The Impossible Maureen Dowd Touts Caroline and Once Again Denigrates Hillary
By Anita Finlay ("Ani") on January 8, 2009 at 6:45 PM in Barack Obama, Caroline Kennedy, Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Qualifications
In her NY Times column yesterday, “Sweet on Caroline,” Maureen Dowd finds yet another way to display her Hillary Derangement Syndrome by defending Caroline Kennedy in her bid for appointment to the Senate. In the process, MoDowd not so subtly plunges yet another dagger into Senator Clinton’s heart. Contrary to her mission in this column, however, MoDowd only succeeds in proving that, in Caroline Kennedy’s case, less is more — since Caroline is far less qualified than the far more capable Hillary was when she was first elected to this seat in 2000.
Ms. Dowd begins in her usual snide fashion:
Ask not, you know, what your country can, like, do for you. Ask what you, um, can, you know, do for your country.
After a lifetime of shying away from the public spotlight, Caroline Kennedy asked herself what she could do for her country.
Her soft-spoken answer — to follow her father and two uncles and serve in the Senate — got her ripped to shreds in the, you know, press.
I know about “you knows.” I use that verbal crutch myself, a bad habit that develops from shyness and reticence about public speaking.
Wow. That’s so nice of you, Mo, to first make fun of Caroline Kennedy’s crutch of saying ‘you know’ 120 times in one interview – only then to excuse it. This ignores the fact that Ms. Kennedy’s “you knows” may cover the fact that she doesn’t have very much that is pertinent to say otherwise. Mo then continues fawning:
I always thought that Caroline and her brother, John, had special magic capital in America because of their heartbreaking roles in the Kennedy House of Atreus.
… I found it bizarre that when Caroline offered to use her magic capital — and friendship with Barack Obama — to help take care of New York in this time of economic distress, she was blasted by a howl of “How dare she?”
How dare she indeed. Let me inquire of Ms. Dowd: how does Caroline’s “friendship” with Barack Obama or her magical Kennedy name enable her to magically help the beleaguered State of New York?
Is Ms. Dowd implying that if a Senator is not a ‘friend’ of Barack Obama, his or her state’s needs will be ignored? Surely, Hillary Clinton has done an amazing job for her constituents and earned their respect, despite the fact that the Bushes and Clintons are like oil and water. For one thing, Senator Clinton fought for and got better care for first responders after 9/11 when President Bush ignored their needs. She did it without the ‘magical friendship’ Ms. Dowd insists is so important. Furthermore, many in NY Congress as well as local representatives refused to abandon Hillary for Obama during the primary, though they were under great pressure to do so. They stuck with her for one reason: they each made clear, when they needed Hillary, she always showed up for their districts. Yet, Ms. Mo still treats Senator Clinton like a carpetbagger. How is it that Caroline is magically equipped, simply by virtue of the Kennedy name to rescue New York? Dowd then states:
Although Americans still have enough British in their genes to be drawn to dynasties, W. has no doubt soured the country on scions. And the camps of the other two New York dynasties — the Clintons (still bitter about Caroline’s endorsement of Obama) and the Cuomos (who’d like that Senate seat for Andrew) — have certainly done their best to undermine Caroline.
Who has undermined her? Ms. Kennedy has done a fine job of doing that for herself. And why shouldn’t NY Attorney General Andrew Cuomo want the seat – he is also far more accomplished? What about Congresswoman Carol Maloney – probably Hillary’s pick? Why should the far more qualified woman once again be overlooked? Why do we seem hell bent for leather to promote “American Idol” in this country? What has happened to the American dream of working for and earning what you want in life? And why do we assume the Clintons are bitter about Caroline’s Obama endorsement? And what does that have to do with the fact that Congresswoman Maloney is more deserving and more qualified for this appointment in her sleep than Caroline Kennedy?
Sounds like Ms. Dowd is the one who is bitter. The Clintons are husband and wife. No dynasty there that I can see, but Mo still pulls out the same old, tired narrative of ‘no dynasties’ that Obama used so effectively when trumpeting his excuse for CHANGE. Um, except when the dynasty is “Kennedy” – then the sky’s the limit. Heaven forefend we have someone who has some idea what the hell they are doing. But since we just elected a President who hasn’t a clue, perhaps Ms. Dowd feels we should keep the trend going. Ms. Dowd refers to Caroline Kennedy as offering the Senate “an infusion of class, intelligence and guts.” Guts? Um, you know, yeah, err, aah, you know aaaaaaand….yeah.
“People complain that the 51-year-old Harvard and Columbia Law School grad and author is not a glib, professional pol who knows how to artfully market herself, and is someone who hasn’t spent her life glad-handing, backstabbing and logrolling. I say, thank God.”
Oh, Mo! You’re kidding me, right? And your beloved “Obambi” hasn’t spent his career glad-handing, backstabbing and logrolling??! Certainly, P.E. Obama hasn’t any idea how to “artfully market” himself, does he?
The press whines that she doesn’t have a pat answer about why she wants the job. I’ve interviewed a score of men running for president; not one had a good answer for why he wanted it.
