I'd be fine with Caroline

Fillin' Hillary's

Soon to be

Secretary of State seat

But whatever Obama wills

He'd better do it toot sweet

Of course we all remember the vast amount of electoral experience HRC had before she became a Senator!

At first I thought Caroline Kennedy would be good but I didn't really know her background. After looking at the details I like Andrew Cuomo if he is willing to leave his AG post.

Let's have the coronation first, and worry about appointing her afterward....

Any sentient being should understand (as another commenter posted here some time ago) that the new senator will most likely be Cuomo. If Cuomo doesn't get the job, Paterson will be facing a tough fight against him in the 2010 gubernatorial primary. How hard a choice is that?

The smart thing for Paterson to do is give it to his biggest rival for the governorship, whoever that be.

He didn't exactly expect to be Governor in the first place.

... but why else would anyone want to be the Lieutenant Governor?

Remember libs, we simply CANNOT mount enough fury and irritation at this interloper. She MUST BE stopped at all costs.

I hear tax violations are good way to exile someone. It'd be a big deal to the press and the GOP if she's pardoned later though.

Not that this type of thing has happened before. :-p

Actually, Clinton remains a senator and has said she will do so until confirmed as Secretary of State. That will not be before early January, so Patterson need be in no rush to make the call. And New York will not lack representation in the new Senate, unlike Illinois which may not have a new senator for many months.

O tempora, o mores!

"It's the same the whole world over,

It's the rich that gets the pleasure,

it's the poor what gets the blame.

Ain't it all a bloody shame!

When southern white males 18-35 ( preponderance of our military which actually sees combat) have an automatic affirmative action seat in the senate or house or cabinet position ( yes I know they aren't eligible, but they could have a convention and nominate a proxy ) then I will consider the right a greater threat to the Constitution than the left. Moderate conservatives 2, Obama 0.

it's only fair

I know all the words in your statement, but it still makes not a lick of a sense. In fact, it seems to be a series of buzzwords strung together in free-association. Explain further, perhaps?

Just look at who the democratic caucus picked for president.

Yeah, I havta say I'm with Brian on this one: WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU TRYING TO SAY?!

Whoever is advising her has got nits for brains. This responding to the media by accepting only written questions and have a flunky answering them in the third person is ridiculous! Who does she think she is? The queen of England?

And what's this comparison with Hillary! Hillary was not appointed to the seat! She spent two years doing listening tours in rural NY in areas where the right wing and their handmaidens in the MSM said she would never win. She worked hard and won over the voters. So there's no comparison!!!

I see PC's behaviour as a form of bullying. By supping with Al Sharpton and using her pals in the media to push her interest in this seat, Patterson is being bullied into choosig her. I hope he won't fall for it!!

New York has only one vote to count, yet people complain picking a senator in Minnesota is taking a long time.

Personally I prefer Hotdog Boy over Mr. Matchstick

But minds better get made up

And made up quick...

Glenn A. Wrote: "Of course we all remember the vast amount of electoral experience HRC had before she became a Senator!"

Not the point! The point is POLITICAL experience! HRC has always been OUT THERE! Exposing herself to the political drama and imbued in it, helping Bill become governor of AR as well as being involved in his presidential campaign. By contrast, Caroline has for most of her life (until now) elected to have a life OUT OF public view and devoid of political purpose. So why now?

My complaint has always been not so much her lack of experience, but the fact of her lack of previous, serious political committment and passion. Taking political risk like HRC has, not hiding in her own societal niche.

For decades Caroline sought a private niche where she would not have to face overly prolonged public exposure, especially having to answer any untoward questions about her father's and uncle's assassinations. Quite understandable.

What isn't so understandable is her abdication of her voting franchise in SIX presidential elections. This is not the example we want any would -be leader to set, irrespective of family pedigree or celebrity.

For those reasons, and especially because the public persona of a U.S. Senator is so radically divergent from Caroline's hitherto chosen private life, I question her motives, not so much the qualifications.

WHY is she doing this? Why now, why not earlier? Why forego a private life (and cherished family privacy) she had hitherto guarded so zealously? Why did she not even deign to vote in six major elections?

I'd like to vet the answers to those questions before I sign on blindly to a Caroline Kennedy Senatorial position.

It should be Andrew Cuomo who would make a fine Senator. Caroline isn't qualified.

If a woman who has spent her life shunning the New York public and rarely voting is selected to represent the great state of New York public, New Yorkers will not only be losing a extraordinarily effective Senator in Hillary Clinton, but they will be losing even more by having as her replacement an elitest Kennedy, one who has accomplished very little and doesn't even want to come in contact with the people of New York. How sad!

Surely Governor Patterson has more sense than to appoint Caroline Kennedy when he has so many really capable people to choose from, people who have demonstrated their electability and their devotion to the people of New York.