Another Sen. Kennedy?

Two thoughts on the possible appointment of Caroline Kennedy to the U.S. Senate:

1. Will the same people that kicked and screamed about Sarah Palin's lack of qualifications also cause a ruckus over Kennedy? According to wikipedia her professional background mainly consists of:

• Work at the Metropolitan Museum of Art
• Director of strategic partnerships for the the New York City Department of Education. This is described as three day per week job that paid a salary of $1 and consisted of fundraising.
• President of the Kennedy Library Foundation
• Director of both the Commission on Presidential Debates
• Director of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund
• Honorary Chairman of the American Ballet Theatre
• Adviser to the Harvard Institute of Politics, a living memorial to her father.

As far as I can tell she has never been elected to anything and owes much of her success to her family name and wealth (how many of those positions would she have otherwise received?).

I guess one could argue that the vice president occupies a higher office, but at the same time it is a largely ceremonial position while senators cast actual votes that impact our lives.

2. It would seem that Gov. Paterson is not exactly of pure motives in all this:

“The upside of her candidacy is that the 2010 ballot will read Kennedy - Paterson,” said one of those advisers, who was granted anonymity to speak candidly about the governor’s thinking. “David craves national attention and money. If you connect the dots, it leads to her.”

Let's recall that Blagovich's key motive was money as well. The differences, again, is only one of degrees. Will there be similar outrage if he makes this appointment?