Skip to main content

Caroline Kennedy reportedly withdrawing from Senate consideration

By Howard B. Owens

Just picked up this from a D&C tweet: Caroline Kennedy is withdrawing from consideration to replace Hillary Clinton as a New York Senator.

OK. Curious move. There must be some explanation.

According to reports from two New York City newspapers, Kennedy decided to withdraw because of the illness of her uncle, Sen. Ted Kennedy, D-Mass.

Certainly, Teddy's illness is of great family concern, but correct me if I'm wrong: Wasn't Kennedy gravely ill before Caroline threw her hat in the ring to become Senator?

Surely, there's more to this story than what is being reported.

UPDATE: A friend on Twitter writes "Want to bet that NY Gov. Paterson decided against naming Kennedy and this is a face-saving way for her to bow out?"  Makes sense to me.

Which might also indicate, announcement coming soon.  My bets are on Cuomo.

Russ Stresing

Purely speculative, but if Gov. Patterson has made a choice and it isn't Kennedy, then it would serve both of them and the process in general if he gave her a heads-up sufficiently in advance of his announcement so as to allow her to save face with an eye towards any future run for any elective office.

Just speculating.

Jan 21, 2009, 9:59pm Permalink
Russ Stresing

Cuomo would be a problem because it would entail handing over the appointment of a new AG to Sheldon Silver, not one of Gov. Patterson's favorites. A case could be made that making Cuomo a Senator might remove him from any plans to primary a sitting governor. While the myriad of problems that New York State faces might seem to handicap the current officeholder, they might also engender an attitude in voters of "hey, he didn't make it any worse. Let's give him more time". I see any challenge to Gov. Patterson's first election to governor coming from Republicans.

There are so many qualified Democratic Congresswomen/men in New York State, its a veritable embarrassment of riches from which to choose. Much of the reason for the drawn out selection process is probably due to a decision similar to choosing between whether to give Picasso's <i>Guernica</i> or DaVinci's <i>Mona Lisa</i> to the Louvre from one's private collection.

Jan 21, 2009, 10:43pm Permalink
Daniel Jones

I have a feeling that Rudy Giuliani will run for Governor on the Republican ticket, despite his name-recognition this could be problematic for them for a number of reasons, primarily being the Conservative Party (they refuse to endorse pro-choice candidates on a statewide level) and the fact that his popularity has faded in New York City, however, I don't see Cuomo making a challenge to Paterson from the left either.

I think that Andrew Cuomo would make a great Senator and as Russ said, there are a great number of potential candidates. Whoever he picks I'm sure will be someone who can get the job done.

Jan 21, 2009, 11:05pm Permalink
Russ Stresing

It would be beyond the scope of reason to expect that there are no political considerations influencing the choice. Perhaps not necessarily a quid pro quo situation so much as looking forward to who might best support Gov. Patterson's plans for his governing agenda, continue Senator/Secretary Clinton's legacy, offer the best chance for re-election, and also have enough already established congressional gravitas to be a Senator who's immediately productive for New York State.

Jan 21, 2009, 11:05pm Permalink
Daniel Jones

I should amend myself, they won't endorse candidates who support partial birth abortion on a state-wide level, Giuliani has expressed support for it in the past.

Jan 21, 2009, 11:07pm Permalink
Brett Podkanowicz

You know, as much as I respect the Kennedy family, I really didn't want her to take over this Senate seat. She is lacking in experience, and would likely be using it as a springboard to some future endeavor (which I know happens a lot). Cuomo has been accomplishing feats as the New York Attorney General, and has likely familiarized himself with facets of the state that probably need changing, something he can help to change in the Senate.

I know the seat will be up for election soon anyway, but we need to get someone who has experience in there ASAP, because Schumer will not be around forever. They need to build flak in the Senate so that they will have a voice like Mr. Schumer.

And I think it's worth noting that our Governor should probably be a bit more decisive, eh? It's been two months, man, out with it! It's not like the Senate has been in soon as Clinton left, there should have been a replacement waiting in the wings.

