U.S. Senate appointment

     In light of all the rumors swirling around, I wish to make clear that I have had no contact with Governor Paterson concerning his pending appointment of a U.S. Senator to succeed Mrs. Clinton; and no person authorized to speak on my behalf has had any such contact. While I would be honored to serve in the Senate, I am not a candidate, at this time. 

     In today’s news, we hear that Obama’s entourage has indicated that it wants Caroline Kennedy to be appointed. In the first place, her name is Schlossberg, or at least that’s what it was for the past several decades until she decided she wanted to cash in on the Kennedy legacy after all. But anyway, I think it’s a moot point because I’d be very surprised if Paterson appoints her. The Obama camp’s endorsement ought to be the coup de grace to her candidacy, which was already faltering. It was previously looking like Paterson, if he appointed her, was being manipulated into doing so; now, he practically is forced to appoint someone else, lest he appear a total puppet. That’s how I’d see it, if I were in his shoes; though I admit politicians often exhibit a stunning inability to see things as I think they ought to. 

     I have nothing, really, against the lady, she actually seemed pretty admirable (until lately), and appointing her might have come across as a bold and brilliant move, had it come as a surprise. Instead, now, it would come across as capitulation to putative entitlement.

Advertisements

2 Responses to “U.S. Senate appointment”

  1. charles r carlson Says:

    Frank,
    While I do not consider myself a fan of Obama, he has done New York the enormous favor of taking the carpetbagger off our hands. New York’s gain is the nation’s loss.
    Charlie

  2. Jud Says:

    I am curious to hear your take on the ‘Midnight Mystery’ of Caroline’s withdrawal from consideration. Many conservative pundits have picked up on it however, stating that if it was Sarah Palin, the ‘left-leaning’ media would have crucified her. Why do you think that there has been a virtual news black-out in reporting the actual (as opposed to the alleged) reason?

    FSR REPLY: Maybe you know something about the “actual” reason that I don’t know. In fact, far from a news blackout, there has been an avalanche of speculation. It’s my guess that she pulled out mainly because she didn’t want the humiliation of being passed over.
    Kirsten Gillibrand has a down-to-earth homey image, but she is a very savvy political operator. Frankly, I very much admired how she laid the groundwork for her 2006 Congressional run, and then, having gotten that seemingly dubious opportunity, she absolutely made the most of it, with as smart a blitzkrieg campaign as I’ve ever seen. And of course, she pulled it off.
    It’s disgusting how the left is knocking her. These ideological purists hate anyone who doesn’t agree with them on every single issue. I heard Carolyn McCarthy on the radio — a one-issue politician, who sounded like a bitter old harpy. Yuckkkk.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s