IMO, she's entitled to become a Senator.

How does this disqualify her, whinymitter?

tchamber: How does this disqualify her, whinymitter?

Doesn't that fact that she has far less experience than Palin give you any pause? If she wasn't a Kennedy would you endorse her?

/not subby

Snowflake Tubbybottom: tchamber: How does this disqualify her, whinymitter?

Doesn't that fact that she has far less experience than Palin give you any pause? If she wasn't a Kennedy would you endorse her?

/not subby

She isn't running for VP, she's expressed interest in a Senate seat, which she will have to compete for in elections in 2 years time. She will NOT be a heartbeat away from the Presidency, and she will be the JUNIOR Senator from NY.

Also, suggesting that she is somehow less qualified than Howdydoody Palin is a farking joke.

Snowflake Tubbybottom: Doesn't that fact that she has far less experience than Palin give you any pause? If she wasn't a Kennedy would you endorse her?

Given her background and education, I'd say she is miles ahead of where Palin is.

Too bad they couldn't give it to Michael Moore or someone like that instead, and make submitter lie on the ground so that MM could step on him during an elaborate and unbelievably expensive coronation process.

Oh, and for the record, I'm not endorsing her, I'm just pissed at the sheer hypocracy here. If she wasn't a Kennedy and was a man, would all this whining about her qualifications be happening? Or is she just not qualified because she doesn't read "all the newspapers"?

Lord knows Republicans never get an undeserved job just because of their family name. Maybe some free shoes...

Am I the only one who didn't think of Sarah Palin when reading the headline?

/y'all are obsessed
//I like the headline
///palin (it's the new penis)

Total farking bullshiat she is even considered for this position. It is solely based on her inheritance of a bloodline and nothing else. We fought a war years ago over stupid crap like this.

tchamber: Snowflake Tubbybottom: tchamber: How does this disqualify her, whinymitter?

Doesn't that fact that she has far less experience than Palin give you any pause? If she wasn't a Kennedy would you endorse her?

/not subby

She isn't running for VP, she's expressed interest in a Senate seat, which she will have to compete for in elections in 2 years time. She will NOT be a heartbeat away from the Presidency, and she will be the JUNIOR Senator from NY.

Also, suggesting that she is somehow less qualified than Howdydoody Palin is a farking joke.

Given that incumbents have a very high re-election percentage I'd say that just maybe you should take a less cavalier approach to selecting a senator, junior having nothing to do with it. Also given that a republican winning the seat is even far less likely to happen maybe, just maybe, the governor should consider someone actually highly qualified for the job.

Without the Kennedy name would she even be considered?

/nice try on the red herring though

tchamber: If she wasn't a Kennedy and was a man, would all this whining about her qualifications be happening?

It would be whining about something else instead. These "concerns" are brought to us by the same folks who cry wolf every 6 minutes every day. Personally, I'd even like to agree with them on this one... but the whole wolf thing takes precedence.

sullyman: Total farking bullshiat she is even considered for this position. It is solely based on her inheritance of a bloodline and nothing else. We fought a war years ago over stupid crap like this.

This is more or less my opinion. The only reason she's even really being considered is because she's a Kennedy. I'm completely in favor of a special election to fill the seat.

Article actually shows that she mostly does vote (can name only ONE vote for Senator that she missed--1994, when Daniel Patrick Moynihan was reelected for a third term; I'm sure he was quaking in his boots about whether Caroline Kennedy would turn out!). Article also lists four primary elections where she failed to vote and says that these are particularly important because NY leans Democratic--implying that the primary is the moment where the real choice is made because the election winner is a foregone conclusion. And then goes on to add that in three of the four cases the election was won by a Republican.

Article is silly.

In other news: doesn't anyone find it a bit odd that your voting records are public knowledge? Shouldn't a secret ballot be more, well, secret?

Skail: sullyman: Total farking bullshiat she is even considered for this position. It is solely based on her inheritance of a bloodline and nothing else. We fought a war years ago over stupid crap like this.

