Go to Google News and do a search for "nepotism." C'mon. Do it.
Sure, there are a few articles about the establishment of a nepotism policy in the Lake County School District. And there is a piece about the role familial preference plays in college football. But most of the articles are about Caroline Kennedy's interest in Hillary Clinton's senate seat.
Is she qualified? Does she deserve it? Opinions, in New York and elsewhere, are divided:
Ruth Marcus, of The Washington Post, says that ,"on the question of Caroline Kennedy for Senate, my head says no, on balance. My heart says yes! Yes! Right now, as you might guess from the hedging on the former and the exclamation points on the latter, my heart is winning."
Columnist Kathleen Parker thinks that Kennedy will get the seat, but that she doesn't deserve it.
Blogger and Atlantic senior editor Andrew Sullivan is sick of nepotism:
I am so sick of this nepotism. What are we, some kind of neo-monarchy? Clinton got her seat because of nepotism and now Kennedy gets it be the same methods.
Charles Krauthammer says the issue centers on entitlement, not experience.
Michael Daly, of the New York Daily News, says that there is more to Caroline Kennedy than her last name -- and the legacy that goes with it:
Anybody who has spent time with her knows that much more than her surname makes her exactly the right person tof ollow her father and uncles to the Senate.
So, what do you think?