Dec 17, 2008

Dynastic?


I'm a little mystified at all of the faux outrage regarding Caroline Kennedy and her potential appointment to the senate. All of the talk regarding dynastic politics, monarchies and romanticism I think are misguided, here's why:

First as a country we were one additional Jeremiah Wright appearance away from nominating and transitively electing Hillary Clinton as president. Her election would have meant the last 24 years of the presidency being controlled by 2 families and as a nation we seemed okay with that. If ever there was an argument against dynastic politics this would be it.

Second W wasn't crowned by his father he was elected (kinda sorta) by the masses, who knew full well who is father and family were and voted him in anyway (again kinda sorta). This is not inherently dynastic, this is democratic.

Third, I will openly admit to being excited about Caroline serving in the senate and that's okay. I'm not irrational or emotional I just think it is a fitting next chapter in the Kennedy lore. Plus, I distinctly remember NY's last senator being lambasted for being unqualified and by all indications she turned out more than okay.

Lastly, I'm tired of hearing talking heads opine on "qualifications." The only qualifications for the senate, are the arbitrary ones the voters (or in the case the Governor) assign. This isn't a consulting or I-banking gig where an esoteric skill set is evaluated, the only skill set needed is getting people to vote for you....that's it.