Originally Posted by chelsea24

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.

"Camelot" is part of a fantasy view of England during feudal times, as opposed to the Kennedy Administration and the entire clan. What some may call an "enlightened time" centered around a fabled family; can be also viewed as one of the most bungled presidencies ever, matched with blatant nepotism and flubbed foreign relations, tied into a political machine that was able to cover up White House tawdryisms and the facts surrounding an after-party death.

Whether Ms. Onassis inspired her daughter during the years from age 6 (when JFK died) to age 18 (when Mr. Onassis died), considering that most of those years involved living in Europe, is subjective. Suffice to say that being well-heeled allows the freedom to do or be what one wants.

Whether Ms. Kennedy is appointed or not, it is a New York issue. May the governor show wisdom in his decision.

Whether in the future Gov. Palin finds herself as a Senator from Alaska, that is an Alaskan issue. Their voters are inherently just as wise as any from the other 49 states, including New York and Illinois.

Whether Gov. Palin is ever elected into a national office, a lot will depend upon the qualifications of any opponent. It is not inconceivable that Gov. Palin four-to-eight years from now will be as prepared for national office as a four-years-ago heretofore unknown Illinois State Senator and candidate for the U.S. Senate grew to be. It would be nice to think that people can accept the potential for professional growth in others from opposing political parties, as they would like many to have regarding the President-elect.

And as far as Gov. Palin's voter appeal being only with "a very small minority of the extreme right Republicans," that opinion is in error. Rough edges and blunt talk is refreshing, especially to Independents not in awe of political quasi-royalty who believe title to various public office is a birthright.

Any American that has so much disdain for the Kennedy family always confuses me. This family, practically the entire family, has devoted it's life to public service. I believe that is why the majority of American people and people all around the world still have great admiration for them. They have always truly stood for "Country First". It's not just a "slogan" to them.

As for Jackie, I've always admired her lifting the American spirit through the arts. “Culture is the widening of the mind and of the spirit.” This is not her quote, but one I've always liked.

Have you asked yourself "Why does Caroline Kennedy want this job?" Do you think it's for the money? She doesn't need it. Do you think it's for fame? She certainly has that already and never sought it. But I can guarantee you most of the other people seeking the job, are seeking money or fame. She wants to give back. To do the public service she was raised to do.

As for Palin, sorry but I don't find "Rough edges and blunt talk" just will not cut it. We've just had 8 years of this and there's no turning back.

“A culture is made -- or destroyed -- by its articulate voices.”

No, sorry, you can't cram to be President. Palin is in her 40's. She should have been much more well versed in world affairs by this time. I just don't think she's intellectually up for the job and never will be. I don't think she stands a chance. Just my opinion.

Originally Posted by chelsea24

Any American that has so much disdain for the Kennedy family always confuses me. This family, practically the entire family, has devoted it's life to public service. I believe that is why the majority of American people and people all around the world still have great admiration for them. They have always truly stood for "Country First". It's not just a "slogan" to them.

As for Jackie, I've always admired her lifting the American spirit through the arts. “Culture is the widening of the mind and of the spirit.” This is not her quote, but one I've always liked.

Have you asked yourself "Why does Caroline Kennedy want this job?" Do you think it's for the money? She doesn't need it. Do you think it's for fame? She certainly has that already and never sought it. But I can guarantee you most of the other people seeking the job, are seeking money or fame. She wants to give back. To do the public service she was raised to do.

As for Palin, sorry but I don't find "Rough edges and blunt talk" just will not cut it. We've just had 8 years of this and there's no turning back.

“A culture is made -- or destroyed -- by its articulate voices.”

No, sorry, you can't cram to be President. Palin is in her 40's. She should have been much more well versed in world affairs by this time. I just don't think she's intellectually up for the job and never will be. I don't think she stands a chance. Just my opinion.

Our differing opinions of the Kennedy clan probably have a lot to do with proximity to their actions over the years. Growing up within inner-city Boston of a different ethnicity than the ruling "political machine's" primary base, and watching the "royal family" operate was souring. The media gave them a free pass over many of their antics, and so the rest of the nation was presented a glossy and romantic image of a patriarchal rum runner who tried to obtain legitimacy for his criminal activity vicariously via his progeny. However, the progeny had nothing over the much-publicized youthful and later actions of the current President.

I've never been much for celebrity adoration, especially when the celebrity is created by media accent on the positive with total obliteration of any reference to the negative ever happening or being weighted. It gets worse when the negative involves a death, and demonstrates the difference between "them" and "us" when it comes to accounting for actions and conduct.

Ms. Caroline Kennedy's reasons for seeking public office in any fashion are her own, and conjecture on what those reasons may be are beyond my clairvoyant abilities. Why super-wealthy seek a public position which pays less than their car(s) cost(s) is between them and their conscience. However, "to protect and serve" is definitely not the sole and continuing reason.

Whether the "majority of Americans and others around the world" have great admiration of the Kennedy clan is questionable and subjective, unless "great admiration" includes reluctant recognition that in many Northeast jurisdictions the Kennedy's can live and operate without concern that the law applied to the general public will be applied to them.

Originally Posted by chelsea24

Any American that has so much disdain for the Kennedy family always confuses me. This family, practically the entire family, has devoted it's life to public service. I believe that is why the majority of American people and people all around the world still have great admiration for them. They have always truly stood for "Country First". It's not just a "slogan" to them.

As for Jackie, I've always admired her lifting the American spirit through the arts. “Culture is the widening of the mind and of the spirit.” This is not her quote, but one I've always liked.

Have you asked yourself "Why does Caroline Kennedy want this job?" Do you think it's for the money? She doesn't need it. Do you think it's for fame? She certainly has that already and never sought it. But I can guarantee you most of the other people seeking the job, are seeking money or fame. She wants to give back. To do the public service she was raised to do.

As for Palin, sorry but I don't find "Rough edges and blunt talk" just will not cut it. We've just had 8 years of this and there's no turning back.

“A culture is made -- or destroyed -- by its articulate voices.”

No, sorry, you can't cram to be President. Palin is in her 40's. She should have been much more well versed in world affairs by this time. I just don't think she's intellectually up for the job and never will be. I don't think she stands a chance. Just my opinion.

Chels, you never address all the time spent "tuning up" Obama before he was allowed to speak without a teleprompter and he still erred at times. It's part of the training process and you must be very aware of that fact. I am hoping for the best now that he has been elected but contrary to some opinions, he isn't Einstein. He is very calculated is his actions and he has the media doing everything they can to cover his rough edges.

Individuals do not have to hate Caroline Schlossberg to hate this process. Voters are tired of the "inside, slick manuevering" of the political parties, PERIOD. You probably hated the fact that George W. Bush was slid into place on the coattails of his father but wholeheartedly endorse Caroline being annointed to a senatorial position for which she is hardly prepared.

Contrary to public opinion, attaining a degree to lawyer in the USA is not the nth degree of brilliance. Many of us find critical thinking important and aren't into monarchies. Perhaps New Yorkers should review a list of very qualified candidates and then chose the very best senator available. Caroline Schlossberg may be a viable candidate but at this point, who in New York knows? The credentials presented thus far are mediocre at best but maybe there is a dynamo within her that has been to date, very well hidden. Good luck, New York!

My take is that Gov. Patterson is too smart to pick Ms. Kennedy. The smart political move is to pick Cuomo so that he doesn't run for Govenor. Ms. Kennedy has limited support Upstate and the independent voters are not going to like the appointment based on name alone. We are done with this royal family. The wise pick is Rep. Louise Slaughter, a liberal from Rochester. Take a look at her background. She has actually been serving the people of Upstate.

I love it when people like the Kennedy's say, "They where taught to give back and to do public service." Give me a break. It's a cushy job. The salary is nothing. It's all the potential monetary benefits that go with it, not to mention power and prestige. Why do you think they encourage their children to follow in their footsteps???

