Vatican blocks Caroline Kennedy appointment as US ambassador

[jefferson_dem]

Vatican blocks Caroline Kennedy appointment as US ambassador
The Vatican has blocked the appointment of Caroline Kennedy as US ambassador, according to reports.

By Alex Spillius in Washington
Last Updated: 8:37AM BST 11 Apr 2009



Vatican sources told Il Giornale that their support for abortion disqualified Ms Kennedy and other Roman Catholics President Barack Obama had been seeking to appoint.

Mr Obama was reportedly seeking to reward John F Kennedy's daughter, who publicly gave her support to his election bid. She had been poised to replace Hillary Clinton as New York senator, but dropped out amid criticism that she lacked enough experience for the job.

The Italian paper said that the Vatican strongly disapproved of Mr Obama's support for abortion and stem cell research. The impasse over the ambassadorial appointment threatens to cloud his meeting with the Pope during a G8 summit in Itay in July.

Ms Kennedy, 53, has said that she supports abortion. Raymond Flynn, a former US ambassador to the Vatican, said earlier this week that Ms Kennedy would be a poor choice.

"It's imperative, it's essential that the person who represents us to the Holy See be a person who has pro-life values. I hope the President doesn't make that mistake," he told the Boston Herald. "She said she was pro-choice. I don't assume she's going to change that, which is problematic."

The White House refused to comment.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/vaticancityandholysee/5138135/Vatican-blocks-Caroline-Kennedy-appointment-as-US-ambassador.html

[annabanana]

1. I don't see much reason to have an ambassador to the Vatican..

It's not really a Country, no matter what they say...

[tomreedtoon]

42. What happens if God decides to go to war with us?

We need an ambassador to Vatican City to try to keep God calm. If you read the Old Testament, you know how violent and unstable God can get. Makes Kim Jung Il look like Gomer Pyle by comparison.

[lostnotforgotten]

52. It's A 4 Year Vacation Gift For High-Profile Campaign Donors And Supporters

eom

[ClarkUSA]

61. This is another story that rightwing rag The Telegraph got wrong. Newsmax started this rumor.

See reply #55 for details.

[DevonRex]

66. Thank you for debunking this rumor. :)

[Rabrrrrrr]

2. I bet they wouldn't bat an eye if we sent Cheney, Rumsfeld, or Limbaugh, though.

Who gives a fuck if they support war and killing of children - goddammit, don't be sending anyone who thinks a woman has the right to choose what to do with her body!!!!!!!!!!!!

Fuck the Vatican.

There's no reason for that miserable shithole to be a country, anyway. It's a fucking OFFICE.

A HEADQUARTERS.

[opihimoimoi]

3. International Peace requires all Religions to SHUT UP....its PEACE

Thats what she should be focusing on

[Sanity Claws]

4. We don't need an ambassador to the Vatican

Who the hell is the Vatican to tell us who we can appoint? The Vatican has marginalized itself.

[Demoiselle]

23. We didn't have one until 1984..

Reagan was the first US President to appoint an official ambassador. Previous Presidents have sent representatives from time to time....but Reagan was the first to do the whole ambassadorial thing. At least that's what it says in my googling.

[AllentownJake]

5. Tell the Pope accept our ambassador

or kiss our ass.

[ruggerson]

6. So make her Pope

get rid of the Nazi - and everybody's happy.

[Cha]

7. There's got to be a better

job for Caroline Kennedy. The Vatican has been nothing assholiness since Rat took pope.

[SecularMotion]

14. Since Rat took pope?

Long before that -

Catholics vs. Nazis - Doug Stanhope

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WPmyry0yaQE

[Cha]

16. Yeah, I'm sure..that's

just when I started reading about it on DU.

[BlooInBloo]

8. Fuck 'em. Go without an ambassador then.

[cyclezealot]

33. I second that emotion.

[DesertDiamond]

47. I'll third it. Fuck 'em, fuck 'em, and also, fuck 'em.

[WeDidIt]

9. Then O bama should appoint NO ambassador to the Vatican.

Simple solution.

[Ken Burch]

26. In fact, we should switch our entire diplomatic approaches towards the Vatican and Cuba

We could slap a trade embargo on Rome and forbid people to travel there. We could let Vatican exiles have a huge role in the U.S. politics, and train Unitarians to invade the Holy See. We could have our customs agents search the suitcases of incoming travelers for mitres and incense burners.

