Seriously?

Are we really having this debate again?

When the pitbull with lipstick stepped onto the national stage, I defended her as a "mom" in the workforce. I've been there and done that - so to speak. Everyone knows how I feel about the Governor of Alaska. Nevertheless, I do think she might actually make a decent Senator if she so desires.

As a card-carrying Democrat, I also know I'm supposed to pay homage to anyone that is in the Joe & Rose Kennedy lineage. Even a must to kiss the ring of the direct heir to the throne - in this case - Caroline. I kept quiet when the talking heads began spinning the whethers about her appointment to fill Senator Clinton's seat. But today I read an interesting piece about how qualified she isn't. Seems a woman that decides to get an education then stay at home to raise the children before re-entering the workforce isn't qualified for squat. I can not disagree more. What are her qualifications?

Well lets take a looksee...

**Bachelor degree from Radcliff (part of Harvard)

**Law degree from Columbia Law School

**Founded the Profile in Courage Awards, which honors elected officials who have shown political courage.

**Caroline co-wrote In Our Defense: The Bill of Rights in Action with fellow law graduate Ellen Alderman. This is the first of several books she has published.

**She turned down an offer to be chairwoman of the 1992 Democratic National Convention. (has no problem saying no to the party)

**Serves as a member of the national board of directors for the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, the vice-chair for the Fund for Public Schools in New York City, and chief executive for the New York City Department of Education Office of Strategic Partnerships.

You may not be able to see Russia from her backyard, but I think she is qualified to be a Jr Senator from the state of New York. We need more women in Washington DC that have a deep passion for what women care about. It doesn't hurt that she is a Kennedy either...