1) Nancy never responds to comments because she is not interested in arguing her case, only talking down to the posters - she's been hiderated before for good reason;
2) Nancy has repeatedly made it clear that she doesn't care at all about the issues - her only two qualifications are 1) that the person is female, and 2) that the person did not cross paths with Sen. Clinton (this is actually the first diary to reveal the heretofore undiscovered second factor);
3) Very often, her arguments do not make sense. Almost all of them refer to women as being the most oppressed group in the world, no matter how disconnected that is from her overall argument. Here's a paraphrased example: "Women are the most oppressed group in the world ... therefore Palin should be the Vice President."
As for this diary, it's clearly a veiled attempt to torpedo Kennedy's candidacy to fulfill some personal revenge fantasy. I'm no fan of Kennedy myself, but at least I don't have to make logic pretzels in order to say so.
Don't worry about KnoxVow - the person is on at least his/her third username for insightful comments such as those above, and generally only surfaces to fight wars long since over ("cultist" is extremely ironic).
I don't necessarily agree with your take on things, and it's not entirely clear whose idea it was to do this. Hopefully he can be removed or someone from our side can forcefully address the issue at some other point in the inauguration.
I don't particularly relish Kennedy for the seat - in my mind, it would be a legacy appointment and I'm sure that there are more deserving politicians. That said, the idea that her appointment would be a "slight" annoys me. I thought that we had moved past all of that.
Blago also thought that he might be a viable presidential candidate in 2016. Time will tell, though it would appear that there is not much on Jackson at this point. He won't get the appointment, but that doesn't necessarily mean that he's a "bad dynast," or whatever.
Maybe, but Blago himself might also prefer Candidate 5 because s/he may be more willing to "pay to play," as suggested by the snippets above. It could be a two-for-one - screw Obama and install an ally.
My reading is that the "screw you" would come from denying the seat to Candidate 1 for no reason other than vindictiveness, not necessarily in appointing Candidate 5 instead. So, I don't think it's necessary to read the passage as if Obama dislikes Candidate 5, just that he'd prefer Candidate 1 to Candidate 5 and Blago would reject Candidate 1 out of spite.
It's interesting that the machine and the counter-machine are both politically successful in the very same political environment, at the very same time. I wonder if a similar dynamic is at play in Alaska.