After weeks of criticism that she had not opened up to the public or the press, Ms. Kennedy has embarked on a series of print and television interviews. But in an extensive sit-down discussion Saturday morning with The New York Times, she still seemed less like a candidate than an idea of one: eloquent but vague, largely undefined and seemingly determined to remain that way.
It is heartening to see that the New York Times is curious about how Caroline might “depart from Democratic Party orthodoxy.” Lo and behold, we find out:
Ms. Kennedy seemed to have trouble identifying one. “If we’re not comparing it to anybody specifically, it’s hard to say where I disagree,” she said. But when asked how she might differ with Governor Paterson, she refused. “I’m not going to talk about my disagreements with him,” she said. “You’ll find out over time.” Ms. Kennedy similarly declined to say how she might differ with Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, though she reaffirmed that she would vote for the Democratic candidate in the mayoral contest.
So: she desperately desires to serve, after a lifetime out of politics, because she has discovered her inner identity as a plain-wrap, conventional Democrat?
To review: she has no experience, no consistent voting record, and no views of her own. I suspect Governor Paterson is wondering how he’s going to wriggle out of selecting someone so embarrassingly unsuited for office. It doesn’t really sound so great to declare, “Well she’s rich and nice and has powerful relatives.” But the sad truth is, this is all she has going for her.