Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

It's actually quite simple.

Ted Kennedy was elected by a plurality of his constituents many, many times. There was a campaign for each one of his terms and he won. Not so much "hired" as "elected." If the Republicans of that era could have unseated him, I presume they would have. In fact, the question that you may do better to ask is, "why couldn't a conservative in Massachusetts unseat someone with that much baggage?"

RFK and Pete Hegseth, whom I presume the earlier poster was alluding to because of his confirmed alcoholism, were appointed by the current President and confirmed by the Senate. There was no campaign and they were approved largely along party lines, which is more akin to "hiring" and that is an obviously less exhaustive process.

I can only assume that your connection to this was, "haha booze... Ted Kennedy!" Maybe you could graduate to parroting a different joke from Rush Limbaugh? Why don't you sample something from the "I do not think that 12-year old Chelsea Clinton is attractive" section?"






> It's actually quite simple.

Not surprising!

> Ted Kennedy was elected by a plurality of his constituents many, many times.

Massachusetts voters condoned Chappaquiddick. He was still a drunk and worse. Ted Kennedy was never able to overcome Chappaquiddick when running on a national level. There's no doubt that the Chappaquiddick incident was one of the primary reasons he lost the 1980 primary, when he had his best chance of succeeding.

> If the Republicans of that era could have unseated him, I presume they would have.

Why? Massachusetts voters are overwhelmingly Democrats, and all sorts of disgusting characters like Ted Kennedy are elected to high office. The Democrat voters of Massachusetts were willing to overlook Chappaquiddick and that's all there is to it.

> RFK and Pete Hegseth, whom I presume the earlier poster was alluding to because of his confirmed alcoholism, were appointed by the current President and confirmed by the Senate. There was no campaign and they were approved largely along party lines, which is more akin to "hiring" and that is an obviously less exhaustive process.

Again, this only hurts the original argument. Hegseth and RFK Jr. are mere appointments. Neither of them to my knowledge has done anything as heinous as what Ted Kennedy did at Chappaquiddick but let's assume they did. Every few years Massachusetts voters spoke loudly and clearly, affirming their support for someone who drove so drunk that a woman was killed as a result. So the DUI snark above is kind of a joke, and deserves a response.

Heck you could argue that the national scrutiny that Hegseth and RFK Jr. faced was much more of a vetting than Ted Kennedy received in his machine state, but whatever.

> I can only assume that your connection to this was, "haha booze... Ted Kennedy!"

The truth hurts. If Democrats didn't want to defend Ted Kennedy they shouldn't have elected him. I happen to be fond of drinkers who don't kill people. Honestly I care much more about the fact that he abandoned Mary Jo Kopechne to die, and that he received special treatment in court.

> Maybe you could graduate to parroting a different joke from Rush Limbaugh? Why don't you sample something from the "I do not think that 12-year old Chelsea Clinton is attractive" section?"

The most famous example of a joke at Chelsea Clinton's expense was told by John McCain, who stated that the reason for her ugliness was the fact that her father was Janet Reno. John McCain was elected by a plurality of his constituents many, many times.


Disingenuous brainwashed prattle.

Pathetic!



Consider applying for YC's Fall 2025 batch! Applications are open till Aug 4

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: