Originally Posted by Peachie

I read what I was writing, Chels. Across the board, serve two terms and you are through... out the door and off the dole.

I agree with the two terms, Peachie. Absolutely!

Originally Posted by gnu

Since when is having a law degree a qualification for anything political? Most of the country holds lawyers in ridicule. In our home town alone there have been lawyers that have shot their partners, been convicted of drunk driving, tax evasion and who knows how much contempt of their clients for the money they charge. Simply having a law degree means nothing in itself.

And who said anything about Palin running for the Senate? The topic was experience to run for a public office. Palin had experience for the office she was running for and Kennedy has non for the office she seeks. Palin was ridiculed in these posts because of her lack of experience for public office, even though she has held public office, yet now Kennedy is defended simply because she has a law degree!

I've seen exactly what I expected to see for a response, one-up-manship, gotcha, and twisting of the topic to appear superior.

Last time I checked a law degree requires a Doctorate while Palin barely made it past a bachelors. She was a mayor of the Meth capital of Alaska and left the city deep in debt. Palin was running for Veep a heart beat away from the Presidency. No way was Palin qualified for the office of VP....

Originally Posted by Irish Rover

Gnu, the people who have already defended Caroline Kennedy would defend a stone if it was specified as a democrat stone. The same two who have already chimed in, spend their days looking to pounce on this kind of thread. Caroline should be appointed the "Hostess in Waiting".

You would oppose any Democrat the Governor picks. If he picks her she gets 2 years and then has to run in 2010 and again in 2012.

Originally Posted by chelsea24

SteveZ, you say you don't like people that would choose a Kennedy just for the name and yet, you're making it clear that you would oppose a Kennedy just because of the name.

Why don't you listen to the people that actually live in the state. No one wants to hear about Chicago from someone that's actually lived there, i.e. Kahuna and me and now you completely ignore Rekop's opinion about New York! I don't get it? Do you know better than everyone in this country that has lived in every state?

And BTW, I don't know if you guys are even reading what you're writing because much of what you say would apply to Bush, Palin and McCain.

If you read the entire posts, they specifically stated that the voters in the state (or their duly elected delegate) are the ones to choose whom they want as their representative. That's the way it is. The "star-power" attitude and "select families" concepts (and I said that both major parties do this) is turning the nation into a two-class system - rulers and serfs.

As far as Chicago is concerned, if you read the posts, they stated that Chicago is no different than any other major city in the US, in that the "political machine" concept applies elsewhere and provides the same results - exploitation, institutional racism, selective disposition of services, and patronage to the devout. Those who feed the machine and become the primary recipients of its output tend to ignore the effects upon others.

There is no difference between how the "political machine" concept works and that applied in any dictatorial regime elsewhere in the world - no matter how many potholes are filled.

As ar as the Kennedy's are concerned, if one became a candidate for office here in the Florida Fifth, or for the soon-to-be open Senate seat, or any state office, the eligible and qualified criteria appies. They would get no special break, as I don't see where there is anything within their DNA that automatically makes them the best person for a job simply by having notorious ancestors. They would not be biased - just treated as "equals" as explained in the Declaration of Independence.

Sometimes it seems the Democratic (or Republican) Party believes that people should follow as sheep behind Party aristocracy, as it is their birthright to lead us. And it happens again and again. Is that "shame on them" or "shame on us" for being so easily star-struck?

With all this discussion on appointments to a senate seat I found this article covering appointments of this type over the years to be very interesting.

This is a section near the end which is a good read...

"Finally, while almost all states give the power to governors to fill vacancies, there are a few that do not, such as Oregon and Wisconsin. Two others have recently changed their laws to take away gubernatorial appointment power. Alaska changed its law after the Lisa Murkowski flap in 2002. And Massachusetts changed its process in 2004, when some Massachusetts legislators -- hoping John Kerry would be elected president -- didn't want Republican Gov. Mitt Romney to choice his successor. "

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archi...6/1718626.aspx

Let's hope that Gov. Patterson ignores the "legacy" candidates like Cuomo and Kennedy and picks a qualified person like Rep. Slaughter from Rochester. She has paid her dues.

