Out of curiosity, would you be opposed to Kennedy if Paterson appointed someone else as a "caretaker" for two years and then she ran and won the seat via election in 2010? Of course, I suppose much would depend on what happened during the campaign.
I think the reason I am so agitated about this is that one man has the power to decide the outcome here and that one man has the ability to transcend the herd behavior and celebrity premium that is impossible to drive out of electoral politics. I don't love the family thing in political campaigns, but I recognize it is something we all have to live with because we can not change it. It's the aggregate result of too many individual decisions to donate money and support people who remind you of others you supported, or who seem safe because you think others will like them. There's no reason why David Patterson as an individual has to go along with it, though.
