorney is somebody who practices law. Caroline has never practiced law.

Why don't you look up the backgrounds of the other contenders, so you can see for yourself how woefully insufficient Caroline's experience is in comparison to theirs.

[jhw22]

The definition is debated amongst attorneys and lawyers. And do you know for a fact that CK has never represented any of her organizations in any legal proceedings? Simply drawing up contracts could designate her as either.

As for the other contenders and their experience I suggest you look at John McCain, Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden and Christopher Dodd's resumes and tell me how they compare to Obama's and then remind me who the President-elect is.

Jennifer

[JimR]

Oh please, it is a legitimate question. She has shown no interest in elected office up until this point and it quite reasonable to wonder whether it is simply her last name that even puts her name up for discussion.

[dajuice7]

I agree. I have no doubt that if this is really what she wanted, she would do fine. She is intelligent, thoughtful, and is legitimately concerned about the well-being of our nation. However, it is imperative of us to ask whether those seeking office (in this case an appointment, not by way of election - which makes it more important to ask) are truly ready, qualified, and have their constituency's best interests in mind. If we had vetted W much more closely in 2000, we'd be much better off today.

[SethBLiNK]

I agree with basic premise of this piece. Clearly, being a Senator is not a work-intensive job. Sens. Obama, Biden and McCain held their seats while they were clearly engaged in other activities. The only Senators who cast fewer votes than McCain during this period was the one who had a brain tumor and he didn't step down either.

If the President or a Governor is put under anasthesia for an apendectomy, there is a whole formal passage of power to the second in charge. But a Senator can be in the hospital for six months and nobody talks about replacing him.

So clearly, the United States Senate doesn't need every one of its members, though I'm sure that the people of the State of NY like knowing they have a full contingent qualified to represent them.

But can we leave sexism out of this one argument, please? Caroline Kennedy may be as qualified or even more qualified than her cousin Robert, Jr., but she has passionately pursued her privacy for many years and only this year has re-emerged as a public figure whereas Robert, Jr. has been in the public eye quite a bit. It's reasonable for most NYers to think of Robert, Jr. or Andrew Cuomo being on the short list before Caroline.

The notion of Deleware naming a placeholder for Joe Biden's seat until his son Beau returned from active duty was denounced by many too.

[hardybear]

If you are a woman with life experiences to back up the assertion that
no sexism whatsoever is involved in a scenario, it's your choice to
leave it out of the argument.

Others might find it worthwhile to look into the premise and Then make an
informed judgment.

[SethBLiNK]

I don't buy this argument, Hardy. You say that "others" (non-females) might find it worthwhile to look into the premise and then make an informed judgement. I start my comment by saying that I agree with with basic premise of this post.

My argument is that tagging this as sexism doesn't help advance any argument. And, I find the injection of sexism into so many political arguments to be distracting. If only women with life experiences are qualified to participate in a discussion, than I am being excluded from the discussion on a sexist basis. Nowhere in your comment do you address my argument, only my qualifications to make the argument..­. based on my gender.

One of the arguments in favor of Caroline Kennedy is that since we are losing one of only 16 females in the US Senate, it would be a good idea to replace Hillary with a female. I think this argument has merit... though it is sexist by definition.

It seems that the question of sexism has been injected into many political conversations in the past year, and while the discussion itself is good, it's important that we answer the questions we ask. When somebody asks, "who this be said about a man," and the response is, "it has been asked of a man, many times," then the argument is debunked.

[antaeus]

Isn't this a bit of a straw man? I hear mumbling about whether she has the appetite for the 2010 campaign, and I hear dissatisfaction with yet another nod towards dynastic government, but I don't hear anyone questioning whether she is a smart woman.

In fact, it is the legacy aspect of this appointment that is truly "shameful," to use your own word. Entrenched family power is the way towards even further decadence in our society. Weren't many of us sickened by the banana-republic quality of Bush, Jr.'s, presidency, even setting aside his personal lack of merit? CKS is smart and attractive and decent, but her appointment also represents a sick lust for a royal family--don't let anyone claim otherwise.

[americanboi]

This is odd, Caroline is by namesake, qualified to be a US Senator.

Who's next? Chelsea Clinton?

[LaurieR]

Where did the author make this assertion? Indeed, this assertion is made mainly by her detractors--most of whom don't know anything about her BEYOND her "namesake"--so they make their assumptions based on the only thing they know... as if their ignorance of something is how it should be judged by all.

