Governor David A. Paterson has not yet appointed Caroline Kennedy to fill Hillary Clinton's Senate seat but the proposition seems to have an air of inevitability. Hopefully it won't occur. New York has a different style of corruption from Chicago. In Chicago the governor sells Senate seats for cash. In New York, cronyism, incompetence and legislated theft are the rule.
With respect to Sarah Palin, who does not come from a wealthy background and did not attend an Ivy League university, the Democrats and their television propagandists were eager to criticize her inexperience and make fun of her abilities, despite her having been elected to governor and having held an executive position. Let's see what kind of experience Caroline Kennedy has.
Besides being the scion of a wealthy family, Kennedy attended Harvard and Columbia, and so is acceptable to Progressives and their propagandists. She worked at the Metropolitan Museum of Art. After marrying, Kennedy lived on Park Avenue for about 20 years, unlike Wasilla an address acceptable to Progressives, and had two children. Kennedy holds a legal degree and has co-authored several books. She worked for two years in a $1 per year, part-time staff job for New York City's Department of Education. She was a successful fundraiser, raising over $65 million for New York's schools. She is also on the board of the American Ballet Theatre.
This is impressive experience indeed. Impressive, that is, for a rich housewife. The most impressive thing about Caroline Kennedy's resume is that it is probably the lightest weight resume of any serious contender for Senate in New York's history. It is impressive that someone with a resume this thin would be taken seriously for a City Council, much less a Senate seat.
What would make a lightweight like Kennedy think that she ought to be Senator? Her politically correct, socially acceptable ideology? Her rich family? Her attendance at expensive private schools? All of the above?
America has been in the process of devolving from a republic into an aristocracy. Kennedy represents not the natural aristocracy that Jefferson anticipated, but a throwback to the Federalist belief in an aristocracy based on family connections and inherited wealth. Caroline Kennedy's application for New York's Senate seat represents a deeper and more profound corruption than the Blagojevich scandal.
A second-rate mayor who bought his way into City Hall has recently been able to repeal the term limits law, undoubtedly through intelligently placed contributions and pressure. A city that has banished its middle class, destroyed tens of thousands of jobs and presented unlimited eminent domain and real estate development opportunities to developers who have failed to produce value but have managed to suck the state and city dry. A state that has seen more hard working people exit than any other state and has become a two-tiered society devoid of economic opportunity. A state that has banished freedom in favor of corrupt wealth and aristocracy, all in the hypocritical name of helping the poor.
Caroline Kennedy rates New York, and New York rates her.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
New Jersey continues to be the opposite of NY in matters of aristocracy. This goes back to the days of New Amsterdam. The Dutch who measure themselves according to the social consensus stuck within the city and the near suburbs, those who measured themselves according to inward measures moved to the hinterlands, for the sake of being out of oppressive village of social consensus.
Do I think she deserves it..no way, no how.
However, I must address your following quotes.
"In New York, cronyism, incompetence and legislated theft are the rule."
in relation to Palin -" the Democrats and their television propagandists were eager to criticize her inexperience and make fun of her abilities, "
"Besides being the scion of a wealthy family, Kennedy attended Harvard and Columbia, and so is acceptable to Progressives and their propagandists."
One word. "Bush".
A man who likely acquired your vote twice and has a wealthy ivy league lineage going back to the civil war. He is truly the posterboy for elitist cronyism and the endless promotion of the incompetent who did not earn it. 4 generations of Yale grads? Cronyism is not just an affliction that Democrats/ Propagandists/ Progressives suffer from..
In regard to Palin -I've had a similar argument with friends of mine, but I am befuddled by a college professor(not trying to insult you) who would want to be representated internationally by someone who can hardly carry on a conversation without Colloquialisms. Maybe that make me an elitist, but I like the idea of being representated by someone I think is smarter than me vs. someone I would like to have a beer with at a BBQ..
Probably not the best forum to bring it up given my audience.
As always..enjoy your day, and Happy Holidays..
My only solace is knowing these liberal regressive socialites will have to answer for their atrocities. I refuse to think of them as progressives as this terminology permeates a positive ideal within its terminology. I think we need to find a mainstream housewife, such as myself, challenge her to a debate and see how she compares. The onus is on her. She is a democrat so let's see if she can compete in a layman's terms middle class ideology like the Democrats like to promote yet seldom are a part of. They disgust me with their "for the common man rhetoric" living in their million dollar homes. How about they live in a average middle class home, with the same middle class assets, and give the rest of their wealth to those who need it since they want to redistribute everyone's middle class wealth. Please, spare me your rhetoric Caroline. You are not John F. Kennedy, you're just riding his "righteous wind".
Frankly Truthhurts, I'm sorry that you underestimate me. I voted against Bush in 00 (for Libertarian Party) for the reasons that turned out to be right--likely coddling of corrupt special interests and incompetence. In 04 I voted for him because of the Iraqi War, but I was already deeply concerned about Fed policy, and if you follow my blog, I turned against him within two years. I wrote in favor of Bush's impeachment earlier this year. In fact, Bush is why I have turned into an opponent of Northeastern candidates.
There has not been a president in my lifetime whom I was happy with, so Palin's representing me does not trouble me.
I would be interested in any objective, hard evidence that Barack Obama demonstrated greater sophistication than Palin did during the election. This college professor is not so easily manipulated by media propagandists as you seem to be. It seems to me that there was a lot of media decoration of Obama and dirt slung at Palin, but where's the evidence? Do you believe that if the media went after the Annointed One as they did after Palin he would have looked good? Here was a candidate that was so ignorant of Middle East policy that he was going to hand Jersusalem to Israel. This is Bozo level ignorance, worse than anything Palin said, but since Obama came from an artistocratic background (old family, Harvard, Columbia) he was given a free pass for his ignorance. Not so Palin.
As far as Palin representing me internationally, I do not consider that would be any worse than any of the other morons who have been representing me all my life, starting with Eisenhower. Not worse at all. Why is she worse than Truman, Nixon, Clinton or Obama? Maybe she doesn't have an accent or pedigree you like, but so what?
Like Caroline Kennedy's representing me would make me happy? I would rather have a name randomly selected from the Yahoo! telephone directly than an overprivileged opportunistic creep like Caroline Kennedy.
One word. "Bush".
A man who likely acquired your vote twice and has a wealthy ivy league lineage going back to the civil war. He is truly the posterboy for elitist cronyism and the endless promotion of the incompetent who did not earn it. 4 generations of Yale grads? Cronyism is not just an affliction that Democrats/ Propagandists/ Progressives suffer from..
In regard to Palin -I've had a similar argument with friends of mine, but I am befuddled by a college professor(not trying to insult you) who would want to be representated internationally by someone who can hardly carry on a conversation without Colloquialisms. Maybe that make me an elitist, but I like the idea of being representated by someone I think is smarter than me vs. someone I would like to have a beer with at a BBQ..
Post a Comment