Meanwhile, we could send Raul Castro on tours of every cathedral in the U.S.

It's give folks something to think about.

[MADem]

10. This was a bad idea from the git-go. Send her to the Bahamas if she wants to "get away"

Send her to Haiti if she wants to do REAL WORK.

This patronage appointment was just silly. I don't really see why she must be rewarded, anyway. It's not like she's poor. She's just bored, and wants to "get away" from where she's at--to Washington, to Rome, to anywhere.

What ever happened to supporting a candidate for the sake of the candidate's AGENDA, not for the senate seat, Vatican ambassadorship/party time in Rome rewards that accrue.

Gee, all the work I did getting Democrats to the polls oughta be worth something. Where's my month's supply of free Grand Slam breakfasts at Denny's, or something?

[karynnj]

35. Every source of this story is suspect

as in:

Drudge

Panarame - a rw Italian news magazine

the Boston Globe

and

The Telegram


This was likely intended to hurt Obama with Catholics and further hurt Caroline Kennedy.

[MADem]

44. I believe that the portfolio was discussed with her.

But the bottom line is, the receiving agency is the one to "accept" the credentials of the ambassador, and sending someone so high profile in the pro-choice crowd in this environment just ain't gonna cut it with them. With this pope, especially--he's not progressive at all.

The Boston Globe, FWIW, has endorsed her uncle (and his junior partner, Kerry) forever and always. They are now owned by the NYT, but they were always the "Democratic" paper in town. It's that tabloid rag, the Herald, that leaned right.

[karynnj]

62. I only saw the Herald, not the Globe comment on this

I know the Globe is not right wing and know that they are owned by the NYT.

If the Globe has says that she or someone in Obama's administration says they spoke, I will concede. However, I did not see anything that clear.

[MADem]

64. One thing I'll say for the Obama administration--they're not bad on message discipline.

There are always the odd "leaks"--some accidental, and some deliberate (sorta like a warning shot or a "wave off") and this just might be one of the latter.

Probably the Catholic News report IS true, that the Vatican has NOT "blocked" her appointment....but it could well be that the Vatican has "informally" warned the administration that she's not a good fit.

This leak, and the subsequent brouhaha surrounding it, provides everyone an opportunity to claim "Well, I never said that....I never asked for that....I never wanted that!" and retreat to their own corners to save face.

Sending her to the Vatican is a shitty idea. You give that reward to some fat old fundraiser who wants an extended vacation in Rome and who hasn't commented on issues of Catholic doctrine one way or another. I also suspect she'd be bored in an instant with the protocol. It really IS stultifying, and shit moves slow as molasses. She doesn't strike me as the type to go to daily mass, or get a charge out of farting around with all the "Men in Dresses" so, unless she thinks it is cool to be picking up the check and dining out every night with overweight priests, bishops and cardinals, she probably wouldn't enjoy the gig very much after she gets "The Magic That is Rome" out of her system.

The most exciting thing about the Vatican? The incredibly cheesy gift shop, located just behind the huge statues of the Saints on the upper level of St. Peter's (to the left as you look at it). You have no idea how much horrid schlock they sell there--the "golden" (plastic) doll house-sized Vaticano with the light behind the front door, displaying an image of "Il Papa" that doubled as a music box playing "Arrivederci Roma" was probably the largest piece of stuff-n-nonsense I've noticed in that joint, but I'm sure they've come up with more craziness since the last time I was there.

I used to eat my sack lunch up there a lot. You used to be able to hop up on the parapet, right by the Saints, and hang out, undisturbed. If you didn't look like a ruffian, they'd leave you be. I took more than a few afternoon naps up there, too! Great view of the Square, and a nice quiet spot on a "non touristy" day.

Of course, if she's got some covert Italian boyfriend, she may have motive for wanting the job....!

[DesertDiamond]

46. The right wingnuts are scared of the idea of her becoming a political force

Juast as they were scared of her brother John. That's what's behind the character assassination. And yes, it is that. After she withdrew as a candidate for Hillary's old seat, it was revealed that the "criticism" that pushed her into withdrawing was specifically orchestrated by right wing political operatives.

[DevonRex]

68. The story isn't true. See #55.

[cbc5g]

11. WWJD?

Fuckers need to grow up.

[Captain Hilts]

12. Their loss, not Caroline's. She can have France or Britain. nt

[MADem]

45. I would be very surprised if they offered her one of those. nt

[Captain Hilts]

54. Those posts usually go to someone who is wealthy because there are strict limits...

on the govt.'s budget to buy liquor for entertaining.

[MADem]

56. Those two posts, though, need someone with a bit more savvy than Ms. Kennedy.

Sure, she may be well educated, but that "Like, you know" performance...in FRANCE? The UK? AGGGH! Her self-made thug of a grampa, who had the UK job when her daddy was a lad, was far more well-spoken than she was in that position.

I think if she wants to "get away" from NYC (and I think she does--I think she wants "CHANGE" badly) she should offer herself up to do a crappy and hard Ambassadorial job, in a poor and underserved country. Haiti's a good fit--or the Dominican Republic. She could pump up the volume on how we need to help our close neighbors and maybe do some good there. There are a lot of expats from those nations in NYC so she'd "resonate" in that environment. Of course, living conditions wouldn't be like Rome, not by a long shot.

Hanging around the Vatican, really, is just a paid vacation in Rome. Plainly, there's something "wrong" with her marriage--maybe she's just "done." Or maybe he is. Her husband wouldn't be giving up his life and business and career to go there, any more than he would have to go to DC--she really should just unload him and move on, and start by doing a hard, small job, not an easy large one. She's already got that "patronage/quid pro quo" stink on herself as a result of that disastrous "debut" as a Senate contender, and the only way she can get it off is by taking a lousy job that no one wants, and hitting it out of the park.

You can ask for extra cash for booze if you need it, particularly if you're entertaining a lot in a "serious" way. I'm thinking this administration would OK those sorts of expenditures, so long as they aren't terribly frivolous ones or the staff aren't a bunch of drunks. The trick, too, is to "stockpile" the booze and make your purchases quarterly. For example, in Rome, there's not much going on in the heat of the summer--EVERYONE is gone on vacation...but buy that hooch anyway! And only buy the hard stuff--you can get wine on the economy with your miscellaneous funds that's far better than anything you can import!

The good news is that the Embassies, with their little stores, get "Class Six" rates (or better, with bulk buys) so they aren't procuring their pricy whiskeys, vodkas, brandies, etc., "on the economy." THAT can get expensive.

[Captain Hilts]

63. Not really. The fact that she has the Prez's ear is good enough for both. Congress imposed limits

on US money spent on alcohol. It's a law that goes back to prohibition. That's why - with the exception of Admiral Crowe - you usually have someone crazy wealthy, such as Pamella Harriman, Anne Armstrong, Joe Kennedy, etc. as ambassador to Britain or France.

[MADem]

65. I just don't see her in either job. I could be wrong. NT

[Captain Hilts]

69. You could be right. nt

[Freddie Stubbs]

72. Actually, usually 1/2 of the ambassadorships go to career diplomats, and the other 1/2 go to

political donors and former elected officials.

[CTyankee]

57. A while back during the Caroline/Gov. Paterson controversy, I suggested that Caroline be sent to

France. After her mother's wonderful appearance with JFK To Paris back in the early '60s, it would be the perfect follow up, IMHO. Caroline would be a graceful, intelligent, highly poised ambassador to that country and the French would love it. I think there is significant payoff for us to send this beautiful lady there as our representative...

[Undercurrent]

13. According to Catholic News Service, this is not true.

They say that this story was started by, "An article published April 2 by Newsmax.com -- and recirculated in Italian media..."

They also say:

A Vatican spokesman dismissed reports that the Holy See has rejected several candidates for U.S. ambassador to the Vatican because of their support for legal abortion...

Vatican sources said not only was the report inaccurate, but that its premise was faulty. The Vatican has not been in the habit of vetting the personal beliefs or ideas of candidates before accepting them as ambassadors, they said.

There have been occasions in the last two years when the Vatican has objected to ambassadorial candidates -- from Argentina, in the case of a divorced Catholic with a live-in partner, and from France, where the candidate was an openly gay Catholic in a union with another man...

Another rumor making the rounds of blogs says Caroline Kennedy, the daughter of the late President John F. Kennedy and briefly an aspirant for appointment to the Senate from New York, is favored for the job.

more:
http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/0901631.htm

[ruggerson]

17. "For Catholic ambassadors, there is the question of their matrimonial situation"

"but outside of that I don't think there are any other criteria,"said one Vatican source

Great. Let's put that to the test. Appoint a newly wedded gay guy from Iowa as Ambassador and see what happens.