This is more or less my opinion. The only reason she's even really being considered is because she's a Kennedy. I'm completely in favor of a special election to fill the seat.

What a resounding waste of money that would be, when the seat will be up for re-election in two years anyway.

I'm more bothered by the fact that nearly everyone in the Kennedy family assumes that last name, even if it was their mother's maiden name.

That said, my cousin Jim looks like a Kennedy. I don't know why.

Snot Monster from Outer Space: In other news: doesn't anyone find it a bit odd that your voting records are public knowledge? Shouldn't a secret ballot be more, well, secret?

Who you vote for is private. Whether you voted is public. Sort of has to be unless you want them to destroy the voting rolls.

Snowflake Tubbybottom: tchamber: How does this disqualify her, whinymitter?

Doesn't that fact that she has far less experience than Palin give you any pause? If she wasn't a Kennedy would you endorse her?

/not subby

If I ask Caroline to name a newspaper, and she has an answer, she is far more qualified then Palin. The experience of an idiot means nothing.

DamnYankees: Snot Monster from Outer Space: In other news: doesn't anyone find it a bit odd that your voting records are public knowledge? Shouldn't a secret ballot be more, well, secret?

Who you vote for is private. Whether you voted is public. Sort of has to be unless you want them to destroy the voting rolls.

Obviously who you vote for is private. I don't quite see why it has to be public knowledge who voted, though. Wouldn't it be sufficient that each individual should be able to check that no one voted in their name? Why should I be able to check whether or not my neighbor voted, say?

Is this info public knowledge in any other country? Non-USian Farkers?

vartian: If I ask Caroline to name a newspaper, and she has an answer, she is far more qualified then Palin. The experience of an idiot means nothing.

Because that's exactly what happened. Exactly.

So should we conclude that merely naming a newspaper somehow makes you qualified or just more qualified than a governor and former mayor?

On another topic: I love how Republicans have gone from "Of course Palin has more than enough experience to be President of the United States!" to "Anyone with less experience than Palin clearly does not even have sufficient experience to be a Senator!" Meaning, presumably, that Palin just, maybe has enough experience to be a Senator.

VP though? Are you kidding us?

(Prepare for the standards to be revised again in 2012).

Subby, don't you mean Caroline HUSSEIN!!!!1111 Schlossberg?

Snowflake Tubbybottom: So should we conclude that merely naming a newspaper somehow makes you qualified or just more qualified than a governor and former mayor?

More qualified than someone who took more than half a decade to graduate with a degree in sports journalism.

Snowflake Tubbybottom: Because that's exactly what happened. Exactly.

What part of that gut-wrenching moment did he leave out or distort?

Snot Monster from Outer Space: Obviously who you vote for is private. I don't quite see why it has to be public knowledge who voted, though. Wouldn't it be sufficient that each individual should be able to check that no one voted in their name? Why should I be able to check whether or not my neighbor voted, say?

Is this info public knowledge in any other country? Non-USian Farkers?

My thinking would be that since anyone would be allowed to simply sit by the polling place and write down who came in to vote, they might as well make it public. Anything which a private citizen can catalogue might as well be.

DamnYankees: Snot Monster from Outer Space: Obviously who you vote for is private. I don't quite see why it has to be public knowledge who voted, though. Wouldn't it be sufficient that each individual should be able to check that no one voted in their name? Why should I be able to check whether or not my neighbor voted, say?

Is this info public knowledge in any other country? Non-USian Farkers?

My thinking would be that since anyone would be allowed to simply sit by the polling place and write down who came in to vote, they might as well make it public. Anything which a private citizen can catalogue might as well be.

I could sit in the doctor's waiting room and write down the names of all the people who came in (of those, at least, that I can identify). That doesn't mean the doctor should release that info.

Wikipedia:

Article I, Section 3 of the Constitution sets three qualifications for senators: 1) each senator must be at least 30 years old, 2) must have been a citizen of the United States for at least the past nine years, and 3) must be (at the time of the election) an inhabitant of the state they seek to represent.

