|
|
A Weblog of Centrist Voices in American Politics |
|
June 13, 2006Good for Rep. KennedyRep. Patrick Kennedy (D-RI) today pled guilty to DUI for his actions last month, when he was in a car crash, but was not given a breath or blood test by Capitol Police, who perhaps were told by their superior to take no action other than driving Rep. Kennedy home. This police special treatment would have made prosecution difficult, and it is to his credit that Rep. Kennedy accepted criminal responsibility for his actions after seeking rehabilitation for prescription drug addiction. As part of a plea arrangement, reckless driving and other charges from similar incidents shortly before this one were dismissed. As a former prosecutor, I can attest that it is quite common practice to dismiss lesser charges in return for a plea to DUI. I'm still not sure what, other than his family, led Rhode Islanders to choose Rep. Kennedy as their Member of Congress, but his acceptance of responsibility today is to his credit. Posted by PatHMV at June 13, 2006 02:45 PMComments
I was resisting posting that tidbit all morning, but since you went and did it.... Regardless of one's feelings about Kennedy, when he sobered up the next day he did the right thing. He sought treatment and assumed full responsibility for his actions. He deserves credit and respect for that. I wish him all the best in dealing with his personal problems. Posted by: Tully at June 13, 2006 02:58 PMAs a Rhode Islander, I can say he was chosen for his family ties and because he is a Democrat - it is amazingly hard for a Repuulican to get elected to any office except Governor here. I actually am quite suprised at this since his family, himself included, is notorious for using their power to squash indictments, including murders. Posted by: Dan at June 13, 2006 02:59 PMThis is an interesting tale of two congressmen from the StarTribune last week. Posted by: Todd Pearson at June 13, 2006 03:19 PMTodd, I keep saying that all hope is not lost for our political parties, and I think the article you cite is good evidence that there is a lot of good left in the people and the system which is going on under the radar. Posted by: PatHMV at June 13, 2006 03:30 PMWell, he's a Democrat in the second most Democratic state in the country after Massachusetts. Posted by: Centrist Chris at June 14, 2006 08:45 AMCall me a skeptic, but would he have come this clean had there not been such an outcry against the long history of Kennedy privilege? Personally, I doubt it. Posted by: LASunsett at June 14, 2006 09:25 AM"Well, he's a Democrat in the second most Democratic state in the country after Massachusetts" Well said Chris. Republicans in this state rarely even say they are republican! I actually had to ask "What party are you" of a guy running for town council and he told me that the party specifcally told him not to mention it unless asked directly. In in 6 page leaflet, he never even says he is a republican. Thier reasons? Well, in local and state elections, saying you are anything but Democrat reduces your chances of winning by over 50%! NUTS if you ask me. Especially since most of the people who vote Dem dont even know the positions of the candidates. Crazy stuff. So I ask theor positions and match them with the proper candidate. over 70% match Republican. Posted by: Dan at June 14, 2006 09:36 AMThere's a lot of Republicans in my state, and yet I'm somehow not a Congressman. Is that his only qualification? He's a Democrat in a Democratic state? LASunsett: You're probably right, but when before have we seen any Kennedy plead guilty to any actual wrongdoing as a result of public outcry? It's unusual enough that his doing it is worthy of giving him some credit. Not make him man of the year, by any stretch, but just a little credit for doing the right thing. Posted by: PatHMV at June 14, 2006 10:53 AMPat: As far as I have seen from Patrick, he has 2 qualifications. He is a Democrat and a Kennedy. He actually has the Senate Seat originally reserved for Morton Downey Jr actually. They PLANNED this - he was told from a very young age that he would be a Senator in Rhode Island. Politics at its finest. New England is a fiefdom of the Dems, whoever they say is going to be the candidate is who gets elected, regardless of qualifications. Unless they pit them against a Chafee. Posted by: Dan at June 14, 2006 10:59 AMWhat Pat said. I can think of all kinds of possible reasons for Kennedy to do what he did after getting caught, and they're all speculative. But he did the right thing, and I'm not gonna run that down with speculation. You can bet your sweet ass that had he done the wrong thing, I'd be telling you about it loudly, and in detail. Posted by: Tully at June 14, 2006 11:10 AMMeh, there have always been pocket boroughs for certain families: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._political_families The Roosevelts (who include Bill Weld), the Romneys, the du Ponts, and the Tafts (who include Lincoln Chafee) are among the families who have been able to simply "appoint" a child to political office on the basis of their influence. Posted by: Greg63 at June 14, 2006 11:46 AM"I'm still not sure what, other than his family, led Rhode Islanders to choose Rep. Kennedy as their Member of Congress, but his acceptance of responsibility today is to his credit."--Pat I'll drink to that statement, Pat. Perhaps he'll be an inspiration to his Uncle relative to taking responsibility for a wrong...and then his Uncle can drink too that. Posted by: RealRepublican1854 at June 15, 2006 03:35 AMAh crud...sorry, I meant to write he can be an inspiration to his Father for owning up to a wrong... When I wrote the above, I must have been think about RFK, JR., you know, the "enviromentalist" who knocks SUV owners while tooling around in a private jet to places where Delta can get him to just as easily... Posted by: RealRepublican1854 at June 15, 2006 03:39 AMWho and what exactly are we to blame for RI's electing a congressman Kennedy? What party, given a choice, will nominate a garden-variety joe instead of a person from a prominent family with name recognition high enough to virtually guarantee winning the seat in a state that solid votes their party's way? I must have missed all the stories where the Kennedy machine was caught twisting the arms of the voters. :-) It's simply NOT unreasonable to assume that a person raised in a family where solidly democratic public service is a tradition would be a solidly democratic representative committed to the virtue of public service. Like it or not, with such a candidate, you have to show a reason why they would NOT be a good choice, not just complain that it's unfair that such a person gets the benefit of the doubt. And do you ever know how the heir will do? For every Pete Rose jr or Ziggy Marley there's a Barry Bonds or Payton Manning. Posted by: bk at June 15, 2006 01:32 PMRI's choice is theirs to make. For all the rest I have to say, see comment #1. Posted by: Tully at June 15, 2006 02:05 PM |
Archives
March 2007
February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 April 2003
Recent Entries
Some Smart Surging
Democratic Disgrace Obama: Tastes Great or Less Filling Should United States Attorneys be Professionalized? Don't you dare change your mind! Erin Go Open Thread NCAA tournament thread Blog that Brouhaha to death, AMIIGAF! Why Communism Grew Big: WWI Mythology Part 1 of 3 (LONG) The Right Immigration Questions
|