[asphalt.jungle]

18. oh italian media, you didn't know newsmax.com just makes shit up.

oh well.

[deminks]

21. Thanks for the link.

I think I am going to keep that link handy this evening. :evilgrin:

[Undercurrent]

25. Yes, me too!

This all sounds like standard backroom Vatican intrigue to me. I don't believe a word they are saying until proven. But I don't believe a thing Newsmax says either, so who knows the real story.

I don't think the Vatican deserves, or needs an ambassador from the US. It's NOT a country. It's not a member of the United Nations.

[babylonsister]

28. Thanks for that! nt

[DesertDiamond]

48. In that case, I respectfully withdraw all of my above fuck 'ems.

[DesertDiamond]

49. On second thought, given that they excommunicated Jackie for marrying Ari,

I withdraw my withdrawal of the fuck 'ems.

[mmonk]

51. Thanks. In the US, all "news" is suspect these days.

[genna]

70. Why all the animosity for the Catholic Pope?

I'm not a Catholic nor did I go to Catholic schools. I am surprised that people read the OP without checking the facts.

When I read it, I had a funny feeling because I wondered why the Pope can approve or reject our delegation. My first reaction was either they accept who we send or choose to have no formal or informal representation from the U.S.

I didn't think man this is something I should jump on Catholics for. Reading some of these comments make my stomach turn.

If and when the Catholic Pope says some vile thing, I will respond to the vile thing not the entire group.

[stellanoir]

15. The Vatican is the oldest manipulative bureaucracy on the planet.

They wouldn't recognize true class or care if it bloody well choked them.

I know someone who's been to their catacombs. The entry way is lined on both sides with skulls of martyrs.

Charming. . .eh. . .?

[polichick]

31. And I'm sure they don't want a woman in the job...

The saddest thing about the Catholic church imo is that it wouldn't exist without all the women who keep it going, including mothers who send their families to church, members who do all the grunt work for a congregation, and nuns who give their lives ~ and yet all these women continue to enable an institution that considers them second-class citizens. Makes no sense to me for women to support such a thing!

[stellanoir]

37. The denigration of the divine sanctity of the feminine energy finds its unfortunate root in the

spiritual/sexual schism of the virgin/whore fallacy.

'Tis a tragic pity really.

One perhaps we can rectify over time.

[polichick]

50. How different things would be if the early church hadn't tossed out the Gospel...

...believed to have been written by Mary, the wife of Jesus. And how different things would be if feminine energy held equal footing with male energy across the world!

[denem]

19. Offer the job to Palin.

[Chipper Chat]

20. Send Michelle Bachman.

Get her shrill ass out of Congress.

[babylonsister]

22. Ha! They'd beg for Caroline after that! nt

[dflprincess]

24. Bachmann is a true friend of fetuses everywhere

and that's the only issue the Vatican cares about. You can support a war of choice (a war the last pope called "Godless"), you can support the death penalty and even mock someone about who's about to be executed and the Vatican will say you're okay. - But threaten a blastocyst or believe that Gays deserve equal rights and you are doomed.

[Ken Burch]

27. And I'm sure the fact that her husband is Jewish has NOTHING to do with it.

:eyes:

[polichick]

29. It's pretty rich for the Vatican to preach about values given its flock of criminal priests...

How they can still find a single person who will listen to them is astounding imo.

[dcindian]

30. They asked for Chester instead.

Need someone who fits in.

[karynnj]

32. I really doubt this story is actually true

The original source was an Italian paper that reported that Senator Kerry lobbied President Obama to pick Caroline Kennedy to be the ambassador. This was NOT reported any where in the US. Now first of all, if Caroline wanted to be an Ambassador to the Vatican or anywhere else she has her own strong links to Obama. Kerry is known for not leaking anything. There would be no reason for Obama to leak a name - there is no way that this helps him here.

So here is the timeline -

An Italian news magazine reports the rumor and it is picked up by a Catholic news source - http://www.headlinebistro.com/en/news/italyambassadors.html

It is then picked up by the right wing Boston Herald, which goes to Ray Flynn, a former Democratic mayor of Boston who is a strong anti-abortion advocate.

Through that time, there is no comment by Obama's administration or the office of either MA Senator or Caroline Kennedy. The Vatican however today denied they rejected anybody.