End of discussion.

Unless, of course, you want to discuss the qualifications of Ronald Reagan, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Sonny Bono, Sarah Palin, etc. etc.

Snot Monster from Outer Space: I could sit in the doctor's waiting room and write down the names of all the people who came in (of those, at least, that I can identify). That doesn't mean the doctor should release that info.

The doctor isn't the government.

DamnYankees: Snot Monster from Outer Space: I could sit in the doctor's waiting room and write down the names of all the people who came in (of those, at least, that I can identify). That doesn't mean the doctor should release that info.

The doctor isn't the government.

And a fish is not a hamster. So?

Snot Monster from Outer Space: DamnYankees: Snot Monster from Outer Space: I could sit in the doctor's waiting room and write down the names of all the people who came in (of those, at least, that I can identify). That doesn't mean the doctor should release that info.

The doctor isn't the government.

And a fish is not a hamster. So?

Gah! Missed the PERFECT opportunity for a "Dammit, Jim..." joke, didn't I?

Snot Monster from Outer Space: And a fish is not a hamster. So?

Freedom of information. Citizens have a right to know what the government knows unless its classified. We don't have the right to know what other citizens know.

Snowflake Tubbybottom: vartian: If I ask Caroline to name a newspaper, and she has an answer, she is far more qualified then Palin. The experience of an idiot means nothing.

Because that's exactly what happened. Exactly.

So should we conclude that merely naming a newspaper somehow makes you qualified or just more qualified than a governor and former mayor?

I think being able to name a newspaper you read, when asked, makes you qualified to not be a complete 'tard.

DamnYankees: Snot Monster from Outer Space: And a fish is not a hamster. So?

Freedom of information. Citizens have a right to know what the government knows unless its classified. We don't have the right to know what other citizens know.

But that's just circular. "Shouldn't this information that the Government knows be of the sort that the Government keeps secret"? "No, because the Government must share all information, except that which it keeps secret."

The govt. has access to all kinds of personal data that isn't made public. Tax returns, for example. The question I'm asking is why the fact that you did or did not vote not treated like your tax return? Why is it anybody's business but your own?

Snot Monster from Outer Space: But that's just circular. "Shouldn't this information that the Government knows be of the sort that the Government keeps secret"? "No, because the Government must share all information, except that which it keeps secret."

It's not circular because I haven't given any parameters for when the government should keep something secret. I think anything that the government knows which a private citizen could also know if he simply bothered to do it (like sit outside a polling place) should be public information.

Snot Monster from Outer Space: The govt. has access to all kinds of personal data that isn't made public. Tax returns, for example. The question I'm asking is why the fact that you did or did not vote not treated like your tax return? Why is it anybody's business but your own?

Because on a tax return there's no way a private citizen could know about it without breaking your seal of privacy. Anyone can find out if you voted without violating your privacy at all by just watching you while standing in the street.

She may well be qualified. I don't know. It would be interesting to know who brought her name into consideration and what their recommendation was based on. Surely it couldn't have been that she's JFK's daughter. Could it?

New York, you'll get what you deserve.

/proactive involvement in your government is a good thing

DamnYankees: Snot Monster from Outer Space: But that's just circular. "Shouldn't this information that the Government knows be of the sort that the Government keeps secret"? "No, because the Government must share all information, except that which it keeps secret."

It's not circular because I haven't given any parameters for when the government should keep something secret. I think anything that the government knows which a private citizen could also know if he simply bothered to do it (like sit outside a polling place) should be public information.

Snot Monster from Outer Space: The govt. has access to all kinds of personal data that isn't made public. Tax returns, for example. The question I'm asking is why the fact that you did or did not vote not treated like your tax return? Why is it anybody's business but your own?

Because on a tax return there's no way a private citizen could know about it without breaking your seal of privacy. Anyone can find out if you voted without violating your privacy at all by just watching you while standing in the street.

And if I mail my ballot?

Just don't put her in charge of operating *ANY* vehicle and things will be fine.

