I am unclear of what you think the story is on the Caroline Kennedy nomination (”a story to watch (and why)”). My guess is that you think that if the media does not scrutinize her closely based on her supposed lack of experience, then they will not have treated her the same as they did Palin - is that what you are getting at?

If so, while I have no dog in the NY Senate race and have no opinion of Kennedy, I would not that “is someone who has spent years focusing on philanthropic issues that deal with education, health care, expanding America’s interests in the arts, writing books dealing with the right to privacy and the Bill of Rights, showing a passion for civil rights and serving as a national board member of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund.” - a great deal of pertinent experience.

I would further note that she is not running for Vice President, but being nominated for the Senate - an important position, to be sure, but not a heartbeat away from the presidency.

It was not so much Palin’s lack of experience that concerned most of us - although that was a factor, just as it was with Obama - but her lack of knowledge and curiosity. She came across as grossly uninformed and dangerously naive. At least to many of us.

Dan,
I saw one correspondent comparing Ms Kennedy to Paris Hilton regarding her serious approach to affairs. Hence … the suggestion that if the press doesn’t examine her critically, the gig is up.