I'll start with full disclosure: I do not live in New York, and I don't get a vote. Barring the completely unforeseeable, like me moving east of the Mississippi River, I never will get a vote.
Full disclosure part two: I have never even met anyone from the Kennedy family, specifically I have never met Caroline Kennedy, but I would like to. Like many others, I am fascinated by the Kennedy family, I would like to see them be successful, and the thought of a Kennedy dynasty does not bother me, especially since I believe that there is a basis in meritocracy for Caroline Kennedy's appointment to the US Senate.
Given that US Senators seem more like national candidates than local, state candidates, given the scope of what happens to us all when one of them is off in the weeds (think Lieberman), I think it's fair for everyone to think about, and have an opinion about, who might become a US Senator. This is my view.
On January 27, 2008 Caroline Kennedy published her endorsement of Barack Obama for President. In her endorsement, she said:
My reasons are patriotic, political and personal, and the three are intertwined.
I firmly believe that Caroline's reasons in seeking the job of US Senator to replace Hillary Clinton contains the same three elements, and like her endorsement of Barack Obama, the three are still intertwined.
Caroline Kennedy went on to campaign for Obama for much of the remaining Democratic primary. She headed up his search for a vice presidential pick, even as some pushed her name as the candidate. This history is all known. What may not be so well known is what happened to Caroline in the process. Did she get a taste of politics? Did she like the reception she got by the cheering thousands in rallys? Was it all painful for Caroline, who had hidden from the cameras for decades or was it a mixed bag?
Is it so hard to imagine Caroline Kennedy taking the initial risks she took out of some sense of duty? Coming out in public in January of '08 saying that she wanted Barack Obama to be President because he was "for the first time" able to inspire her as her father had, had to involve some serious assessment of risk for her. At that time, it was far from certain that Obama would make it beyond the primaries. One could argue that Caroline put whatever notions she had of ever entering politics at risk by that endorsement. We see here a profile in courage. This was the daughter of the great, legendary John F. Kennedy talking. Her every word was going to be scrutinized. Her motives would be discussed for days or weeks. She was speaking out for the opponent of her state's US Senator, and a Clinton at that. Those of us who have never lived her life might find it difficult to see this as political risk-taking, but that's a failure to see ourselves in her shoes and maybe a failure to see political risk for what it really is for those who have political opportunity by DNA.
As Caroline began to campaign for Obama, it was easy to see her stage discomfort in those early rallies. It was visibly difficult stuff she was doing. She exited decades of solitude and privacy and came on stage to screaming thousands, overnight, no time for preparation, no time to practice making speeches at the Rotary Club. But she did it anyway.
Later, when she took on the head of Obama's search committee for his VP pick, she was able to move back into her more comfortable role of behind-the-scenes player.
But the campaign rallies and the search committee role were two very different activities that had one thing in common: Caroline Kennedy defending Barack Obama. She had his back. She knew at every step what a mistake could mean to a candidate who would remain the underdog for much of the primary race and even in the general election, especially in the MSM view of the race. I believe that after months of playing defense for Obama, this became like motherhood to Caroline; she was invested in his success. It became personal. She had put it out there that he was going to be a President like her father, and she did all she could to make it so. Is it such a stretch to see this extended to Barack Obama, the President, and not just Barack Obama, the candidate? It would be easy to see that she would want her role in his agenda to continue, and the next most obvious place she could be effective in this is in the US Senate.
In her 2008 endorsement of Obama for President, Caroline says:
I have never had a president who inspired me the way people tell me that my father inspired them.
Think about this for a minute. "Never" is a strong word to use. She didn't pick "rarely", or "few", she says "Never." She closes with this:
But for the first time, I believe I have found the man who could be that president — not just for me, but for a new generation of Americans.
When people are inspired, they begin to think about what's next, what can I do, what are my assets, how can I use those assets to make a difference. If your last name is Kennedy, it's one of your assets. You can choose to use it, or not use it, but it's a choice you have to make every day.
Many would like to know where Caroline's been, why wasn't she out there slogging against the right-wing nutjobs like the rest of us, and hell, why didn't she vote all the time? Only she can answer that, but maybe the answer's in her statement about being inspired. I know lots of Democrats that didn't do a thing in the 2004 elections, purely out of lack of inspiration. John Kerry just didn't do it for them. For me, the fear of what would happen to the country (and did, in spades) was inspiration enough to get out there and work my tail off for the Democratic ticket. Not so for others. Does that ban them from seeking public office for life? Would it, if her last name happened to be Kennedy? Some say yes, some say maybe not. I say that once the bus got driven into the ditch, at least now she's willing (inspired) to come out and do all she can to get the thing back on the road. We could use all the help we can get, especially given the persistent Republican-lite tilt of the 111th Congress.
