If she got elected in her own right thats one thing. Not a fan of her getting appointed to the position. If she wasn't a Kennedy, would she even be considered?

Is that where we're headed?

Apologies for nitpicking but it's still hearsay.   In fact, it's almost the dictionary definition of hearsay.  

What do you mean "the precedent this would set"?  New York is famous for handing out their Senate seats to famous people.  How the hell do you think Hillary Clinton got it in the first place?  Sure she ran for it, like RFK, but like him she came in as a carpetbagger -- she never would have entered the election if she didn't think the voters would hand it to her.

Yes, it is disgusting. But for New York it certainly is nothing new.

Literally and unique are two commonly misused words. Here you misuse the word precedent. The precedent here has already been set in the 60s if not before and has already been copied by Hillary.

This precedent is long out the door.

I'm sure Caroline would pursue a good agenda and all, but I'm downright irritated with her presumptuousness.  Being from upstate, I would really like to see a figure from Central or Western NY get the job.  NYC/Long Island/Westchester has held a monopoly on the gov and senate seats for decades while the rest of state has been neglected and left to rot.  If Caroline gets the appointment, her coffers will probably fill to the millions with Wall Street money and she'll become senator for life just like Uncle Teddy.  Yay democracy!

I'm sure she's a great person and all, but I really dislike continuing our downward spiral into oligarchy.

Appoint the best Democrat in NY's House delegation or in state government, maybe someone serving in government in an unelected capacity, but I don't think passing on a seat in the United States Senate to someone with a famous name who seems to have suddenly thought "hey, that might be fun" is a good idea.  

If New Yorkers want to elect a Kennedy, then that's their business.  Let her run and win.  But considering incumbent advantage and name recognition, this is essentially a life appointment based in very little merit.  

I do agree that it would be good to consider candidates who fall outside of the white-male group, though it shouldn't be a "litmus test", in the parlance of our times (and to quote The Big Lebowski!).  

Monarchy. I guess if they can not have the royalty they could at least settle for the Serfdom of Kennedy's.

Woah, All the hate from puma's in this thread is revealing. The fact is she is as qualified as Barack was for president and we saw how the experience argument works in general or in the primaries.. it doesn't work. The facts are that Obama wants her there, she is qualified, good money raiser and wants it. she will probably get it based on those facts alone and then it is up to voters to decide in 2 years as it works everywhere else.The fact that her last name is being used as an argument against her is ridiculous, it is a plus if anything else.

...is what are the pluses for Paterson.  Remember, before Caroline threw her hat in the ring, this choice would be based on his own (skillful) political calculations.  Paterson has a good amount of good will from the public following the Spitzer debacle, but he is still an accidental governor looking towards reelection, so the choice that he makes will not necessarily be solely guided by the desires of this aristocrat.  Hell, people liked accidental President Ford, but the country was in rough shape and people wanted a switch in leadership.

argument that they wanted an end to the Bush & Clinton dynasties, smell of hypocrasy when they are now pushing for another member of a dynasty!

If she ran and won, I wouldn't be opposed to it. She would have won by the will of the people. She's only being considered because she's a Kennedy. If she won a primary and defeated a Republican, I'd take it more seriously.

I'd be opposed to it were it not for the fact that one of her chief rivals (Andrew Cuomo) is so odious.

I have no feelings about Caroline kennedy one way or the other, although I'm a huge fan of Teddy.  That said, I'm extremely skeptical about this idea.  I'd be much more comfortable if she were currently in the House or some other elected office. If this were a special election, I'd certainly have no problem with her running.  But I think being appointed to the Senate as one's first public office is a little much.

Of course, I'm also not thrilled at the prospect of one Salazar being appointed to fill the slot of the other (possibly).

This is how democrats shoot themselves in the foot and snatch defeat out of the mouths of victory.

What's wrong with Cuomo? He's a dullard of a politician  - couldn't get himself elected Gov. Has some name recognition - but totally uninspiring. Is not a real threat to Paterson, at all.

Assume Gulliani will "leap" at the chance to take the seat from some no name appointed congressional woman - who we think is "qualified" to have the seat appointed to them because they have been "elected" in upstate.  Geesh! - how unimaginative can you be - this is how you lose a seat people.

Don't like the rich having so much political power? Well let's just all agree as Democrats that they shouldn't run - and just give the seats away to the Republicans.