There are so many out in MSM-land, it's hard to pick just a few.
But here are links to and brief comments about four very recent articles I found interesting for reasons serious and/or frivolous.
Arthur Sulzberger’s NY Times provides a touching 1958 picture of then Sen. John Kennedy and his baby daughter Caroline in a bassinet looking lovingly at each other. It's followed by the headline and story: “A Fumbled Handoff of the Torch “
As the picture and headline suggest, the story plays on Camelot memories and fails to seriously examine the implosion of Kennedy's bid to be named New York's next U. S. Senator.
The AP's running a number of Kennedy stories offering differing explanations for Kennedy's failed bid including: "Schumer the unseen hand in NY Senate choice"
This is a story political junkies will love. Senator Schumer will too, since: a) he loves media attention focused on his importance; and b) this story makes him seem a “kingmaker.” ( I really should have said “queenmaker,” but all of you except the trolls will forgive me, I think)
Politico offers "Analyzing Caroline"
Politco's Ben Smith links to a New Yorker Kennedy profile he says is outstanding. I’ve not yet read it.
Smith's story includes New Yorker profile quotes from Kennedy supporter Laurence O’Donnell zinging Gov. Paterson.
And then there's the NY Times’ Maureen Dowd’s column: “Which Governor Is Wackier?”
If you know Dowd, you know right away the two Governors she’s talking about are Blago and Paterson.
Blago because even Maureen Dowd's smart enough to know he's wacky.
And Paterson because Dowd worships at the Court of Camelot’s Kings and Queens, Lords and Ladies.
Whatever – you know – the rest of us might think, Dowd really believes if Paterson had just appointed Caroline:
"Then the Democrats would have had another Kennedy in the Senate representing New York — Bobby’s niece and a smart, policy-oriented, civic-minded woman to whom the president feels deeply indebted in an era when every state has its hand out."Ah, the magic glow Camelot still casts on some.
I’ll post again late Sunday afternoon on the Kennedy story at which time I'll more fully thank than here now those of you who’ve commented or given me heads ups on the story since it began playing out in mid-December .
Look for the post by 5 PM ET.
6 comments:
That Dowd article is a lot more vicious than you make it out to be. She sees Blago as a bumbling but endearing bum but paints Paterson as a Machiavellian manipulator for naming Gillibrand. I go into more in my blogpost today.
John: "articles," not "atricles."
TH
Dowd's claim about the civic-mindedness of Caroline Kennedy made me nearly choke on my tea as I read her column. Had I, a fifties something married female whose children are grown (or in Kennedy's case nearly grown) with no career (though in my case I have had one for over thirty years) and neglected to vote in many elections like Ms. Kennedy (though I have a perfect voting record) - I would have been laughed out of the room at the mere thought of proclaiming that I was ready to serve as my state's senator and deserved the opportunity. Dowd obviously imbibes the same Kool-aid as all those other Camelot worshippers. Any one of Kennedy's negatives would have been enough to sink any other candidate (inarticulateness, no stated views on the pressing issues of the day, tax issues, failure to vote, lack of experience of any sort, and as it turns out, quite an overstatement about her effectiveness in fund-raising for the NYC school system). What she did have, of course, was a name that evokes the image of a sweet young girl who tragically lost her father. However, the people of New York deserve more than a memory of a young girl - there is reason why there is an age requirement to be a senator.
What I did find interesting in Dowd's piece was her remarks about Schumer. I have felt all along that Headline Chuck would find it difficult to relinquish his position as the senior senator to a colleague who would be junior to him in all ways except her family name. The selection of Gillebrand does not threaten his position - at least for now. Paterson's actions have just made New York politics even more interesting. Cuomo, Gillebrand, Maloney will be fighting a turf war - meanwhile Guiliani and Peter King will be watching on the sidelines to determine how they will divide the spoils. Who can deny that politics is the real sport of America?
cks
Mo MoDo,
You say, "That Dowd article is a lot more vicious than you make it out to be."
I never got into the matter of its "vicious[ness]."
My only points were to call the column to readers' attention and note with one example how the "glow of Camelot" still influences Dowd; such that she says downright foolish things.
You're right right Dowd presents Blago as a bumbler and Paterson as something far worse.
I read your post this morning.
It's an excellent fisking.
I plan to link to it later today when I post again on Kennedy.
TH,
I've got it fixed now.
Thank you, thank you, thank you.
cks,
You once again provide very thoughtful commentary on what is at many levels a sad and worrisome story.
I won't say more now because I plan to use some of it in this afternoon's post.
Meanwhile, thank you all three.
John
The real mystery in the Schumer/Gillibrand saga is why Schumer (who obviously thinks anyone okayed by the NRA is the Devil incarnate) is supporting Gillibrand (who is not only approved by the NRA, but actually believes and accepts the entire Bill of Rights.
To say there's something fishy doesn't quite catch the import of this. There is no greater enemy of the Second Amendment than Schumer; his alignment with Gillibrand begs more inquiries. Will he get her into the senate then cut her legs out from under her when she is challenged by another gun-hating Democrat? To what end? The plot thickens. Any upstate New Yorkers out there care to comment?
Tarheel Hawkeye
Tarheel Hawkeye:
You are right - something fishy is going on. Like I said, politics is the real American sport.
cks
Post a Comment