Originally Posted by cologal

Last time I checked a law degree requires a Doctorate while Palin barely made it past a bachelors. She was a mayor of the Meth capital of Alaska and left the city deep in debt. Palin was running for Veep a heart beat away from the Presidency. No way was Palin qualified for the office of VP....

Some people are in aw over anyone who has an education. Wow a Doctorate, he/she must be smarter than me! Not!

Let me see who was that Rhodes Scholar that was so intelligent that he was having sex in the White House?

I thought the liberals wanted change in government? With out having a crystal ball we'll never know if Palin would have been the best president we ever had. I'm pretty sure that at least she wouldn't be having sex with anyone other than her husband.

Originally Posted by cologal

You would oppose any Democrat the Governor picks. If he picks her she gets 2 years and then has to run in 2010 and again in 2012.

I don't oppose a Democrat, as a matter of fact I'd be amazed if the Governor didn't!!! I just oppose Kennedy being appoint because she's from the Royal establishment. How about someone who worked their way up and earned the spot?

Ms. Kennedy, who apparently lives in Manhatten, is planning a quick trip through Upstate NY. Gove. Patterson feels that the next Senator needs to understand the problems of Upstate, as they are liable to run against Rudy in two years. He has tons of support Upstate. This talk of Kennedy and Cuomo is more reminisent of a seat in the House of Lords.

Thus far watching the Illinois situation and Emanuel's involvement, and the New York talk, the change we expected must be just around the next turn

Everything appears to me politics as normal, perhaps a bit earlier but normal...nothing much different.

Cant wait for the policies !!!!

What's usual Bucco is you sniping at the President-Elect. What happened to all the "I will support whoever is President" talk???? As I said before, talk is cheap and you're running a Blue Light Special.

BTW, Number 6, Rudy made an arse out of himself by ridiculing Community Organizers at the Repub. Convention. He's never going to be Senator. He's become a joke.

Originally Posted by chelsea24

What's usual Bucco is you sniping at the President-Elect. What happened to all the "I will support whoever is President" talk???? As I said before, talk is cheap and you're running a Blue Light Special.

BTW, Number 6, Rudy made an arse out of himself by ridiculing Community Organizers at the Repub. Convention. He's never going to be Senator. He's become a joke.

If you want folks to NEVER crticize President Elect Obama then you have had much too much of whatever.......

Why can he not be criticized ? I recall the accusations the day after the election in both 2000 and 2004 but that was ok...right ?

Why, and I am serious, is President Elect Obama above being criticized ? I have applauded some of his appointments, but why do you think we should all shut up if we disagree ??? Please, are we just to be silent and accept whatever he or his followers say or does ? Must we all walk as one even we we disagree ?

Rudy has huge support in Upstate NY where he can say anything he wants about community orginizers. The folks in Ithaca aren't going to vote for him anyway. He also has good support in the City where he was a popular Mayor. If not for his cancer I suspect we would not be talking about Sen. Clinton.

Originally Posted by gnu

Some people are in aw over anyone who has an education. Wow a Doctorate, he/she must be smarter than me! Not!

Let me see who was that Rhodes Scholar that was so intelligent that he was having sex in the White House?

I thought the liberals wanted change in government? With out having a crystal ball we'll never know if Palin would have been the best president we ever had. I'm pretty sure that at least she wouldn't be having sex with anyone other than her husband.

Yeah, she showed how intelligent she was during the Couric interviews.

Originally Posted by gnu

I don't oppose a Democrat, as a matter of fact I'd be amazed if the Governor didn't!!! I just oppose Kennedy being appoint because she's from the Royal establishment. How about someone who worked their way up and earned the spot?

Jackie Kennedy made damn sure her children worked for the good of all Americans. They didn't sit back on their Trust Funds. In fact the entire Kennedy family was raised in that tradition of public service. JFK never took his salary as President, I don't think you can say that about anyone else. Just because Caroline hasn't been flouncing around in the spotlight doesn't mean she hasn't been working for the good of New Yorkers, especially when it comes to education.

As for you comment on Palin being possibly the best president we would have had, trust me you'll never know. She will never be elected. The core she appeals to is a very small minority of the extreme right Republicans. She doesn't have a prayer in hell of ever becoming elected.