Caroline Kennedy for senator.

It's unfortunate to hear but Caroline Kennedy has announced to have her name redrawn from the candidate list as a senator. She has redrawn because she wants to be closer to his uncle Ted Kennedy who recently suffered from a seizure during Obama's Inauguration. Although this reason is merited by some, others preferred to think it's because she new she wasn't going to be appointed. Now the CNN believes that Andrew Cromo maybe one of the candidates to move up the list.

Thanks for your reply. I hope that she run also but that won't be until the next election which is two years from now. If she is appointed by Gov. Paterson to replace Hillary for the remaining two years than I can see her running in the next coming election. The first two years would have given her more confidence and the vision to know precisely what she would want to accomplish. I am confidence that Gov. Paterson will pick her, after all it's only for two years. If no one gave you a chance to start your first college job, you would have never achieved the experience you now possess. The decision that Gov. Paterson has to make should reflect the candidates intent for becoming a New York Senator not just experience. Experience alone will not guarantee us a good senator. Yes you right Caroline Kennedy does come from a promising family that has demonstrated good deed toward this country.

Ok, I must admit …this conversation has begun to lose gravity; a lack in comprehension has started to show itself. If we must debate this issue, putting words in my mouth will not highlight your view. Anyone reading my reply to your respond understands clearly what I’ve said. Now, I did not say that Caroline Kennedy was the most qualified Candidate in New York State. Anyone who read my reply can make that assertion for themselves …it appeared that you might very well be the only one whose confuse of what I’ve said. I have repeated myself so much that it has become redundant. I said although experience maybe important it's not all that is needed. One must also look at the intention behind the experience. It is only by knowing the candidate intention can we truthfully trust her to govern. Now, that is the premise of my debate and yet you seem to confuse my view. This got me thinking that your input is back up by other means which are not related to progressive criticism; your recent opinion seems to be invoking by the self ego because it’s obviously in free fall.

The other confusion is even more surprising, I did not say “ Caroline Kennedy carries the spirit of JFK and because of that is the most qualified” what I said was “We offer Caroline the position with the benefit of the doubt she'll prove herself to carry alone the Kennedy spirit.” I honestly don’t see how you arrived to the aforementioned, you got me with that one …I’m totally stunned by your inability to understand what I’ve written. It is almost as if I was communicating with a different person. When I thought you’re done, you said this “Caroline Kennedy is so rich (I thought democrats were for the average guy)” Now; this is where the conversation stops.

The most valuable comment was this “Also, if you think a woman should be replaced by a woman, and a black should be replaced with a black, then does that mean white male senators should be replaced by white male senators? If not, then the double standard continues.”

Opposing the status quo is a fight for equality, fighting for a change. As it is now, there is no equilibrium in our government. All you have to do is draw a parallel between the state representatives in regard to state population by race and gender. What you’ll notice is a misrepresentation between our senate members and the people their represent. First of all women account for more of our population and yet there are more men senators than there are woman. Second, black people have been misrepresented in this country for far too long to only have one black senator which was Barack Obama. Throughout history they have been a total of 5 black senators that have occupied office in subsequent order; they have been overlaps where they were two at one time but never more than two. If you agree that one senator in congress is not a misrepresentation of the black population in the United State than what are your reasons for justifying it?

OK, here's the deal Rob, as you already know, this position is not yet up for election. It will depends sorely on one man, Gov. David Paterson. It is a two years temporary position that is now available until the next election presented itself again. Now, to talk about experience without comparing experience with that of the opponent is meaningless. What we need to know is who are Caroline competitors and what do we know about them. Like I said in this hub, although experience maybe important, it's not everything. The intention of the person seeking this position should also be questioned. As you said, it's an important position, so the opponents of Caroline Kennedy who seek this position should also be important people. What I mean by that suggest those who apply for that position should have also contributes to our society. It would be unfair for her to compete with someone who has not contributed to our society as her parents have done. The truth is Rob, people are more likely to trust someone who belong to a family who has done good for their society than someone their know anything about. It's just how it is, I mean who do you trust more Rub, a family doctor or any doctor? A family doctor knows your health history while any doctor doesn't.

If this was an election for the senate seat it would have been a different story. Since Caroline would have had to prove herself to the people of New York, a more explicit outward of her presentation would have been necessary. Unfortunately this temporary position does not require public participation, it's simply the Governors choice. Offering this position to Caroline would be the right choice. It is a choice that reflects the service of JFK to it's people, not the name. We offer Caroline the position with the benefit of the doubt she'll prove herself to carry alone the Kennedy spirit. Although we're not sure if she can meet the challenge, we take a chance since it's only temporary.

And beside, if we're going to have competitors for this position they should all be women. Since we don't have too many women as senators, it's unfair to offer that position to a man. The same principle can be apply to Gov. Rob Glagojevich who offered the senate position to former state Attorney General Roland Burris. We do that as an attempt to create a balance within our government because to have a bunch of men making decision on woman issues without a woman in the senate, is not a balance government. And the opposite is true for a black senator.

Well done my friend. You do have some valuable points but those points reflects the view of popular thinking which I don't think you're are. As you continue reading my opinion, you'll see why but first I must say that you really are putting Sarah Palin on a pedestal that is seriously too high for her. Nonetheless, from a constitutional point of view, you right, the job of the senator is more detail than the Vice President. However, to assumed because a Vice President don't make or execute the law makes his position less valuable is something a common person would say. Had this position been offered to Hillary she would have taken it and yet her position as secretary of state is more details than the VP. So now the question is ….why is it that the VP position is such a prestigious one? To know the answer to that, all you have to do is look at the influential performance of our current Vice President, Dick Cheney. Cheney is such a powerful VP that people often confused his role with George W Bush.

