Blogs and Stories
The Real Reasons Caroline Didn't Make It
The real reason Caroline didn't get the job isn't taxes. It's that she antagonized liberal interest groups, offended the Clintons, and generally bungled the effort. Not that Gov. Paterson did any better: In the words of someone close to him, "he's incapable of the chess strategy required to think through what the consequences of anything might be two weeks from now."
If you've been following the spat between New York Governor David Paterson and once-likely New York Senator Caroline Kennedy, you've probably asked yourself the obvious question: Who's less impressive? It's a tough one. They're both pretty mediocre.
"I don't know who they wanted," says a Clinton friend. "I know who they didn't want."
Despite the efforts of news organizations, it's almost impossible to put together a timeline of exactly what happened between Kennedy and Paterson earlier this week. Both sides have given wildly confusing and totally contradictory accounts of Kennedy's decision to end her informal campaign for the senate, and the rumor mill is churning with suggestions she had a tax problem, an illegal nanny problem, or even an affair with another high-profile New Yorker.
Somebody—probably everybody—is lying about details. Here are a couple of things we know for certain:
It was a ludicrous idea from the beginning. Here was a woman with virtually no history of political involvement or donations, no clear ideas about public policy, no natural constituency, a poor speaking voice and awkward personal skills, who hadn't even bothered to vote much of the time, who suddenly, for reasons she never explained, decided she should be given Hillary Clinton's Senate seat. Apart from her last name, she was the worst candidate ever.
It was hard to argue she was ready for the job, and few did. "She was walking right onto Broadway without having done a debut in a smaller venue," her cousin Robert Kennedy, Jr. conceded in an interview with MSNBC.
Even her friends don't pretend she's a natural leader. One admirer, who worked with her at the Fund for Public Schools in New York, describes Kennedy as utterly passive in dealings with other people. "She went to the meetings, but she was quiet. People would have stepped back if she'd said 'Let's do it this way.' It would have been nice. And we would have had fewer meetings." But Kennedy never did.
Why would a person like this want to serve in the U.S. Senate? Nobody seems to know. "She never had a rationale for doing this," says one major New York political figure. "In every dealing I had with her family or friends, they clearly thought it was a just theirs for the asking. They had a real sense of entitlement."
Some theorize the 51-year-old Kennedy was in the grip of a midlife crisis. Others who know her say she was persuaded to do it by her uncle Ted. Whoever was giving her advice forgot to mention two iron rules of state Democratic politics: Don't antagonize liberal interest groups. And if you can help it, don't cross Hillary Clinton.
Stars Celebrate the Super Bowl
The Daily Beast is dedicated to news and commentary, culture, and entertainment. We carefully curate the web’s most essential stories and bring you original must-reads from our talented contributors.
How Rich People Smoke Pot
Paul Schrodt is a writer living in New York City. He has contributed to New York magazine, Radar, and Esquire.com.
Why the White House Bullies Fox
Tucker Carlson is a contributor to the Fox News Channel. He previously hosted The Situation with Tucker Carlson and Tucker on MSNBC after working for CNN.
A Man on His Way to Bitterness
Tucker Carlson is a contributor to the Fox News Channel. He previously hosted The Situation with Tucker Carlson and Tucker on MSNBC after working for CNN.
How Jon Stewart Went Bad
Tucker Carlson is a contributor to the Fox News Channel. He previously hosted The Situation with Tucker Carlson and Tucker on MSNBC after working for CNN.
funkychicken
"The state could use a break from the headlines." I always find it odd when someone in the media makes this type of statement. Aren't they largely responsible for creating these stories to begin with? In any case, I'm sure we can all use a break from this particular headline.
EdinNJ
You know who doesn't even rise up to the level of mediocrity? Tucker Carlson.
As for everyone who's been so obsessed with Caroline Kennedy- when is it enough? The point that she shouldn't be senator has been made over and over. Why must failures like Tucker Carlson continue to try to destroy her? So she might not be the best candidate. It doesn't make her a bad person. She's not evil because she might have overreached for something she wasn't ready for. After all, it was the Democratic inner circle in NY that planted the idea in her head. She just ran with it. Who here wouldn't have done the same thing if you thought the opportunity was there? Sarah Palin sure didn't object when Bill Kristol annointed her the VP candidate and she was even less qualified for a more important decision. Where was Tucker Carlson's scathing column about that?
ontheroad38
Why anyone would pay attention to anything Tucker Carlson says, particularly if it involves a Democrat, is a puzzlement.
He is always, without fail, the dark doomsayer who usually sees from the glass half empty. He seems like a nice guy, but not very credible.