[QUOTE=SteveZ;178300
And as far as Gov. Palin's voter appeal being only with "a very small minority of the extreme right Republicans," that opinion is in error. Rough edges and blunt talk is refreshing, especially to Independents not in awe of political quasi-royalty who believe title to various public office is a birthright.[/QUOTE]

The facts don't appear to support that statement. Many republicans didn't like Palin, and voted for McCain grudgingly because of his VP choice. And obviously, the independants didn't vote for the ticket either or Obama wouldn't have won. Most pundits I've read do say that Palin appeals to the right wing portion of the Republican party. In any event, 4 years is a long time in politics. She may educate herself and attempt to re-make her image; or new political stars will come onto the horizon that will outshine her. Obama may be such a great president, that the Republican candidate won't have a chance at all.

Originally Posted by rekop

The facts don't appear to support that statement. Many republicans didn't like Palin, and voted for McCain grudgingly because of his VP choice. And obviously, the independants didn't vote for the ticket either or Obama wouldn't have won. Most pundits I've read do say that Palin appeals to the right wing portion of the Republican party. In any event, 4 years is a long time in politics. She may educate herself and attempt to re-make her image; or new political stars will come onto the horizon that will outshine her. Obama may be such a great president, that the Republican candidate won't have a chance at all.

There was a lot wrong with the way the Republican Party handled this last election: 1) the lead candidate did not espouse right-of-center values which were the party core; 2) the negativity of the campaign did not inspire confidence; 3) the secondary candidate lacked preparation and was thrown into the mix without strategy; and most of all 4) the incumbent President, as the party leader, made strategy inconsistent and contrary.

All that being true, Gov. Palin proved at the onset that for the Republican Party to compete, "fresh faces" devoid of alliances to the current establishment were necessary. Her selection as the V.P. candidate was an initial shot of adrenalin into the Party, as evidenced by the first two weeks of her entry into the campaign. However, the momentum could not be maintained since there was no prior planning and preparation to make the move a decisive one. The "fresh face" strategy proved successful for the Democrats who prepared for the moment with cautious preparation to have a "fresh face" candidate should the "familiar" candidate appear too similar to the Republicans in the sense of being "old school" and tied to past policies and tactics.

Republicans, during the primaries, demonstrated that Sen. McCain lacked across-the-party backing and there was little consensus ever reached. The Democrats too were divided, but linked better in the end.

Sarah Palin may indeed return to the scene, mainly due to the fact that she "took one for the team" and having survived the fray with little more than satirical scarring, proved she can take the heat. She will insure that another time at bat is in the offing, and the next time there will be much more and better prepping. It would seem doubtful that she would be the lead candidate (V.P. is a probable spot), and the Republicans would look more towards grooming someone like one of the current military generals.

Whether President-elect Obama turns into one of the best presidents in the last 100 years, only time will tell. For the sake of the nation, I hope he does.

Originally Posted by Sally Jo

I love it when people like the Kennedy's say, "They where taught to give back and to do public service." Give me a break. It's a cushy job. The salary is nothing. It's all the potential monetary benefits that go with it, not to mention power and prestige. Why do you think they encourage their children to follow in their footsteps???

Oh yes. Let's see, 2 children killed serving their country, 2 more sons assassinated in political life. Yes, I can see why they would be "encouraged" to serve this country by family members. Are you kidding me? Potential monetary benefits? Like they need them. Power and prestige? Like they need them. In case it alluded you, money, power and prestige were given to them at birth! They don't need any of this. Oh, yes cushy jobs all around. Your statement reminds me of the negative statements people make about the developer of The Villages. Pure green envy! At least the developers get wealthy, and well they should.