Given that Caroline Kennedy was concerned with moving to DC, I really doubt that she is interested in being an ambassador.

Now think hard - who is helped and who hurt by this story? Then consider the original source - Panorama magazine. Which is a right wing magazine owned by Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panorama_(Italian_magazine).


Suggesting that David Thorne could be named is actually reasonable and suggesting Kerry, who best friend he is, would advocate for him makes sense. He would be an excellent choice and he has helped the Democratic party and especially John Kerry since they were young. He actually has ties to Italy where his father was a US diplomat.

[karynnj]

34. Hey guys - do you realize that these are all RIGHT WING sources

1) The Italian news magfazine, Panarama which first reported it is owned by the right wing PM - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panorama_(Italian_magazine). (Here's an article listing it as the original source - http://www.headlinebistro.com/en/news/italyambassadors.html. ) Note it has a NEW article denying that the Vatican rejected anyone.

Then the next source is the Boston Herald, a right wing paper that went to Ray Flynn for a predictable response. Then the Daily Telegram reported it - and they are a right wing British paper.

This is to stir up trouble for Obama and to hurt Caroline Kennedy and John Kerry.

[Crabby Appleton]

I think you got it right. nt

[Pab Sungenis]

36. Fuck them.

Break off diplomatic relations. We no longer deal with tyrants, and that's what Benedict XVI is.

[JerseygirlCT]

38. Do other countries get to veto our choices to be ambassador?

This is just flat-out obnoxious.

[BlooInBloo]

39. Um, a country can reufuse to let anyone they want into the country in the first place....

So yes, the can refuse an ambassador to their country. And they can expel current ambassadors to their country.

[Pab Sungenis]

40. There's an interesting article about this controversy

at "Why They Suck."

http://whytheysuck.com/?p=52

[BlooInBloo]

41. That's close to Rude Pundit level.

[saltpoint]

43. Ted Nugent. Is he pro-life? Send him instead.

[DrToast]

53. On the plus side, she's never molested any kids...

Stick that in your pipe and smoke it, Pope.

[ClarkUSA]

55. This story has been proven false. Why do we post crap from rightwing rags like Telegraph?

The Telegraph got this story from its American cousin, the uberwingnut rag Newsmax. Nice way to spread a false meme, eh?

"... apparently the trustworthy folks at Newsmax have been circulating a report claiming that the Obama administration has submitted three separate ambassadorial candidates to the Vatican for approval and each has been rejected for being "insufficiently pro-life."... how perfect it must have sounded to the Newsmax crew when they put out the story. Everyone knows Democrats aren't pro-life. And now Obama can't even get a Vatican ambassador approved--because there's not a single pro-life Catholic in the Democratic Party!

Unfortunately for them, John Thavis at Catholic News Service actually called over to the Vatican to ask about the rumors. Here's what he found:

Vatican sources said not only was the report inaccurate, but that its premise was faulty. The Vatican has not been in the habit of vetting the personal beliefs or ideas of candidates before accepting them as ambassadors, they said.

There have been occasions in the last two years when the Vatican has objected to ambassadorial candidates -- from Argentina, in the case of a divorced Catholic with a live-in partner, and from France, where the candidate was an openly gay Catholic in a union with another man.

"For Catholic ambassadors, there is the question of their matrimonial situation. But outside of that, I don't think there are other criteria," said one Vatican source.

[DevonRex]

67. Thank you for the correct information. So, it's not true at all. Newsmax struck again.

[ClarkUSA]

73. The Telegraph is a rightwing rag, too. Not that it stops folks from posting "news" from it.

[Phx_Dem]

58. Why do we need an Ambassador to the Vatican. Tell the Pope to shove off.

Or shove it.

[Honeycombe8]

59. Ambassador to what? nt

[treestar]

60. I must have missed the paragraph in the Constitution providing for

the foreign nation to whom an ambassador is appointed the power to block the appointment.

[AyanEva]

71. I keep reading this as "ambassador to Vulcan"

And I'm like, "OH COOL! I WANNA BE THE AMBASSADOR!" Then I realize that it's just the stupid Vatican.

(I'm going the advanced screening on May 7th for Star Trek, btw- tickets on sale this Friday!)

[avaistheone1]

74. The Catholic Church is so pro-life they never saw a war that actively

condemn as they do with their ant-abortion soapbox.