The public has a very different view of Caroline's "candidacy" for the US Senate, but for many, it could be argued it is no less personal or emotional than Caroline's own view. That it is emotional and personal can be seen clearly in some of the blog posts and comments and even some MSM articles about Caroline's possible appointment by Governor Patterson, most of them thinly disguised as an argument for meritocracy and against dynasty.
From the critics, most seem to argue that Caroline Kennedy is not qualified to be a Senator. Can you say lawyer, author, philanthropist, mother? Is being qualified to be a Senator different in New York than anywhere else? The only qualification she doesn't have is "elected", but other than that, she's just as qualified, if not more so, than many other sitting members. How is she less qualified than the other possible appointees? Does she have to be more qualified than other possible appointees because she is a Kennedy? What is the argument for more stringent qualification tests to be in the Senate if your family was also there, as opposed to anyone else? Yes, I do know "elected" is a big deal, but I also know that we're talking about a two year appointment here, not a six-year or life appointment.
Let's start the argument in favor of Caroline Kennedy to be in the US Senate with the premise that she likely would not have supported Barack Obama for President if he had supported the war in Iraq. That is to say, she opposed the war in Iraq, supported by her recent statements:
"Caroline opposed the war in Iraq from the beginning," Friedman said. "She supports President-elect Obama's plan to work with our military leaders to begin a responsible withdrawal."
With the backdrop of demonstrated, very public political courage, how different might things have been if a Senator from New York had opposed the war in Iraq, rather than voting with the rest of the quake-kneed, run-for-cover types the Democrats were fielding at the time? The "experienced" Senator from New York supported the war when it looked necessary to do so for political expedience.
More "experienced" Senators, including those from New York, supported one or more of the right-wing nutballs that were stuffed into the Supreme Court, based solely on their ideology.
We could go on and on, detailing weak Democratic support for Republican destruction.
Suffice it to say, the "experienced" vote has been destroying this country. In part, that's what the 2008 election, especially the Democratic primary, was about.
The generation gap is starting to show, too, in the US Senate, never more so than now that Barack Obama is our nation's President-elect. Obama's generation, and mine (not quite a year separates my age from his) doesn't see things the same way previous generations do. This generation is much less about hard political lines than earlier generations. It is also much less about political litmus tests, less about political expediency, than its forebears. Anyone watching Obama's campaign can see that is is much more about taking a stand where you must (remember the Race Speech in Philadelphia), agreeing with others where possible, and side-lining issues where no agreement is in sight.
Caroline Kennedy is of this new generation. For this reason, it is inconceivable that she would be a Senator in Lieberman's image, despite the fact that she has hired his operatives. This generation doesn't do belief by association. Her views, already bound to be generationally different, have been influenced by her kids and the kids she worked with:
I have spent the past five years working in the New York City public schools and have three teenage children of my own. There is a generation coming of age that is hopeful, hard-working, innovative and imaginative.
Perhaps this is the re-awakening of JFK's generation, the generation that saw its hopes and aspirations for change snuffed by assassination, the generation side-lined by the older generation, the one that clearly thought the adults should stay in charge for a few more decades.
Perhaps when President-elect Obama says, "This is our time", Caroline Kennedy hears this as a call to re-light the flame so briefly carried by John F. Kennedy all those years ago, the flame she sees burning in the care of Barack Obama. Perhaps she feels like she owns that flame, or some part of it, and she envisions seeing it burn with the brightness that only a Kennedy can bring.
Let's not forget, when the meritocracy arguments get made in front-page posts here, and elsewhere, what the impact was when Caroline Kennedy endorsed Barack Obama. Could it be that she gave Obama the boost he needed, at the right time in history, to become our President-elect? Now that we've won, is it so easy to say, ah, we had it in the bag the whole time, Caroline didn't add so much....? In January of 2008, nothing seemed so certain for Democrats, nothing seemed certain at all for Obama fans, and we must not forget what it felt like. We must not forget the euphoria her endorsement created in so many Obama supporters. She took a huge risk, put it all on the line for an improbable candidate that she believed in, and to me, this is evidence that we can set aside any doubts about her, give her the space she needs to define herself, her way, in this appointment process, and see what kind of person she is and what kind of Senator she might be. If Obama becomes the great president we feel he will become, and must become if we are to have any future at all, then we owe a great debt of gratitude to Caroline Kennedy for the assist in making this possible.
Caroline Kennedy for US Senate