1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

If Caroline's last name were Pailn

Discussion in 'Political Debate & Discussion' started by NaasPreacher (C4K), Dec 19, 2008.

  1. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K) Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,806
    Ratings:
    +127
    The title of the thread is taken from this

    FOX FORUM POST

    And here is a view from a

    WASHINGTON POST OP-ED

    Both agree that Caroline Kennedy is far less qualified than Gov Palin to hold office. The Post article claims that she need not the same scrutiny because her possible office is not as important as Palin's was. Any thoughts?

    I am leaning toward the Post' opinion at the moment. No one, as far as I know, has questioned Gov Palin's capacity to govern Alaska.

    Should Caroline Kennedy be open to the same level if scrutiny as Gov Palin was?

    Please stick to the topic. This is NOT about Obama, Bush, Islam, the recession, or abortion. It is about the level of media scrutiny of two candidates.


    (BTW - this is why I like Google News - it is easy to find different angles of the same story :) )
     
  2. carpro

    carpro Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    21,787
    Ratings:
    +1,287
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Since democrats , in general are starstruck, and she has the right name, she won't meet the resistance that Palin did, but the coverage will be extensive.

    Can one say ...ad nauseum?

    Since she's not a conservative, the media attacks will be muted and short lived. Maybe even non existent.
     
  3. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K) Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,806
    Ratings:
    +127
    I agree - but do they matter as much for a Senator as they would for a Vice-President? When I read the Fox article I thought that the point was 100% valid, but the Post article, while agreeing in essence, did point out that Kennedy will only be one out of 100 instead of potentially being President.

    Do Senate candidates and nominees 'deserve' the same level of scrutiny, or even more because they have a famous name? Should a famous name be a detriment to a potential office holder?

    What would her scrutiny be like nationally if her name was Caroline Johnson or Smith?
     
  4. carpro

    carpro Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    21,787
    Ratings:
    +1,287
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I believe the scrutiny level and experience requirement, since she will not be elected, should be just as high as it was for Palin.

    As a Senator, she would have a day to day influence on national policy.

    If she had to run for election, the scrutiny and experience would take care of itself in the fires of competition.
     
  5. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K) Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,806
    Ratings:
    +127
    So would you agree that every appointed Senator in every state should be open to the same level of intense public scrutiny that Governor Palin was, regardless of name or family and that the same experience requirement also be expected?

    In other words, is she due extra scrutiny just because she is a Kennedy?
     
  6. carpro

    carpro Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    21,787
    Ratings:
    +1,287
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Yes and NO respectively.

    But being a Kennedy, she'll get the extra attention. She knows it. Probably is counting on it. The scrutinizing will eventually be lost in the glamor of the Kennedy connection.
     
  7. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K) Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,806
    Ratings:
    +127
    I appreciate your candour and find it interesting, mostly because I don't ever recall any kind of national scrutiny being paid to any other Senate appointee. Normally, I think, we just leave that up to the individual state to handle.

    Now if you are talking about scrutiny in New York, I understand and agree.
     
  8. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    39,139
    Ratings:
    +2,365
    Faith:
    Baptist
    If Palin were running for then Senate would she receive the same level of scrutiny? The position has little to do with it. Since the larger part of the media is left wing Kennedy gets a pass and those like Palin get 50 lawyers up their back sides.
     
  9. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K) Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,806
    Ratings:
    +127
    I strongly suspect that if it were Palin before her run for the VP office none of us would even hear about it outside of Alaska. When was the last time before Kennedy (or the Obama seat) that you heard about a Senate appointee? Who, for example, without googling, is going to take Biden's seat?
     
  10. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    39,139
    Ratings:
    +2,365
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I disagree.

    1. If Bidens seat was now being filled by a Republican it most likely would get much scrutiny.

    2. If Obama's seat was being filled by a Republican or anyone not a Democrat it would likely get much scrutiny.

    The reason for this is that they would need to be destroyed in order to place someone in those offices that support abortion, gay marriage, and the UN's childrens rights treaty.
     
  11. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K) Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,806
    Ratings:
    +127
    This has nothing to do with the topic at hand.
     
  12. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K) Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,806
    Ratings:
    +127
    Any time you change parties it will get scrutinised, thats obvious - but that is not the case here, Clinton and Kennedy are both Democrats.
     
  13. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    39,139
    Ratings:
    +2,365
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Hence there will be no scrutiny. Your example that Biden's seat goes unnoticed fails to support your original assertion that Senate seats receive less scrutiny because of the nature of the seat.
     
  14. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K) Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,806
    Ratings:
    +127
    ON the contrary - it is evidence of my assertion - the scrutiny is normally not there in any case. why should Kennedy be an exception?
     
  15. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    39,139
    Ratings:
    +2,365
    Faith:
    Baptist

    If as you admit the seat is staying Democratic therefore it will go unnoticed then we cannot know that senate seats typically go innoticed with much less scrutiny. All we know is that this happens when Democrats keep seats. Which given the liberal left wing pres will be the case.
     
  16. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K) Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,806
    Ratings:
    +127
    As they do when Republicans seat are maintained.

    The question is does the author of the Fox Forum have a point. I contend she does not. Running for Vice-president and being appointed a state's junior senator are two different matters. Kennedy deserves no more scrutiny than Kaufman. Every vice-presidential candidate deserves special scrutiny.
     
  17. windcatcher

    windcatcher New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2007
    Messages:
    2,764
    Ratings:
    +0
    I think any appointee to fill a vacated and normally elected seat deserves some scrutiny. That being said, it is not a typical function of the press to give it so much attention so, in this case, I think both the Kennedy/Clinton prior conflict, Camelot hype, and the fact that Caroline is lobbying public support by publishing her desires..... is adding to the extrordinary interest which filling this vacancy is getting.
     
  18. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    39,139
    Ratings:
    +2,365
    Faith:
    Baptist
    It has everything to do with it. It is the reason why the left scrutinizes conservatives and not libs.
     
    #18 Revmitchell, Dec 19, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 19, 2008
  19. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    39,139
    Ratings:
    +2,365
    Faith:
    Baptist

    You have not provided any evidence to support this.
     
  20. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    39,139
    Ratings:
    +2,365
    Faith:
    Baptist

    Every candidate deserves equal scrutiny regardless of office. But the left only scrutinizes conservative candidates with a fine tooth comb.
     
Loading...