Jan 22, 2009, 9:29am Permalink
Chris Charvella

I'd have to agree with Brett. I hold Caroline Kennedy in high regard, mostly for her work on bettering education in New York, but I'd prefer someone with a little more political chuztpah like Andrew Cuomo.

Of course it's all a moot point now that she's removed herself from contention.

What do you folks think it would take to get an Upstate candidate (Democrat or Republican) elected to the Senate in the future?

Jan 22, 2009, 12:39pm Permalink
Russ Stresing

In answer to Chris' question regarding what it would take to elect an upstater to the Senate from New York: a miracle. "New York City and its eight suburban counties have a combined population of 13,209,006 people, or <b>68.42%</b> of the state's population." This is just a guess, but there is probably a greater number of people there who donate hefty amounts to election campaigns than there is upstate. Prospects would seem daunting.

Jan 22, 2009, 12:36pm Permalink
Patrick Weissend

Here is my long shot prediction on who will replace Hillary Clinton.

Gov. Patterson will select:

David Patterson

Jan 22, 2009, 1:16pm Permalink
Brett Podkanowicz

I recognize that the seat was not open, but still, Clinton was a virtual lock to be in the Obama administration since December. Of course, you wouldn't dub the nominee the 'next senator', perhaps the "Senator-in-waiting' or something like that. Sounds a bit silly, but it happens in sports all the time, especially football. It saves from speculation by media and citizens.

I think the bigger issue is Patterson's lack of decisiveness. I've not been terribly thrilled with him so far. Honestly, it wouldn't shock me if he picked himself, because whomever the Governor is has an eminently inoperable budget and a very difficult task (and yes, I know that won't happen, thank you).

Jan 22, 2009, 6:34pm Permalink
Andrew Erbell

Per WPIX, our next US Senator will be.......

Kirsten Gillibrand, Congress Woman - NY 20

She apparently has had the blessing of both Senators Schumer and Clinton from the start.

Jan 22, 2009, 7:43pm Permalink
Beth Kinsley

Nothing on CNN yet but WPIX is reporting that the appointment of this "upstate" congresswoman will be announced at a news conference tomorrow. I guess their idea of upstate isn't really the same as mine. I wish her the best.

Jan 22, 2009, 7:57pm Permalink
Andrew Erbell

You have to understand, to most non true Western NYers, there are four parts to New York.

1. New York City and Long Island
2. Upstate = the Capitol Region
3. the Adirondacks
4. Niagara Falls (the waterway, not the city)

Jan 22, 2009, 8:04pm Permalink
Daniel Jones

Great pick! Gillibrand represents a diverse district, from the suburbs of Rensselaer County to the farms of Essex County, she's represented a cross-section of the types of areas in the state. She also won 62 percent of the vote in a Republican +3 District, which is very similar to ours here in the 26th.

Jan 22, 2009, 8:35pm Permalink
Robert Drewinski

I Battlin Bob have seen and read all the post on The Batavian about B. Hussein Obama and Governor Patterson efforts to command the people of the Country. In doing so and having read all my fellow Batavian`s blog efforts for their love of Obama, I will no longer support the ideas of the republicans. I will address my issues like I did last night to the President via this web site to close Gitmo and he heard my words and after 3 days he sign the paperwork to close gitmo. I will run on the identical platform as our President. When my fellow Batavian`s like my buddies russ and others to remain faceless have decided to plant their flag of support behind the liberal cause, Its time for change. I want to be the replacement for Hillary (FDR) Clinton for Senator, I will on my first day not the 3rd like mr. Obama I will increase taxes 66 percent on everyone that has cable TV. My next plan will be to close all prisons in international countries and apply the US Constitution to the misguide prisoners of those States. I will as US Senator will demand like Obama to sell the US Navy to the highest bidder and to sell off our nuclear or like GWBushie said newclear weapons to our new friends in Iran and north korea. ( sorry russ for the spelling)

You boys are right. it is much easier for the government to deal with everyday issues. All school teachers I mean government employed indoctrination educators are stressed now, they make only $50,000 a year and have to work 5 months a year, they need their wages tripled to 150,000. They are brainwashing (ooops) educating our young. I will band all foreign goods ship to the USA and make Americans buy only union made products. Who but GM makes a cheaper car then them, why buy a Toyota when their employees don’t belong to a union. I remember at a time when TV`s were made in Batavia. And all the 1960 studies were saying we have over 30,000 taxpayers living here by the time charlie and the democrats showed up.