Snot Monster from Outer Space: And if I mail my ballot?

Interesting point. Maybe you're right.

Klingon Penis: Wikipedia:

Article I, Section 3 of the Constitution sets three qualifications for senators: 1) each senator must be at least 30 years old, 2) must have been a citizen of the United States for at least the past nine years, and 3) must be (at the time of the election) an inhabitant of the state they seek to represent.

End of discussion.

Unless, of course, you want to discuss the qualifications of Ronald Reagan, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Sonny Bono, Sarah Palin, etc. etc.



Well, she does meet the Constitutional requirements, but then so does a 30 year old crackhead living on the streets of Manhattan. Somehow I don't think Willy the wino is going to get the appointment, though.

As far as the other people you named, all 4 have a qualification that Kennedy doesn't: they were elected. If she really thinks she wants to be a Senator, let her run for office instead of expecting it to be handed to her.


From her bio on Wikipedia:

Kennedy "considered becoming a photojournalist (her mother's original career) but soon realized she could never make her living observing other people because they were too busy watching her."[12] She worked as a photographer's assistant at the Winter Olympics in Innsbruck, Austria.[12] In 1977, she became an intern at the New York Daily News, where according to People Magazine, "she sat on a bench alone for two hours the first day before other employees even said hello to her." According to former News reporter Richard Licata, "Everyone was too scared."[12]

Subsequently, she began work as a research assistant in the film and TV department of the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York in 1980, where she met her future husband, exhibit designer Edwin Schlossberg.[10]

TRANSLATION: Her family connections got her cushy do-nothing jobs.


Professional life

Kennedy is an attorney, writer, editor and serves on the boards of numerous non-profit organizations.

TRANSLATION: She has dabbled in several different things

Law and politics

Kennedy is a member of the New York and Washington, D.C. bar associations. She is also a member of the boards of directors of the Commission on Presidential Debates and the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund.


TRANSLATION: The Kennedy name and fortune put her on some boards. I will give her credit for actually passing the bar, but has she ever, you know, practiced law?


Kennedy family legacy

Kennedy and other members of her family created the Profiles in Courage Award in 1989. The award is given to a public official or officials at the federal, state or local level whose actions best demonstrate the qualities of politically courageous leadership in the spirit of John F. Kennedy's book, Profiles in Courage.[14] In addition, Kennedy is currently president of the Kennedy Library Foundation.[13] She is also an adviser to the Harvard Institute of Politics, a living memorial to her father. Kennedy has represented her family at the funeral services of former Presidents Ronald Reagan in 2004 and Gerald Ford in 2007, and at the funeral service of former First Lady Lady Bird Johnson in 2007. She also represented her family at the dedication of the William J. Clinton Presidential Center and Park in Little Rock, Arkansas in November 2004.


TRANSLATION: She sits on a lot of boards because of her lineage, and has attended state functions. She is after all, American Royalty.


From 2002 through 2004 Kennedy worked as director of the Office of Strategic Partnerships for the the New York City Department of Education. The three-day-a week job paid her a salary of $1 and had the goal of raising private money for the New York City public schools.[15] In her capacity, she helped raise more than $65 million for the city's public schools.[16][13]

TRANSLATION: She attends parties and asks other rich people for charitable contributions.

She currently serves as one of two vice chairs of the board of directors of The Fund for Public Schools, a public-private partnership founded in 2002 to attract private funding for public schools in New York City.[17] She has also served on the board of trustees of Concord Academy, which she attended as a child.[11]

TRANSLATION: More ceremonial positions from organizations that want the name "Kennedy" on the letterhead.

Works published

Kennedy and Ellen Alderman have written two books together on civil liberties:

* In Our Defense: The Bill of Rights In Action (1991)[31]
* The Right to Privacy (1995)[31]

TRANSLATION: Ghost writer

On her own, she has edited these New York Times best-selling volumes:

* The Best-Loved Poems of Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis (2001)[31]
* Profiles in Courage for Our Time (2002)[31]
* A Patriot's Handbook (2003)[31]
* A Family of Poems: My Favorite Poetry for Children (2005)[31]

She is also the author of A Family Christmas a collection of poems, prose and personal notes from her family history.