[1099]

No - Biden's son is next when he gets back from Iraq.

Then Chelsea in about 15 years.

[LaurieR]

Thank you. I'm worn out from arguing these points in other threads, so just... thank you. Caroline, like her cousins Bobby and Kerry, is a hard-working, compassionate individual who has chosen to dedicate her life to public service instead of relaxing in the lap of luxury and trade on her family name like she easily could have done. She's a fine person who would make a fine senator, and this New Yorker would have been quite happy to see either her or Bobby get the job. If it "appears" to you that it's "just because of her last name," then you simply haven't done your homework on either her or her Kennedy contempora­ries... you're just making assumptions.

[ignorantwillyharper]

I'm not a Kennedy fan, but just how smart do you have to be, to be a senator in the US Senate?
Just step back and score the intellect of our current president. This guy never achived anything on his own. His Daddy paid his way thru college and also made big contributions to his universities for his passing "C" grades. Got him in the Air National Guard, which he didn't attend all that often. He went bust up in the oil business and his Daddy's friend bought him part of a baseball team, where his job was just attend the games. Because his Dad appointed and tilted the USSC, they put him in the oval office and we all can see where that little move got us.
Yeah, a two toed idiot can handle any job in government, so don't say she may not have the right stuff for the job.

[glorialovelace]

Do you know for a fact that Poppy Bush made any financial donations at all to the colleges where his children were educated?

[bogues]

All this talk about experience is getting alittle tiring. I have seen women take over their husbands senate seats upon their spouses death. Republican Sonny Bono comes to mind. I know there are others but I can't call their names at the moment. Mr. Bono's wife had absolutely no experience what so ever, as far as I know. I also know that George Bush had his family name and pretty much, nothing more when he ran for Governor of Texas. Mrs. Kennedy is a very well educated woman with accomplishments that are to be admired. Her civic conscience is also to be admired. She would be a remarkable addition to our political make-up.

[markg1956]

Anytime there's an empty New York Senate seat we should just rent it out at least the state can get some tax benifit. Has this seat been optioned out to just Kennedy's and Clintons or can anyone play?

[bronceye]

Think that a Senator needs to be anything extraordinary. Check out the the foghorns (both of them) from Alabama.

[zann]

You're perfectly right that there are plenty of idiots in congress who are just the public face for rich schemers.

What you don't get is the deep and essentially justified resentment people feel towards the rich. We're supposed to pretend like there's no class warfare, when its glaring out at us from behind every statistic, private plane, estate tax law etc, etc.

Caroline Kennedy seems like a good woman, and she'd be in the senate to fight for democratic principals. So I'd like to see her there. The least you can do is acknowledge that its her connections that put her in line for this seat, that raise her above women with similar or more striking accomplishments, and that it rouses class resentment, and that classs warfare creates more misery and injustice here more than in any other developed democracy.­.

[astroyo]

Did anyone hear her speech at the Convention? SNOOZER!!!!! She is a cure for the worst insomniac. She's lucky to be considered for the appointment because this is not a woman who could campaign! I love the Kennedys but, sorry, this socialite needs to stay in the Hamptons where she has been secluded all her adult life.

[bogues]

Obviously you have not bothered to learn about Mrs. Kennedy Schlossberg's education and back ground. If you had, you would not call her a socialite!

[glorialovelace]

She is exactly and precisely a socialite -- and nothing more.

[Merckx]

You mean compared to the great orator George W. Bush?

[LaurieR]

Caroline Kennedy, a "socialite who's been secluded in the Hamptons all her adult life"?! LOL, seriously.­.. talk about a cliche that couldn't be further off the mark!! HAHAHAHA I don't even know where to start on that one, except... HAHAHAHAHA!! No, I can't. I'm sorry. It's just wrong on too many levels to tackle. It's like the Mt. Everest of wrong.

[glorialovelace]

What do you think the definition of a "socialite" is? Many socialites have Ivy-league educations, and they spend their spare time -- and many of them have a great deal of that -- serving on boards of museums, libraries and schools.

You might be interested to know that if you don't have a famous name or great wealth that you're willing to part with, many of these so-called public spirited boards won't have anything to do with you. There is no snobbier place in the world than a museum.

If you want to know more about who socialites are and what they do, read one of Cleveland Amory's books on the subject. You'll see that the descriptor "socialite" fits Caroline Kennedy perfectly.