PS, I only pick on Mr. Mallow because of his position with the city of idiots, I never met the man. I really think you are doing good with the issues. I was on the City republican committee years ago and quit because they wanted to treat the unions as kings, Your position is hard enough but you should always remember one thing- working people pay for the things liberals and unions want. What I hate is seeing the city being 2nd chair to the school board, there is no way possible for you to run a city of 16,900 and always crying for more when a school district of 1800 costs 40 million., it just doesn’t add up, if you now what I mean.

Jan 22, 2009, 9:37pm Permalink
Russ Stresing

The word I'm hearing is that Gillibrand's office has released word that <b>all</b> of the 10 people under consideration have been invited to meet with Gov. Paterson tomorrow.

Jan 22, 2009, 9:54pm Permalink
Robert Drewinski

Come on Dan, You didn`t read my whole press release I am throwing my name into the hat for the Hillary(FDR)Clinton seat. I hope you an russ support me. HEY russ DID i SPELL OK?

Jan 22, 2009, 10:00pm Permalink
Daniel Jones

Barack is his name, Bush uses the term "W" himself, Obama doesn't. Your still trying, despite it severely backfiring in the election to associate him with Saddam Hussein, which in itself is shameful and displays a total lack of class.

President Barack Obama rules!

Jan 22, 2009, 10:15pm Permalink
Robert Drewinski

No it doesn`t it, Saddam will just kill you, Obama and the gang ( Nancy, Harry, Teddy, Kerry, Barney, will just take your money) the man ran on change even though the ABC soup channels told you different. He ran as a everyday person and that is far from the truth. Go to many web sites not controlled by the major ABC CBS NBC NPR NY TIMES Letterman channels and Batavia Daily News. go to you tube and type in Obama name and you`ll find many issues that will disturb you. Thank you for the freedom lives here!

Jan 22, 2009, 10:28pm Permalink
Robert Drewinski

Oh Dan you did not address my press release about throwing my hat in the ring for Hillary`s position, I promise to raise taxes and support union made junk in the USA do I have your support? iM Sure rUss will support me how about you, git r done close GITMO NOW.

Jan 22, 2009, 10:35pm Permalink
Howard B. Owens

A few years ago, conservatives were very careful to differentiate between extremist Muslims and the Muslim world. They would call the extremist, in order to differentiate, Islamofascists, for example.

Then Obama came along, and they want to blast out "Hussein" as a broad brush racial slur to hide their real racism (get over it, he's black), ignoring the fact that Obama's Christian faith dwarfs that of Bush, let alone even Reagan (who's wife called on spiritualists to aide his presidency).

Honestly, though, it's mostly not racism, just partisanship, which is almost as bad and ignorant (whether from Republicans or Democrats). I've no patience for partisanship. It's one of the great evils of the empire, and without which, there would be no empire.

Jan 22, 2009, 10:37pm Permalink
Robert Drewinski

No I hate all extremist muslims that want to kill Americans, even if they want to kill conservative or bleeding heart liberals. Obama is the same person as any lib, nothing to do with any skin color he sounds the same as Hillary, Nancy, Teddy, Kerry. Brokaw, Rather, Helen Thomas, Larry King, Chuckie, Jennings, Barney Frank, underground network, idiot Gov of Calf Arnold, AL Gore, PETA, US EPA, Carter, Casto, Mao, Lenin, hollywood stars do I need to go on? Long live Exxon, Shell, Flying J and any company that sells gas for my car cheap.

