Keeping it in the family
If this New York Daily News report is to be believed, it seems that Senator Ted Kennedy has told friends that he would like to keep his Senate seat inside the Kennedy clan if and when he can no longer occupy it.
Ted Kennedy has made clear to confidants that when his time is up, he wants his Senate seat to stay in the family – with his wife, Vicki.
Multiple sources in Massachusetts with close ties to the liberal lion say his wife of 16 years has long been his choice to continue carrying the family flame in the Senate. Kennedy won the seat in 1962; his brother John held it from 1953 to 1960.
“There’s no question that he’d like Vicki to continue in his seat,” said one Massachusetts Democrat with ties to the Camelot clan who spoke to Kennedy recently, before his health crisis.
“She’s smart, and smart politically.”
Not being a resident of Massechusetts I really don’t have a dog in this fight, but such a concept (in some ways resembling a royal succession all too closely) has never sat well with me. While the people of the state can certainly select who they will, the handing off of a Senate seat to a family member just strikes me as unamerican in some fashion.
I still have full sympathy for the Senator and hope for his full and speedy recovery, but it is at times like this when devotion and attachment can sometimes run roughshod over the normal political process. I would like to see less of this in the future and more of an open chance for the best qualified candidates to step forward and be vetted.
opinions powered by SendLove.to
8 Responses to “Keeping it in the family”
Another arrow in the heart of meritocracy.
Not so different from the senator who's wife took over his seat after he died in a plane crash…
There is precedent, but there is now “willing” of a seat afaik.
If she happens to be the most qualified (which would be one hell of a coincidence) then fine, elect her. Otherwise elect someone else, it's that simple.
The fact that having an important last name, be it Bush, Clinton or Kennedy, gives you a leg up in an election is a sad statement about the value we give to democracy.
The Kennedy's have a 'Kennedy clan' mythology. That's their affair.
We are not part of the clan and don't have to buy into the mythology.
i don't see anyone in the youger generation capable of stepping into the large shoes of the clan elders. Yet, if someone named Kennedy were to crop up, i don't think he/she should be penalized for bearing the name.
The left loves to use the meme and affirmative action is needed because we cannot afford to waste talent in the U.S. Yet, from the Carnahan's *(Missouri), Bushes (texas), Tafts (ohio), and Kennedy's where elected positions are given to family members. Is there no talent people in Mass. who do not have Kennedy for a last name.
The Kennedy's have had their time being in charge. It is time for others to be given the chance.
It's nice to see that nepotism remains alive and well among the fixtures and other camp-following fleas, including celeb-syncophants and lobbyists, in Washington. What's next, the children or other relatives of staffers and reporters and think-tank members? (Does Newt Gingrich have any relatives who want to live and “practice” there?) I believe father-son lobbyist instances already exist.
Don't hold your breath, Superdestroyer, because while Neil Bush is too tainted, a desperate GOP in 2012 is likely to try the “brand name” “designer label” approach out of frustration once more and the long-anticipated run for the White House by Jeb Bush will likely be real.
“Another arrow in the heart of meritocracy.”
[ahem] The Senate, after all, _was_ meant to be aristocratic. But yes, in a meritocratic rather than a nepotic or corrupt sense. Stop the family dynasties!
(Isn't Evan Bayh still a likely Vice Presidential selection? ugh)
*** AMERICANS WANT TERM LIMITS *** *** TWO TERMS AND OUT ***