The Kennedy's, any Kennedy doesn't need anything you mentioned. They have it all. And that's what really bugs the hell out of some people!

such as degrees and intellectually up to the job very amusing if not hypocritical.
If we were to use intellectually up to the job as the measurement whether all the incumbents in any office State or Federal at any level pass or fail.....boy would we have a deluge of failing grades.
And they have the knack of being re-elected by their apathetic constituents down to a science.
The other phraseology that is totally inconsistent with the reality actual "governing" of today is any indication there is representation in any aspect of a politicians agenda....it simply does not exist anymore.

The preamble to the constitution has gone by the wayside...long ago...both parties....no exceptions!!!

In my humble opinion.

BTK

Originally Posted by chelsea24

Oh yes. Let's see, 2 children killed serving their country, 2 more sons assassinated in political life. Yes, I can see why they would be "encouraged" to serve this country by family members. Are you kidding me? Potential monetary benefits? Like they need them. Power and prestige? Like they need them. In case it alluded you, money, power and prestige were given to them at birth! They don't need any of this. Oh, yes cushy jobs all around. Your statement reminds me of the negative statements people make about the developer of The Villages. Pure green envy! At least the developers get wealthy, and well they should.

The Kennedy's, any Kennedy doesn't need anything you mentioned. They have it all. And that's what really bugs the hell out of some people!

Chels, some of us don't hate the Kennedy's, we just don't find the Kennedy's at all enviable.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/3283161.stm

Originally Posted by chelsea24

Oh yes. Let's see, 2 children killed serving their country, 2 more sons assassinated in political life. Yes, I can see why they would be "encouraged" to serve this country by family members. Are you kidding me? Potential monetary benefits? Like they need them. Power and prestige? Like they need them. In case it alluded you, money, power and prestige were given to them at birth! They don't need any of this. Oh, yes cushy jobs all around. Your statement reminds me of the negative statements people make about the developer of The Villages. Pure green envy! At least the developers get wealthy, and well they should.

The Kennedy's, any Kennedy doesn't need anything you mentioned. They have it all. And that's what really bugs the hell out of some people!

If "all" means being able to influence out of any responsibility for the death of a person because you virtually own all of turf where the death occurs, yeah, that bugs me.

If "all" means being able to turn the White House into a haven for nepotism (brother, in-laws) so that it looks and operates like a monarchy, yeah, that bugs me.

The fact that the family is wealthy is their good fortune. They have the luxury of living in the style and manner their fortune allows. Good for them!

That being said, the family fortune fuels a political machine to not only gain position and title, but also to manipulate any response to malfeasenses of its members - the most famous being documented at http://www.nndb.com/people/623/000023554/

Are the Kennedy's the only family so "fortunate?" Of course not. However, to raise their image to candidates for beatification is humbug. Are we so short of "heroes" that we need to elevate any group with money to pseudo-deity status? Do we do the same with other families who have had multiple losses due to war or other violence, or are these other families "off the radar" because they do not have a public relations service to inspire sympathy and worship? And should we ignore their transgressions because they are the so-and-so"s?

When you have more money than you can ever spend, all that is left is the accumulation of power. And in this world, money can indeed buy power, but power is not a birthright in a democratic republic - only in a monarchy. And all the money and power in the world cannot buy respect - you have to earn that!

I will only say that Caroline had help get passed for Law School. I can't give particulars but she never passed her LSAT.

SteveZ. If you are saying that there is nothing, NOTHING, that any of the Kennedy's have done that you respect, shame on you.

And yet you defend morons like Bush and Palin.

Originally Posted by Bubbalarry

I will only say that Caroline had help get passed for Law School. I can't give particulars but she never passed her LSAT.

The New York bar exam is the second toughest in the nation (California being #1)(http://www.sfbsearch.com/content.cfm/ID/20004). The LSAT is simply a screening tool for entry into most law schools, with the bar exam being the final hurdle that counts.

Since Ms. Kennedy had to pass the NY Bar Exam to get licensed there, she earned her "Esq." regardless. Whatever help may have been available along the way, one sits alone when taking the bar exam and under highly monitored conditions.