Jan 22, 2009, 10:50pm Permalink
Daniel Jones

Bob-No, you don't have my support.

Your hiding why you call him "B. Hussein Obama", I'll ask you again Bob, why not just Barack? You also have referred to him as "Osama" in the past. Pathetic.

I'd rather not take my news from conspiracy theorists and people who make youtube videos about them. I have yet to see any of them write a clear, concise and grammatically correct statement of their positions on Obama and the "truth".

He's more of an average person than the guy who was the son of an admiral and owns seven houses. Obama worked his way from the bottom to the top, which is why I like him so much.

President Barack Obama rules!

Jan 22, 2009, 11:03pm Permalink
Brett Podkanowicz

As a right-leaning college student, I'm gonna throw in my two cents...

During the past few years, I've watched closely both the Republican and Democratic tickets. I am registered as a Republican (may be switching that to Independent soon), so could only vote in the Rep. primary, but was still intrigued by Obama's meteoric rise in the party. I was against him because of his leanings politically, and was skeptical (who wasn't) when he made claims of changing Washington and reforming things. I've heard that ad nauseum for my short adult life, and was a bit cynical.

Although I am a bit shocked at his what I feel to be overabundance in use of Executive Orders over the first few days of his administration, he seems to be a very charismatic man. As Daniel said, he rose from very little to the top. It's a path that I hope to somewhat mirror in the school, a career (perhaps in politics) then who knows. Point is, the guy is our President now. I didn't vote for him because of his tax plan, knowing full well that he would win. But what he has done for the American people (say what you will about his policy platforms) is brought people together. Even if he accomplished nothing tangible in office, this in itself is a pretty nice accomplishment.

Jan 23, 2009, 1:42am Permalink
Howard B. Owens

Nice comment, Brett. Best wishes in your aspirations.

My wife made a nice comment on Inauguration Day: "I realize it's 2009, but today is the day the 20th Century finally came to an end."

Much like you, I agree that whether Obama does much as president, or nothing as president, he's already changed this country for the better. No child of any race or background will ever again grow up thinking, "I can't be president because of who I am."

For the record, I didn't vote for Obama. But neither did I vote for McCain. I tend to reject both parties as being part of the same plutocracy.

Jan 23, 2009, 5:44am Permalink
C. M. Barons

"All school teachers I mean government employed indoctrination educators are stressed now, they make only $50,000 a year and have to work 5 months a year, they need their wages tripled to 150,000. They are brainwashing (ooops) educating our young."

Of careers directly linked to outcomes that improve society-in-general, why do you hold teachers in such disdain? Pro athletes are payed astronomical salaries, and their seasons last a fraction of a year. The same athletes find their way to headlines colored by illegal drug use, violence, gambling and antisocial activities- the likes of dog fights and intoxication. Why don't you bang that drum as loud?
If you are making a case for managing other peoples' salaries, you better demonstrate your credentials for being so-qualified. Making absurd generalizations does not bolster your credibility.

Jan 23, 2009, 7:24am Permalink
C. M. Barons

"...I am a bit shocked at his what I feel to be overabundance in use of Executive Orders..."

On the heals of G. W. Bush's administration, how could the use of executive orders be shocking. Did you just come up from an eight year long scuba dive?

Jan 23, 2009, 7:33am Permalink
Brett Podkanowicz

I meant in the first several days. Bush issued no more executive orders than any previous President. I simply was implying that perhaps he should not be so hasty in making these decrees. I don't care how many he issues.

