the money. Old Joe Kennedy was wily enough to hang on to the boodle even during the Depression (the last one).

maureenodonnell: Good Irish name, you usually really freak me out but that was really funny.

Caroline Kennedy would make a great US Senator from New York. She is intelligent, articulate, well-educated and carries some damned fine political genes. Andrew Cuomo is also a worthy successor to Hillary Clinton and is a scion of that family. Carolyn Maloney has a strong case for being picked, as well; she has earned high marks for the work she has done.

I would choose Caroline Kennedy, though, based on several factors, including her ancestry. No doubt, seeing JFK and Jackie's daughter in the US Senate would complete a picture many of us wanted to see occur with John-John. Caroline is a fine woman in her own right and would be an excellent choice.

However, dissing her simply because of her lineage or whining about "dynasty and entitlement", as if that were insufficient to succeed, is simply wrong. She is asking for the job until the special election in 2010; at that point, she can be elected by her constituents for a six-year term based on performance.

I say give her the chance to represent New York state...

The Kennedys have always been about public service. They don't need to take bribes or kickbacks because they've got all that old money that Joe Kennedy made in his bootlegging days.

As for the experience thingy, forget it. We elect many of our senators and governors because they have name recognition. Hillary Clinton, Arnold Schwartzenegger and George W. Bush are three examples of people who became candidates because they had name recognition.

Give the kid a shot. What've we got to lose? It's only the Senate. You can't screw that up too badly and she may turn out to be a really good one.

What makes you think 30 year political cronies, hacks and insiders can do a better job?

race-horses. Is Carolne (not Carolyn, the Congresswoman) being selected for a stud-farm or as a candidate for the Senate? As for the other Carolyn, I had a quick squint at Wikipedia and when I found out that she'd only acquired the name Maloney through marriage and that she was a Bosher, I knew she was finished. "Bosher" doesn't really cut it at all when you have "pedigree", the pedigree that produced a Lord Launcelot, also late of Camelot, such as William Kennedy Smith.

While Caroline announces she's ready to be handed the seat, the other Caroline actually works in government, has actually won real campaigns, and actually has earned the right to be considered.

I think the entire story says it all about why Washington is a joke and has such low approval ratings.

No experience needed.

The reasons for supporting Caroline are purely emotional. I don't have a clue where she stands on ANY public issue. Not a single one.

Every person associated with Salon -- writers, editors and readers, myself included -- universally condemned the choice of an elected governor as a vice presidential candidate. How can any of us now with a straight face support appointing someone to the Senate who has ZERO experience in the public eye, simply because, at the age of 51, she has decided she needs to heed her family's much-talked about call to public service?

This doesn't pass the smell test. Even if you like Caroline (frankly, what's not to like??), you have to be just a little uncomfortable giving away this plumb appointment to a neophyte.

Being a good Senator is NOT genetic. You don't catch it by being around people who serve in office. Frankly, I'm surprised she would seek to enter public life by being appointed to a job on the basis of her name alone without being a known quantity to the public. That in and of itself does NOT speak very highly of her.

What she should have caught by being a Kennedy is the desire to enter politics the old fashioned way -- by running for office. Anything else is pure princess tactics.

the awfulness of Sarah Palin. Why in the world would Caroline Kennedy NOT be a valid choice to fill the NY senate seat? She is very well-educated, professional, articulate, a behind-the-scenes activist, committed to at least one worthy cause (education), politically connected, an actual New Yorker, well-traveled, wealthy enough to not be beholden to anyone...right there you have enough qualifications to lift her head and shoulders above most of the other pols in elected office. If her name was not Kennedy, then the points I listed would be enough to at least get her noticed. So, she's shy...that's a bad thing, as opposed to a rampant narcissistic politician? That her name is Kennedy opens doors to getting things done just because there is a certain cachet to the name.

All in all, good enough for me.

I already posted, but after reading all the other comments, I have to ask what is with the snarky unnecessary remarks that Caroline Kennedy is 'ordinary looking', the 'gummy smile', ad nauseum? How shallow do you have to be to make such critical comments when talking about a female politician?

Barney Frank's less than movie star good looks certainly don't keep him from doing a great job as a Congressman. I thought in 2008 we were beyond all this.

Admittedly, I'm rather amused by all of those who insisted that Hillary Clinton should not be elected president because people were sick of the "dynasty" of prominet political families. No more Clintons and Bushes, they cried at the tops of their lungs. Well, neither the Bushes nor the Clintons hold a candle to the Kennedys when it comes to political dynasties, so the hypocrasy is rather apparent.

But simply on qualifications when you fairly look at what Caroline Kennedy has accomplished in her life, I find very little little to recommend for her to hold this office. Certainly, she is an extremely intelligent and well educated woman, but she has never shown any interest in the guts of politics before now. She had confined herself to charities and trusts, using her name recognition for causes like public education. She had never expressed any desire to hold office herself and has never publicly endorsed a candidate until this presidential election.

If Ms. Kennedy decided that she wanted to run for office and campaigned for the position, I would be all for it. She would be required to defend her record (or lack thereof) to the voters who would then decide if she was suitable for the postion. But by seeking the position through an appointment, it does show that she still has little desire to engage fully in the political process.

When appointing someone to a political position, the two things that must be avoided is the appearance of appointing one because of political connections and appointing someone who would not be able to get the position with an election. A lot of the arguments some have used in favor of Ms. Kennedy, including her closeness to the new president, are rather unseemly. Hillary Clinton campagined for and fought for this office. It's too important a position to be handed over to someone who has immediate phone access to influencial political figures in the state and no real stomach for a political fight.

And yes, I'll be one of the Clinton supporters that's nursing a bit of a grudge against the Kennedy family over how they threw over Clinton in favor of Obama despite the years of politcal partnership between the Kennedy's and both President and Senator Clinton. To have Caroline Kennedy simply handed Clinton's senatorial seat would be an insult to the outgoing Senator.