Caroline Kennedy

Jane Hamsher, over at FireDogLake, says that the notion of appointing Caroline Kennedy to take over Hillary's Senate seat is a "truly terrible idea."

I have to admit, when I first heard Jane wrote that, I thought "what's she got about Caroline?" Then I read what Jane wrote and, you know, she's got a point. Nothing against Caroline Kennedy, but what has she done to prove that she can handle the job? She's been a rather private Kennedy in a family that excels at public. Taking a US Senate seat, as a Kennedy, would put her enormously in the public eye. Not that she isn't already, but she really isn't. She manages to stay out of the public eye by choice. As a Senator, and a Senator Kennedy at that, she would no longer have that option. And we don't really know how good a public Kennedy Caroline is.

Having said that, I don't want to knock the allure, and benefit, of Camelot. People need dreams. And the Kennedy family, at least to those of us on the left, has carried the torch of the American dream for five decades. My heart likes the idea of having someone to carry on Ted Kennedy's legacy. Of continuing to have "a Kennedy" in public life long after Senator Kennedy retires. My head asks the same questions Jane asks. Is she ready for the spotlight? Will she be capable of being an effective Senator? Can she hold the seat against a Republican in the future?

I believe that symbols matter. And I liked it when I heard that Caroline was up for the job. But Jane raises a good point. Is it time to retire America's nobility? Are we spending far too much time focusing on politicians named Kennedy and Clinton and Bush? Is the sequel ever really as good as the original? I honestly don't know.