Jan 23, 2009, 2:54pm Permalink
C. M. Barons

G. W. Bush, 2001 - 2009, 282, 2 in first month: faith-based initiative

W. J. Clinton, 1993 - 2001, 364, 2 in first month: exec branch ethics, Nat. Economic Council

G. H. W. Bush, 1989 - 93, 166, 1 in first month: federal ethics reform

R. Reagan, 1981 - 82, 381, 2 in first month: decontrol crude oil, terminate wage/price regulation

J. E. Carter, 1977 - 81, 320, 2 in first month: selective service violations, D. C. income tax

G. R. Ford, 1974 - 77, 169, 4 in first month: revoke/amend 3 previous exec orders, appointments (Nixon pardon issued in 2nd month)

R. M. Nixon, 1969 - 74, 346, 2 in first month: est Council for Urban Affairs, Cabinet Comm on Economic Policy

L. B. Johnson, 1963 - 69, 324, 3 in first month: JFK Day of Mourning Nov 25, 1963, renamed NASA Cape Canaveral site- J F K Space Center, appointed comm to report on J F K assassination

J. F. Kennedy, 1961 - 63, 214, 3 in first month: expand food program for needy, amend food for peace program, inspect gift tax per Senate Comm

D. D. Eisenhower, 1953 - 61, 486, 1 in first month: est President's Advisory Committee on Government Organization

H. S Truman, 1945 - 53, 896, 8 in first month: re-est apptments exp during military service, reinstated A M Warren in foreign service, federalized Cities Service Petroleum operations, reorganized Dept of Commerce, federalized United Engineering Co., supported bonds and notes via Transportation Dept., placed airports under sec of war, ceded military reservation properties to territory of Hawaii

F. D. Roosevelt, 1933 - 45, 3728 total

Jan 23, 2009, 6:11pm Permalink
Robert Drewinski

Lets see children are forced to attend the public school indoctrination camps in their local communities. No one forces people to the sporting events to watch the high paid athletes, so your comparison is not even close. I agree about the criminal element taking over in the pro football ranks. In Buffalo last summer they tossed a big party for all the administration for achieving their goal of 38 percent graduation rate. Now the board and schools are $53 million short in funding. Wonder how much more they would be short if the rate was 85 percent. Lets keep dumping more money on the schools it must be not be working yet.

Jan 23, 2009, 8:01pm Permalink
Russ Stresing

The number of executive orders issued by President Obama might be explained metaphorically: You don't put out a house fire a drop at a time.

Jan 23, 2009, 10:49pm Permalink
Howard B. Owens

"Robert/Bob Drewinski"'s account has been blocked. He has not been posting under his real name.

His posts will still show up, but that particular account is no longer active.

Jan 24, 2009, 2:34pm Permalink
Timothy Paine

Nice job Howard! I love that keep track of who is who. I look at the DailyNews site and just laugh at these people hidding behind fake names. If you truly believe what you are saying, you'll stand behind it no matter what. Thanks for keeping people honest Howard.

Jan 24, 2009, 3:49pm Permalink
C. M. Barons

"Lets keep dumping more money on the schools it must be not be working yet."

He made his point. Judging from the grammar- we need more spent on education.

Jan 24, 2009, 5:02pm Permalink
Sean McKellar

It was a real pleasure meeting you yesterday! Thanks for dropping by my shop (Fastec Automotive in Leroy). I look forward to working with you.

Jan 24, 2009, 5:22pm Permalink
lawrence S clark

I thought this wasn't to be tolerated, Howard?

C.M.Y.K. ? You seem to think those not in your line of work are dumb
are you saying correct grammar is the most important thing of all?
I don't see how either belief makes you undumb

You talk of absurd generalizations
Then put out your belief that those who make grammitical errors are stupid
Lets not pretend you're not saying this either
Chances are you both received the same amount -$'s- of education
You are
plain and simple
Calling him dumb

What are you not so great at?
Running? Shooting a basket? Drawing? Chess? Arm-wrestling? Telling jokes? Making love? Marriage? Being a father? Typing? Sewing?
Well, judging from your complete lack of coordination you must be slightly retarded, or something

Absurd, bro.

I probably have the worst grammar here
I can compete with anyone here at anything if I choose to

Absurd, dude.

How about we apologize?

