You are currently browsing the daily archive for December 27, 2008.

I started this as an update to my last Caroline entry, but I thought it merits an entry of its own.

The pearls keep rolling off her tongue – and the ones revealing her cluelessness about democracy are my favorite.

After being surprised and dismayed by her own voting record and declaring she would only become senator by appointment, she answered the New York Times questions about education

in an area like education, where she has some expertise. Ms. Kennedy would not say, for example, whether she supported proposals to abolish tenure for teachers and offer them merit pay instead.“To pick out the most controversial one as a stand-alone thing, I don’t think that’s really the way to go about this,” Ms. Kennedy said. “People can vote; it’ll be really interesting to see what happens.

It would be really interesting your bratiness, except we don’t get to vote for – or rather against you. And you are an empty vessel to be used by the same puppeteers that install figureheads in the rest of the government.

Willie Brown let us know of Blago’s new PR offensive

It’s fascinating from the start

Igot a call from Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich the other day. The first thing I said to him was, “You know, this call is probably being taped.”

and gives us a fresh angle from Blago

I can’t go into details, but my impression is that the whole mess started because the governor had been considering appointing a political rival, Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan, to the Senate so she wouldn’t be able to run against him when he went up for re-election in 2010.

Apparently, Obama’s people weren’t happy about the idea of Madigan coming to Washington, and there were some pretty heated conversations between Blagojevich and Obama chief of staff Rahm Emanuel, which I understand will burn your ears off.

Considering everything we already know about the Obama-Blago ties in the pay to play system,

Obama and Blagojevich have undeniable links. Time and again, the same “pay to play” businessmen who gave Blago his pound of flesh also gave smaller donations to Barack Obama

it makes sense.

And Willie Brown’s opinion

I wouldn’t bet on him stepping aside anytime soon. If anything, his hand is getting stronger by the day.

I guess he knows a few things.

Remember Michelle’s “you only have one shot at him”?

Caroline pulls a similar one acording to Politico in her NY interview

Kennedy, who projected a relaxed, accessible persona, was also asked if she’d run in 2010 if not selected.

“Well, if he doesn’t select me, I would support the person that he does select,” she said.

Why would she have to pander to riff raff? (It also means it’s in the bag, like B0’s selection whem Michele spoke)

After all, she has a “vocation”

Dominic Carter: Is the legacy of your father perhaps why you’re running or hoping to go to the U.S. Senate?

Caroline Kennedy: This is really about me. I’m tremendously proud of our family legacy my mother was really a strong force in my life and she believed doing the unexpected and living life on your own terms. Now that I am 51 as you pointed out (laughs) this is something I’ve come to on my own. I’ve done different kinds of things because I think this isn’t something you don’t do unless you’re really committed. I understand about how much work is required This is not just a job, it’s a vocation, a mission, I wouldn’t be putting myself forward unless I was serious about exactly what was required.

Sheesh! Silly me – I thought it was about serving the people of NY!

Anyway, the little bit of dish from the Politico article

she finally spoke to Hillary Clinton — who didn’t initially take her call — and that, if she’s not selected, she won’t run for the seat.

“We did have a very nice, you know, conversation, and obviously I’m not gonna talk about that, except to say that she said this was the greatest job that she’d ever had and could imagine having,” Kennedy said. “So, she was very encouraging, and that was, you know, that was nice because she’s a huge inspiration of mine.”

yeah, Caroline, it was a great job she had. Then your uncle squeezed her out bu kicking her out of the healthcare committeee making her leave senate so you can have a ‘vocation”. But only by appointment.


I missed the funniest bit – her answer to the voting record:

“I was really surprised and dismayed by my voting record,” she said. “I’m glad it’s been brought to my attention.”

Translation: not the voting record I used to know”

And then, there’s the NY Times interview where she gave the impression that

she still seemed less like a candidate than an idea of one: forceful but vague, largely undefined and seemingly determined to remain that way.

one exception from the vagueness:

Caroline Kennedy, the woman who would be New York’s next senator, is sure of one thing

“I wouldn’t be here if I didn’t think I would be the best,”

And she left the controversial answers to…the voters

even in an area like education, where she has some expertise. Ms. Kennedy would not say, for example, whether she supported proposals to abolish tenure for teachers and offer them merit pay instead.“To pick out the most controversial one as a stand-alone thing, I don’t think that’s really the way to go about this,” Ms. Kennedy said. “People can vote; it’ll be really interesting to see what happens.

It’s the title New York Times gives – minus the suspension dots to their editorial on W’s latest kick against Roe

Undermining women’s reproductive rights and access to health care has been a pervasive theme of the outgoing administration. On his first full day in office, President Bush imposed the “global gag rule,”…

True, W (whose “W” stands for women per Laura), bookended his administrations on attacks on women’s right to choose. And it’ a good point to make that with this last one

The impact will be hardest on poor women who rely on public programs for their health care.

That New York Times evem mentions women’s rights in 2008, the Year of the Penis – is not even funny.

Mind you, they make a point to say that Teh One – who once gave a speech, also…wrote a letter:

In July, Barack Obama, still a senator at the time, signed a letter to Mr. Leavitt, along with some of his colleagues, urging Mr. Leavitt to scrap an earlier draft of the regulation. It cited a number of problems that were perpetuated in the final version.

Translation: a group of senators made perfunctory comments to this outrageous bill and Obama added his signature to theirs. because at the time only Hillary and, OK, Nancy too issued statements on the bill

“It is outrageous that the Bush administration is once again putting ideology over women’s health. Instead of undercutting access to contraception and family planning services, the Bush administration should put prevention first,” said Sen. Clinton.

But Obama co-signed a letter. Now I am even less sure he’ll change it. Although NY Times seems to trust Daschle a lot:

By acting right away to suspend its implementation, President-elect Barack Obama and his choice to succeed Mr. Leavitt, Tom Daschle, can block irresponsible changes that threaten people’s rights and defy the federal government’s duty on public health.

I’ll be keeping an eye on it. In the meanwhile, New York Times and women rights????? I’ll pick just one memory from the 2008 ugly bag:

MoDo: Sexism in party platform? For that Bitch????

In which she complains:

Obama also allowed Hillary supporters to insert an absurd statement into the platform suggesting that media sexism spurred her loss and that “demeaning portrayals of women … dampen the dreams of our daughters.”

I especially love the quotation marks there. I suggest NY Times stands by MoDo, Frank Rich and Bob Herbert with his Phallic symbol and leave women’s rights alone for a while.

NYT on women’s rights is as appropriate as a leper on cosmetics.


Not Your Sweetie

December 2008