Gee, does that include P.E. Obama – the one you touted this entire election season while excoriating the far more qualified, eloquent (sans teleprompter) and caring Hillary Clinton at every opportunity? I believe when Obama was asked the first thing he would do as President, he said he would “put his feet up behind the desk.” Awe inspiring.
Ms. Dowd then tells us Caroline’s relatively inarticulate and inexperienced manner is no worry, since she “knows Caroline Kennedy.”…
“She’s smart, cultivated, serious and unpretentious. The Senate, shamefully sparse on profiles in courage during Dick Cheney’s reign of terror, would be lucky to get her.
Anyhow, it isn’t how you say it. It’s what you say. Hillary Clinton is a great talker, but she never stood up in the Senate to lead a crusade against any Republican horror show, from Terri Schiavo to the Bush administration’s dishonest push to war.”
I see, but Barack Obama stood up to …???? Who exactly? What crusade did the inspiring speaker, Mr. Hopey-Changey lead? Who did Joe Biden stand up to? Or Kerry? Or any of them? Furthermore, P.E. Obama supposedly made an anti-war speech in 2002 and then when elected to the Senate in 2005, spent the rest of his time voting in lock step with his party and rubberstamping everything that President Bush wanted. Senator Clinton, gave her vote for the IWR in 2002 very reluctantly, as her speech on the Senate floor shows. The very next day she, along with Senator Robert Byrd, set about restricting George Bush further in terms of what powers this IWR would grant him.
Again, Hillary is being judged by a ridiculous double standard. Dowd actually has the nerve to criticize her for not being the lone Senator to stand up against Bush and his cadre but the man Dowd affectionately named “Obambi,” who never stood up to anyone, or for anything, gets a pass. Does she even realize or care how contradictory this nonsense is?
And if we are going to talk about Terry Schiavo – didn’t Obama vote to keep her alive?
What the hell is Mo Dowd going on about here? She seems to conveniently forget that very man she spent the last year fawning over is just as vapid and chameleon-like as they come. Moral courage? How about political expediency? That is the only term our President-to-be understands.
I find Dowd’s closing words most hilarious:
Sitting in the Senate gallery on Tuesday as senators were sworn in by Dick Cheney, I saw plenty of lawmakers who had benefited from family.
It isn’t what your name is. It’s what you do with it.
So dynasties are OK as long as you are a Kennedy. But Hillary Clinton, who Dowd predictably finds time to trash once again, had far more accomplishments on her own that Caroline Kennedy ever had, only got to her Senate seat and a run for the nomination because of her husband? I see. Ms. Dowd sounds more like Chris Matthews every day. Jealous much? Hillary Clinton has done a great deal with her name but her detractors still are determined to pretend her accomplishments are non-existent, probably to make Caroline look better by comparison. Sorry. Not working.
What exactly has Caroline Kennedy done that entitles her to jump to the head of the line in front of Carol Maloney and Andrew Cuomo?
It is far more likely that Ms. Dowd chooses to champion Caroline because she is sweet and non-threatening – no brilliance detected. Hillary surely is a far more intimidating character. I have nothing against Caroline Kennedy personally. The question in re Caroline Kennedy isn’t what’s wrong with her – it’s what’s right with her for this particular job? Out of nowhere, she crooks her finger to get a Senate seat and it should be granted her?
The rather clueless Ruth Marcus of the Washington Post also chimed in…
“Caroline has always been part of my consciousness: the lucky little girl with a pony and an impossibly handsome father. What a fitting coda … to have the little princess grow up to be a senator.”
So in order to have a “storybook ending,” let’s put a totally unqualified Kennedy in the seat. Marcus enjoyed giving Mr. Obama a storybook ending as well. For those who don’t remember, Marcus is also one who saw fit to trash Hillary Clinton endlessly.
So a qualified woman is to be vilified and held to impossible standards – but one with no qualifications for the job is to be nursed along at every turn? What kind of a message are we sending with this behavior? When we send a woman up who is unqualified and she falters, she makes it twice as hard for the truly qualified female candidate to be sent up the next time.
The bottom line is this: When we lower the bar to suit an unqualified woman, or a minority of either sex, you are making it that much more difficult for a qualified person in the same category. Unqualified men seem to get by with little consequences, however.
Ms. Dowd may excuse Ms. Kennedy’s ‘verbal crutch,’ but that does not excuse her lack of deserving or qualifications otherwise. It also doesn’t excuse the fact that women like Ms. Dowd and Ms. Marcus seem incapable of celebrating a truly qualified and capable woman like Hillary Clinton over a truly unqualified, dissembling man.
, the basis for the Best Motion Picture Nominee (Golden Globes) starring Brad Pitt.
, the novel by John Le Carre, a new motion picture starring Gary Oldman and Colin Firth.
by 
* (Included in the 
* 
.by David Fredosso who wrote 2008's 
- You'll have access to 18 million movies, TV shows, songs, magazines, and books, as well as ultra-fast Web browsing with Amazon Silk -- faster than iPad. Full e-mail and document access and a keyboard. Fire can transmit what is on your screen onto a connected TV or monitor without an accessory. It runs Flash (iPad doesn't). 