You wait till he is blocked to bring out your big guns?
Whatever happened to respect
not talking behind ones back
or kicking when down
What happened there

Jan 24, 2009, 9:33pm Permalink
lawrence S clark

guess I'm not

"If you truly believe what you are saying, you'll stand behind it no matter what." -Paine
*Timothy Paine

Who says they don't stand behind what they say just because they don't attach their name to it?
This stuff ONLY makes perfect sense when you make it make perfect sense

Sounds cute
pretty empty

Jan 24, 2009, 9:46pm Permalink
Russ Stresing

Ok, larry, I'll play your silly game of "Am I Laz or is I Bob?".


If you're neither, welcome. That's not to say I don't welcome "Bob" or "Laz".

Jan 24, 2009, 9:53pm Permalink
lawrence S clark

"Of careers directly linked to outcomes that improve society-in-general, why do you hold teachers in such disdain? "

Not sure he does, Barons.
He talks of teachers not doing their duty
or whatever
Not the occupation itself

"Pro athletes are payed astronomical salaries, and their seasons last a fraction of a year."

True. They get paid commensurate with the amount they RAAAAAAAKE in for owners and all else profiting OFF THEIR TALENT

The same athletes find their way to headlines colored by illegal drug use, violence, gambling and antisocial activities- the likes of dog fights and intoxication.

Another absurd generalization.

"Why don't you bang that drum as loud?"

"If you are making a case for managing other peoples' salaries, you better demonstrate your credentials for being so-qualified. "

MAN, I am remembering this one! That's going to come back to bite -someone- in the butt

"Making absurd generalizations does not bolster your credibility."

Sounds to me as though your using your real name
isn't helping all that much in the credibility department, either

least not for the website

Jan 24, 2009, 9:53pm Permalink
lawrence S clark

Not Bob, Bro

Didn't post ANON. after my getting blocked, either

Thought you had that one figured out, too?
"superstar yadda yadda"

If you had asked yourself a few simple questions I'm sure you'd have come to the conclusion that it was definitely NOT LAZario

Jan 24, 2009, 9:57pm Permalink
Russ Stresing

Then accept my welcome to you larry, in the warm, sunny California you call home. Your interest in our New York State Senate appointment shows that whatever people might think about the Empire State's place in the national consciousness, we still matter.

Jan 24, 2009, 10:04pm Permalink
lawrence S clark

You sure are a suspicious one
Don't see how being suspicious of people posting on a community website is going to help the community

But I guess we all probably know posting on thebatavian won't


Seems to be counterproductive, anyway
You know
Much like how much of the world works now

LSC still looking for real change not mere slogan

Jan 24, 2009, 10:10pm Permalink
C. M. Barons

I don't follow your arguments, lawrence... My grammar comment was directed at the suggestion, too much being spent on education. I never suggested anyone was stupid.
The original post cited teachers' work schedules- being less than a year, evidence to over-compensation. Professional athletes are seasonal workers who get paid large salaries. Seasonal workers like farmers and life guards don't earn enough to serve my argument.
What should I apologize for? ...Suggesting there was room for improvement in someone's grammar usage? Is that as provocative as stating, "your complete lack of coordination you must be slightly retarded, or something..."
I don't know who lit your fuse, but you seem more emotionally involved in this issue than mere bystander. In any event- I am neither a big gun, nor was I called out. The timing of my post was coincidental- not conspiratorial.
You have a gladiator's approach to conversation. You imply a need to graduate to nets and tridents. This is a blog- not the Coliseum.

Jan 27, 2009, 12:06pm Permalink
Andrew Erbell

Although I agree super star athletes are overpaid, they are paid based on skill level unachievable by most and their compensation was arrived at via mutual agreement from their employer. When that level drops substantially, they find themselves out of a job.

Upon reaching tenured status, teachers have a job for as long as they chose to stay within a district in almost all cases, regardless of skill level. Until merit pay standards are seriously addressed in public education, you can throw all the billions you want at the problem and it won't get better. There's also the matter of social promotion and self-esteem being a grading criteria to consider, but that's for another thread.

Jan 27, 2009, 12:21pm Permalink

Authentically Local