maybe i should keep my mouth shut about this. i'm not a new yorker and actually i'm not even a citizen so what the hell do i know.
i did find, though, that some people are interested in an outsider's view so i'm going to throw in my 2 cents just in case.
below the fold there lies yet another Caroline Kennedy-themed diary
i thought i'd first give you a little background about me: i come from a relatively prominent family with some connections, and yet my parents always insisted that i start everything from scratch and build my life and my career completely independent of them. actually, they always told me that the standards and the harshness of self-examination should be much more intense in my case because there might be a soupcon that my achievements were helped by my last name. In other words, i was always supposed to be twice as good because of my heritage. I sometimes resented that, but with age came wisdom and now I understand why they chose to do it this way. But maybe it makes me biased in my judgments as I expect the same kind of attitude from other people.
Caroline Kennedy will probably be the next senator from New York. Nothing wrong with that. She will probably deliver good votes and we all know that the grunt work of legislating is actually done by the representatives' and senators' staff and aides. It's probably not bad to have a Kennedy in the Senate for the next couple of decades, it makes for good symbolic value and they come with a solid tradition of service. Not sure how she'll manage to keep her integrity and graciously navigate the political games - not sure, for example, how she would have voted on the Lieberman chairmanship issue? I mean, does she have the kind of single mindedness and spine to stand up on principle or is she going to buy into the exclusive-club attitude and protect other senators just because they're senators, applaud an exiting Ted Stevens just because she's one of them? Not sure. Time will tell I guess.
I don't have a problem with her being inexperienced in the legislative work or not having ever held a full time job. It's not her fault that she was born rich.
the only thing I do have a problem with is probably immaterial and won't make a difference in the selection process. I have a problem with her attitude. If I discovered at 51 that I am actually really interested in something I've never done before - painting, cooking or politics - I would think really hard about all the things I'd need to do in order to be good at it.I am pretty sure I'd have the humility to know that there's a learning curve involved, no matter how gifted I personally am. And I wouldn't think about bypassing the unpleasantness.
It so happens that I am a filmmaker. When I direct a film I have to earn the respect of my crew. You know, everybody wants to direct. Some get to do it just because they have the money to pay for it - kind of like throwing themselves a really cool birthday party. You can't blame them, directing gives you such a high, it's kind of hard to pass on the opportunity. I went to an elite film school (which I paid for with my own hard-earned money, no parental contributions) where we all learned to edit and operate camera and set up lights, and my multi-millionaire classmates came and labored thanklessly on my film set, painting walls and pushing the dolly, because if you really want to be a filmmaker you have to know what this is all about. You have to get your hands really dirty, because that's the only way you can learn to respect the work of people that you contend you want to order around as a director. This is what leadership is about. You can of course just pay your way through. But film crews have a way of making their leaders feel that they're not getting their money's worth if they're not good leaders. Even if you do manage to bypass the ladder-climbing, you still have to earn it somehow, work twice as hard to prove the cast and crew that you're not a hack.
This is what i don't like about Ms. Kennedy's way to go about her desire to start a career in politics. It looks to me that she doesn't have any humility about it. I understand that this is going to be an appointed position and she doesn't HAVE to prove herself to anybody but the governor. But it would be nice. Even if her electorate is made up of Gov. Paterson only, it would be nice if she showed a bit of awareness abot her unique position of political novice who is suddenly asking to be considered for one of the highest offices in the land. As it is, it seems to me that she's counting on some factors (money, fundraising ability, family heritage, her only political stance ever being the endorsement of the now-President Elect and the serendipitous vacating of a NY Senate seat) having a combined strength that will allow her to bypass the dirty work - like selling herself to voters, kissing babies and facing the press, things that she doesn't particularly seem to enjoy.
I am just putting myself in the shoes of somebody who really bought into the whole blah blah about starting by running for shool board or county commissioner, earning people's respect and climbing the ladder. I think the way Carioline Kennedy is going about this appointment is a slap in the face of these people. You know, the best feeling I had was when I saw pictures of Barack canvassing an Ohio neighborhood just like I had canvassed a Nevada neighborhood for him. I knew he hadn't been afraid to do the work himself and all I was doing was to give him a hand. Like in any profession, doing the dirty work is not some kind of self-punishment due-paying. It's the way to test yourself, your own commitment, your own devotion, your own suitability to do the job. It's about honesty, because "the job" is never just the glamour part. It always includes - indeed is mostly made up of - the unpleasant parts. Again, everybody wants to direct and collect awards - the reason why not everybody does it's because getting to that glamour phase presupposes a shitload of hard work, frustration and suffering.
I just have to wonder: how come Ms. Kennedy didn't want to become a politician when this country was actually going through really hard times and could have used another voice speaking publicly? The fact that she discovered her taste for politics by campaigning for Barack Obama makes me slightly suspicious. It's very fulfilling to tour the country speaking to pumped-up crowds in support of an inspirational candidate who is cruising to victory. It's kind of like getting to go to the Oscar ceremony as an invited guest of one of the nominees - hell yeah, that will open your appetite to become a filmmaker! It's pretty neat to get to be part of this! But what we forget is that Barack Obama got to be adored by millions of people because 10 years ago he was walking the streets of South Chicago talking up the votes of people that I'm not sure Caroline Kennedy knows exist (fundraising for the NY schools doesn't count - even socialites fundraise for charity, it's part of their "job" description. Let's be clear about this, Caroline fundraising is not like you and me fundraising for our local school. At the level she's playing, fundraising means attending parties and talking up millionaires. I'm not saying it's easy, just completely different than calling strangers asking for votes). To sum it up, I'm a little worried that she would be able to actually do a politician's work since her inciting reason was jumping on the inspiration-victory bandwagon. I'm not sure that's the right reason to get into it - just like wanting to win an Oscar isn't, in my humble opinion, the right reason to get into filmmaking.
Yes, eventually she will have to do some dirty work in 2010 and 2012 even if she gets appointed now. Maybe (she would have to be pretty catastrophic in the Senate to have other Democrates DARE to primary her) I wish that instead of all these gracious distant smiles and general pre-written statements she would come out and collide with the electorate and the press and the public opinion. Not because she NEEDS to (she doesn't, as this is an appointed position). But because personally I think it's the appropriate thing to do for somebody who claims to become a representative of the people. Because the standards for somebody with her name and and her fortune should be HIGHER than anybody else's, and she has to prove herself harder. Because doing just about the minimum necessary to obtain the position shows a spoiled, yes, princess mentality. I mean, we did expect Sarah Palin to audition for the job and face the press - although she would have probably gotten more votes if she didn't.
But that's just what I think. Worse come to worst, she'll just be ANOTHER US senator who thinks she's entitled to be there.