MaeQueen
Ah, Tuck - get real! You left out the most important fact, one that was reported on Bill O'Reilly's Fox News show last night - it's 'rumored' that she's having an affair with a journalist.
It wasn't Hillary that did her in, I for one don't even think Hillary would waste time on such a vapid pampered poodle. No, it was her isolation from the American people that she claimed she wanted to represent in the first place!
And I suspect that Paterson wasn't happy with whatever prize Uncle Teddy was offering in exchange for her appointment. Because when all is said and done, this was just Politics As Usual - Democratic Style.
Yet I must say, now that the Dems are in complete control of all things political, there's certainly more drama going on! Better than HBO...:)
terrence2
Caroline would have been a fine pick After all Hilary Clinton had no experience when she ran and was riding on Bill's coattails. But there's the rub. Caroline betrayed the Clintonistas when she backed Obama. Her faux pas and the lack of elegant rhetorical skills didn't help. But I would bet, without really knowing her mind that HRC would have some say in who succeeded her. And Caroline would be picked "over her dead body." Thus the whirligig of time has its revenges.
MedianHater
This essay is spot on and it's about time someone put so concisely what has been obvious for weeks. Tucker, I wish you would have written most of this a week ago, however. We learned from the conservative pundits in the Sarah Palin debacle that it's a good idea to trumpet the obvious early on. I'm disappointed that everyone was doing the "wait and see" dance all the while that Caroline demonstrated so clearly wasn't up to the task.
anndaly
"She should have been naturally appealing to feminists." Why? Do you think feminists are "naturally" drawn to incompetence? You've gotta think it through better than that.
spinozareader
Mr. Carlson,
This piece has all the argumentative heft of one composed by the average (high school) Freshman who's intent it is to "prove" what he's already assumed to be true.
You've fairly clearly lined out some of the very valid reasons that Ms. Kennedy was probably out of her depth in this venture in paragraphs 4,5 and 6. But a read through of the rest of your piece reveals the rather flimsy assertion that the "Real Reasons" can be ascribed to your short list of Usual Suspects--i.e. liberal activists and the Clintons.
tabreu
Paterson lost my vote!
rick164
Actually, I think Tucker Carlson nicely sums up in one paragraph how CK as Senator was absurd from the start.
As for "reported on Bill O'Reilly's Fox News show last night - it's 'rumored' that she's having an affair with a journalist."
Yes, it is apparently an open secret that she has been seeing Arthur "Pinch" Sulzberger, publisher of the New York Times--another under-talented scion of a prominent family, who owes his position to his last name. What a perfect pair.
midpointpolitico
Oh my - a Barbie Doll to replace a Giant? Chuck Schumer, already a great senator for New York will look even better now. If Patterson wanted an upstate politician to replace Hillary, how about US Representative Brian Higgins from Western New York. How about Buffalo Mayor Byron Brown - a young capable African American. How disappointing.
New Yorks only hope is that she's keeping the seat warm for Andrew Cuomo or barring that, hopefully Cuomo will challenge Patterson in the primaries in 2010.
hungryasgandhi
As always, I really enjoyed reading Tucker's opinion/outlook on things.
My main problem with this though is that the only reason Gillibrand was chosen is because she is a woman. All of the polling done suggests upstate New Yorkers like myself overwhelmingly supported AG Cuomo getting the appointment. Instead we get a "gimmick" pick of Gillbrand. Paterson disrespected upstate New York by knowing who we supported and instead going with somebody so he could say "Look at me I appointed a woman".
If there is any luck, Cuomo will challenge Paterson in the primary and we can get a much needed upgrade at governor.
MysteriousTraveller
Tucker and his friend Bill Kristol just never get tired of being wrong, do they?
RODERICK098
It is predictable what this right wing hack puts into a column. All anonymous sources,throwing in gossip that she may be having an affair in New York, throw in everything Tucker-all made up by you and your neocon friends and then pass it off as truth. When are people going to start standing up to these lying hacks. And then claim that the Clintons did not want her-document this-You cannot. You are one of the reasons this country has gone into decline and you have helped destroy this country through your lies and your distortions all so you can make a buck. Those of the few of us who do read you do it out of a sense of fascination at how you still get employment with such unsubstantiated drivel.
DBSMITH
Tucker Carlson on Failures:
Takes one to know one, eh, Tuck?
Thank you.
As a first time user, your comment has been submitted for review. It can take anywhere from a few hours to a day or two for your comment to be reviewed, depending on the time of week and the volume of comments we receive.