Caroline Kennedy, a woman who has spent her entire life avoiding politics, has thrown her hat into the ring for Hillary Clinton's Senate seat.
But apart from being an outspoken advocate for Barack Obama, her credentials don't seem up to par.
And “credentials” was certainly the magic word this year. Obama and Sarah Palin were pushed up against the ropes time and time again, defending their qualifications.
Both in their mid-40s, it was hard to compare either of them to their much older counterparts. At 51, Kennedy is very much a baby boomer.
But when you are looking at the oligarchy that is our government, 50 is pretty young.
But there is a difference between having the resume of a young politician and having no resume whatsoever. In the case of Kennedy, her famous family seems her only qualification. However, in the next eight years, her ace in the hole may have less to do with her surname and more to do with her gender.
Don't be fooled by the talk show hosts and the political cartoons. Palin will run in 2012. And the Democrats will need to have a capable woman in their arsenal, as a foil to Palin.
Is it fair? Not in the slightest. Don't get me wrong, I don't think there is anything immoral with inheriting a family business or dynasty, as the case may be.
But to walk into a Senate seat with a background comprised mainly of fundraisers and schmoozing, wow! That is quite a first appointment. I would liken it to signing a little league pitcher to the Yankees.
The outcome may be brilliant, but to sign on the dotted line seems premature.
I certainly welcome the involvement of women in politics.
In fact, I'm desperate for it.
But I don't think it helps to start plucking candidates when they're still green; exactly why Palin faired so poorly against Biden and probably why Clinton didn't win against Obama.
Andrew Cuomo, another front runner, is also 51, but unlike Kennedy, his resume is rather impressive and his rap sheet is (thus far) clean. He has paid his dues to the party and deserves the appointment.
But having divorced a Kennedy, Cuomo will unlikely find the gates to Camelot locked.
Affirmative action at it's worst.
Estabrook's column appears Mondays in The Citizen,and she can be reached at
estabrookcarole@yahoo.com
And “credentials” was certainly the magic word this year. Obama and Sarah Palin were pushed up against the ropes time and time again, defending their qualifications.
Both in their mid-40s, it was hard to compare either of them to their much older counterparts. At 51, Kennedy is very much a baby boomer.
But when you are looking at the oligarchy that is our government, 50 is pretty young.
But there is a difference between having the resume of a young politician and having no resume whatsoever. In the case of Kennedy, her famous family seems her only qualification. However, in the next eight years, her ace in the hole may have less to do with her surname and more to do with her gender.
Don't be fooled by the talk show hosts and the political cartoons. Palin will run in 2012. And the Democrats will need to have a capable woman in their arsenal, as a foil to Palin.
Is it fair? Not in the slightest. Don't get me wrong, I don't think there is anything immoral with inheriting a family business or dynasty, as the case may be.
But to walk into a Senate seat with a background comprised mainly of fundraisers and schmoozing, wow! That is quite a first appointment. I would liken it to signing a little league pitcher to the Yankees.
The outcome may be brilliant, but to sign on the dotted line seems premature.
I certainly welcome the involvement of women in politics.
In fact, I'm desperate for it.
But I don't think it helps to start plucking candidates when they're still green; exactly why Palin faired so poorly against Biden and probably why Clinton didn't win against Obama.
Andrew Cuomo, another front runner, is also 51, but unlike Kennedy, his resume is rather impressive and his rap sheet is (thus far) clean. He has paid his dues to the party and deserves the appointment.
But having divorced a Kennedy, Cuomo will unlikely find the gates to Camelot locked.
Affirmative action at it's worst.
Estabrook's column appears Mondays in The Citizen,and she can be reached at
estabrookcarole@yahoo.com
Citizen
Hot Jobs
New! Off the Menu
The Citizens' Say
Post your comment - click hereThere are 4 comment(s)
Northender wrote on Jan 4, 2009 9:03 AM:
logic wrote on Jan 1, 2009 1:24 PM:
qwerty1234 wrote on Dec 30, 2008 5:11 AM:
Carole, what legislative experience did Hillary have before being elected? Any idea? That's right. None. Being First Lady did nothing to prepare her for the Senate.
I too question the use of the Affirmative Action line. It's quite fishy...considering the man doing the appointing is an African American.
Another poorly written "opinion" by Ms. Estabrook. "
drivebytrucker wrote on Dec 29, 2008 9:01 PM:
Why do you stick in that final sentence "affirmative action at it's worst"? It does not connect or relate to the column.
Don't you mean that Cuomo will **likely** find the gates locked?
What is your point? What is your thesis?
Clinton has way more experience than Obama, she gives me a stomach ache, but she is far from green.
What do Strunk and White say about ending a sentence with "wow!"?
Caroline K has spent her life avoiding politics? Can you verify that? She may have avoided the public, but she has been involved in politics. She has written several books about politics, too.
She is a smart, well-connected, productive, person. What do you mean her credentials aren't "up to par"? What does "up to par" mean? Do you know?
Your writing does not connect. Why the little paragraph about their ages? So what?
I have read your column carefully and I have no idea what you are trying to say with the sentences you have strung together. I do not believe Caroline deserves this appointment but you have given me nothing to support my belief. "