TRANSLATION: She pulled together poems and essays others have written, and gotten them published because she is a Kennedy.

I'm not saying she's a bad person, or that she might not, in time, make a fairly good senator. But it's pretty clear that she has no qualification at this time other than being born into her family.

sullyman: Total farking bullshiat she is even considered for this position. It is solely based on her inheritance of a bloodline and nothing else. We fought a war years ago over stupid crap like this.

You're about 200 years too late to be so goddamn butthurt over this. Remember John Adams & John Quincy Adams?

/If you're going to make this argument, then perhaps it helps to remember grade school history.

I have no doubts that she's intelligent and well-educated. Does that mean she is the best pick for Senator? No.

I had really no opinion about her until I saw her on Meet the Press. She lead the team that interviewed those on Obama's VP short list. I was VERY impressed with what she said about how she went about doing that, and how she said, forcefully, to Brokaw on many occasions "That's private - I won't answer it," or "Obama/Biden/whoever consider that personal, so don't ask." It showed a strength of character, I think - no tap-dancing around the question, just a simple "I won't answer that...move on."

That impressed the hell out of me. Good Senator? I don't know, but I like her.

Caroline Kennedy didn't take her husband's name when she married. She's not Caroline Kennedy Shlossberg or Caroline Shlossberg. She's Caroline Kennedy.

A big deal? Not really. Just another example of the Subby's ignorance.

How convenient that the whore Caroline Shlossberg , the name she's been referred by for DECADES, now goes only by Kennedy.

F**kin Cheapass entitled princess WHORE!

There is a delectable bouquet of freep in this whine.

If she doesn't have time to vote as a citizen then she doesn't have time to vote as a senator.

tchamber: How does this disqualify her, whinymitter?

There's several reasons why she shouldn't be senator.
NY (both the state and the city) are facing the greatest financial crisis since the 1970's. And if you look at how the Neo-Confederates are stabbing the Midwest in the back over the Detroit Bailout, NY needs somebody who'll be able to work the legislative process to the greatest advantage. She has no experience in any legislative body.

Hillary Clinton biatch slapped her GOP rival for re-election because she was able to deliver for Upstate NY, (she won 58 out of 62 counties and 67% of the overall vote).

And sucking Sharpton's dick will get you real far up in Tawana Brawley land, you cheap slut.

People are only upset about her because her last name is Kennedy. If her last name was Bayh or Biden we wouldn't be having this discussion.

She has a JD and works as a director for the advocacy group which argued Brown vs. the Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas; Loving v. Virginia; and Gratz v. Bollinger. She's as qualified as Edwards was when he became a senator.

Now, what's with the faux outrage? Caroline Kennedy is really when we're going to get upset about lineage? When the governor of New York, whose father was Sec. State of NY (after he left the state senate seat his son picked up) is going to make an appointment to replace the wife of a former president and he has to choose between the son of a former governor and the niece of a former senator?

Nepotism has been the name of the game for a while. Why is suddenly everyone outraged over it? You don't like the appointment then don't vote for Patterson in '10 and vote against Kennedy in the primary. When you keep electing the kids of politicians, don't be upset when they appoint the kids of politicians.

You guys. It is Caroline Kennedy now. You must have missed the memo.

Would Dubya have been President without his father? Would Jeb have been governor of Florida without his father? Would Hillary Clinton have been Senator with a strong presidential bid without her husband? Would Ron and Michael Reagan been political consultants and talk show hosts without their father? Would John Quincy Adams have been president without his grandad? Would FDR have been president without the same surname as a previous president? Would Jesse Jackson Jr. be a congressman without his Dad? Would Franklin Graham be a prominent world preacher without his Dad? Would Peyton and Eli Manning be NFL stars if their Dad wasn't an NFL player? Do I need to go on?