On paper, this guy looks like a much stronger candidate than Caroline Kennedy,

[pnwmom]

that "dilettante."

He's had 4 years in the state's house; 6 years representing his state in the U.S. Congress; and 6 years as a Governor. The son of immigrants, he pulled himself up by his bootstraps -- he's not part of any dynasty.

Too bad he's in Illinois. Otherwise, Blagojevich would make a great Senator from NY -- much more experienced than that lightweight, do-nothing, Caroline Kennedy.

Right?

:sarcasm:

[Name removed]

1. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[charlie]

8. Waitaminute

There's still a little steam left in the 70s schlock remake-o-rama, isn't there? It'd be a crime if they put the $6 Million Dollar Man on the big screen without Blago.

[anigbrowl]

2. And, now, ladies and gentlemen, we are proud to present...

It's that old political standby, the fallacy of the false dilemma!

GASP as your OP presents false choices cunningly disguised as rational alternatives! SIGH WITH PLEASURE as you switch off your critical faculties! THRILL as you watch other posters duke it out in a completely MEANINGLESS argument!

Incidentally, I really don't care what happens with NY's senate seat as everyone knows the West Coast is where it's at, which is why we have sunshine here long after you benighted fools have fallen into darkness. We laugh at your foolishly antiquated power struggles thusly: Ha! Ha!

[ColbertWatcher]

5. And now ladies and gentleman, we are proud to present ...

:sarcasm:

[pnwmom]

7. The point I was making is not defeated by your "fallacy."

Caroline Kennedy offers intangible qualities -- including her personal character -- that are not measured in years of political experience.

And years of political experience don't bestow those qualities on a candidate.

[anigbrowl]

9. The fallacy is yours

If this is a new thing to you, I'm sorry. But I take issue with your argument of the form 'why favor a career politician, since Rod Blagojevic demonstrates career politics is subject to corruption'. It's really weak logic.

Like I said, I don't really have a dog in the fight but I think your argument is deeply unsound. So here's three things I think about Caroline Kennedy:

1. She's great, but so are a lot of other people.
2. Her biggest qualification is her last name, and we all know it.
3. Given her uncle's unfortunate poor health, his seat is likely to fall vacant soon too, but that would look a little too much like inheritance.

Bluntly, we'd like to keep it in the family, but it doesn't square with the value system of our party or country so we 're going through this bizarre formal dance to obscure the fact that this is some good old political horse-trading.

[SoxFan]

3. Huh Huh...."Rod"...

Huh, Huh Huh...She said "Rod".

[Tarheel_Dem]

4. It's hard to know who has legitimate grievances with CKS's appointment,

but it's interesting to note that most of them are still holding primary grudges. I think some here feel that Hillary's seat should go to someone who supported her presidential candidacy. That, in my opinion, really would be pay to play. If Gov. Paterson thinks Caroline is qualified, I won't question that decision. If he chooses someone else, that's also his decision. Whomever is chosen, will have very little time to prove his/her chops. But the plus of a CKS appointment would be that she would certainly be advantageous for PE Obama as she absolutely agrees with his agenda.

[anonymous171]

6. I don't care about experience or legacy. I just want a good campaigner.

[anigbrowl]

10. Elliot Spitzer springs to mind

I think he got a terribly raw deal, but I can see him heading up the banking and finance committee.

[gristy]

11. Now wouldn't that be something?

I'd support that.