The VP is the president left ears, better yet he is his left nut. He's the only man who can assumed presidency if something where to happen to the president. Although he may gives out speeches, the most important thing is to know who to give speeches to. He's where the confusion come in, most of us assumed that the power that the president holds is the most powerful force that exist within our government. We're looking at things in three dimensional when they can be more than three. The power that the president holds can only be viewed as Apparent Power which is Power that us the people have given the president by electing him to office. We must keep in mind that there are what is known as True Power which is power gain from commerce. Some of us call them interest group but those that reach the level of True Power does not need interest group. I will leave it as that.

So yes, the VP job is a chilling position but does it mean those who held these position are not influential people. Your supervisor if you have one who tells you what to do, doesn't he take commands from a bigger BOSS who listen to another big BOSS who sit around all day, pointing fingers, dictating what should be done. That's how the world works my friend, as far as I'm concern we are all slaves who thinks that we're free which makes us more of a slave.

My advice to you is to stop taking the role of public servant so literally, because the guy who tap your back, telling you good job maybe more influential than the president elect. The active role that a VP has in the grand scheme of things is an invisible one. I know that's not the answer you were looking for but it's the best answer you'll find out here.

You said “Palin was lacking foriegn policy experience, but then again, foreign policy should be an expectation of a possible senator, they do vote on wars after all” I agree. However though, if you agree with that statement, you must also agree that Sarah Palin was not ready to be VP since the job required one to be experience not only in foreign policy but in all aspect of politic. I refused to accept a woman who thought talking to a joker from Canada was the same as talking to the French president Nicolas Sarkozy, I mean she spoke with that guy for minutes without realizing that it was a prank. Was that the vice president you wished for us, you must be joking, you can't be serious, perhaps you're playing a prank on me.

This is long because of what you have written in your hub.

Look, you must be a brave supporter because not too many people would have taken for Palin. I felicitate you for that but however, I must let you know that Palin shouldn't be compared with Caroline Kennedy. To compare them can be seen as a mistake of identity. Caroline Kennedy is running for US State Senate while Palin ran for Vice President of the United State. That's totally two different job requirements, most people would agree that a VP job is for someone who's as experience as the president running for office. I'm sorry to say but Sarah Palin was not as experienced as McCain, and you don't need me to tell you that, it's written in all the news papers. What if McCain had been elected, God for sake something were to happen to him, is that how you would want our first women president to make it in the white house. No, I don't think so, that's too much of a cheap shot for women. Hillary showed too much courage for that, women will make it to the white house just like most of our president have made it, the hard way, through the process of election.

Sarah Palin Alaska’s Governor nearly had two years in office. According to some sources she has absolutely no experience in foreign policy. In Dayton, Ohio, John McCain introduced Sarah Palin as his choice for VP. He said, "She's got the grit, integrity, good sense and fierce devotion to the common good that is exactly what we need in Washington today." I thought this VP job required one to have experience and all aspect of politic. Did you noticed anything about her being experienced in this quote? Yes, she may have been devoted but what is devotion if you don’t have the experience that goes with it. That was another bad choice from Senator Mc McCain. Governor Palin then spoke to the crowd and said, "it turns out the women of America aren't finished yet, and we can shatter that glass ceiling once and for all." She made the election seems as though she was the replacement of Hillary Clinton. It almost seemed as a joke to people for Senator McCain to have thought that the women of America were so desperate to have a woman in the white house, that they would settle just for any woman. That my friend was the biggest mistake of his campaign, it tremendously reduced McCain chance for winning the election.

For those of us who were watching the primaries, we saw Senator Barack Obama fought desperately to win this nomination. His opponent was Senator Hilary Clinton the wife of former president Clinton. This woman was not just any woman, she’s an aggressor, a heavy duty and a very experienced woman whose no stranger to politic. There are speculation that she may have lost against Obama because some didn’t want the Clintons to assumed office for another third terms. They would have made too much connection and thereby would have acquired too much power. So let us get it right, Obama is very proud to have won this election. It was then that Obama proved to America that he was experienced enough to direct this country in a new direction. It was after he defeated Hillary I predicted that he was going to be the next president of the Unite State. Just comparing the choices that McCain and Obama made for vice president, it's obvious that Barack Obama was more likely to make the right choice for America. McCain made his choice base on what he thoughts America wanted. Obama made his choice base on what he knew America wanted and that was Joe Bidden. It was this decision that placed the candle on the cake for Obama. I always wondered if Governor Palin was McCain first choice and I later found out Joe Lieberman was McCain first choice, then it made sense to me. Because at first most people thought that Palin was a last result situation that came true ...because to most people McCain choice didn't make sense. They all saw it as a fight for womens rights instead of a presidential election.

The Palin’s daughter issue became an issue mainly because she didn't support sex education. As a Governor running a state, you should be competent enough to know if the statistics showed your state to be the most infected with sexual transmitted disease, it's your responsibility to do something about it. Since she didn't support sex education, it's apparent why when her daughter got pregnant, people were furious to use her as an example to show the American people why sex education is important in our education system. Whether you believe it or not, it’ was more about her judgment than it was about her daughter. This is something that happen to most American families. We’re not condemning the child but her parents for not educating her on how to use protection. This was one of the many reasons why we democrats said that she was not fit to be Vice President. Obviously, if she couldn't direct her daughter’s life into a better path, why should we have believed that she would have help direct America into prosperity?