He's Not Dead Yet, You Know
Like some sort of Monty Python sketch, it seems worth pointing out that the eulogies for What A Great Man Ted Kennedy was are premature. He's not dead, and really, we don't know yet exactly how bad his brain cancer might be.
Let's also not get ahead of ourselves in overstating the importance of who he is or what he's done. Yes, a lot of admirable work has been accomplished on a lot of issues that Democrats care about. But it's also the case that this was a callow youth who got into the family business and was given perhaps the safest of Senate seats. His personal life has been far from exemplary, and no, I'm not just talking about the Chappaquiddick bridge.
Will there be a dearth of leadership if he passes? I find that hard to believe; Senators are ambitious creatures (what, like 7 of them ran for President this go round or so, yes?). The idea that Kennedy is or was better at the business of legislating than others belies the fact that his best and brightest successes were shared ones, that speak to the power of collaboration and cooperation. Values which, I think, could use some celebrating, and less denigrating generally.
As for ghoulish speculation, I'd point out that if he does leave or pass out of his Senate seat, the real interesting question is who succeeds him. It's likely - given the state of Massachusetts politics - that the Massachusetts delegation will be without a Kennedy for the first time in 50 plus years. Moreover, the machine-like nature of the Democrats in Mass has kept a number of perfectly strong representatives (Barney Frank being the most obvious) chafing in House seats with nowhere to go. That could be compounded if, as I suspect, Deval Patrick would leap at the opportunity to flee the State House. And it makes me wonder if John Kerry can really count on never being challenged again in a primary.
I'm always fascinated at my Mom's discussion of the Democratic sacred cows; she was always stinging in her disregard for Daniel Patrick Moynihan, and she reminded me, pointedly, this morning, that she didn't vote for Kennedy when he first ran for the Senate, and we lived in Boston. I think we, as Democrats, get a little doctrinaire at times about who we're supposed to laud (and I'm not going to touch the implications in that sentence about our Civil Rights legends - draw your own conclusions). These are politicians, not Gods, we're talking about. Of course I feel bad about Kennedy's illness, and I hope he can be treated and do good work for many more years. But we can wait until he's dead to make more of him than he actually was in life.
Let's also not get ahead of ourselves in overstating the importance of who he is or what he's done. Yes, a lot of admirable work has been accomplished on a lot of issues that Democrats care about. But it's also the case that this was a callow youth who got into the family business and was given perhaps the safest of Senate seats. His personal life has been far from exemplary, and no, I'm not just talking about the Chappaquiddick bridge.
Will there be a dearth of leadership if he passes? I find that hard to believe; Senators are ambitious creatures (what, like 7 of them ran for President this go round or so, yes?). The idea that Kennedy is or was better at the business of legislating than others belies the fact that his best and brightest successes were shared ones, that speak to the power of collaboration and cooperation. Values which, I think, could use some celebrating, and less denigrating generally.
As for ghoulish speculation, I'd point out that if he does leave or pass out of his Senate seat, the real interesting question is who succeeds him. It's likely - given the state of Massachusetts politics - that the Massachusetts delegation will be without a Kennedy for the first time in 50 plus years. Moreover, the machine-like nature of the Democrats in Mass has kept a number of perfectly strong representatives (Barney Frank being the most obvious) chafing in House seats with nowhere to go. That could be compounded if, as I suspect, Deval Patrick would leap at the opportunity to flee the State House. And it makes me wonder if John Kerry can really count on never being challenged again in a primary.
I'm always fascinated at my Mom's discussion of the Democratic sacred cows; she was always stinging in her disregard for Daniel Patrick Moynihan, and she reminded me, pointedly, this morning, that she didn't vote for Kennedy when he first ran for the Senate, and we lived in Boston. I think we, as Democrats, get a little doctrinaire at times about who we're supposed to laud (and I'm not going to touch the implications in that sentence about our Civil Rights legends - draw your own conclusions). These are politicians, not Gods, we're talking about. Of course I feel bad about Kennedy's illness, and I hope he can be treated and do good work for many more years. But we can wait until he's dead to make more of him than he actually was in life.
Recent Comments