Media Notes Archive   |   Live Q&As   |   RSS Feeds RSS   |  E-mail Kurtz  |  Style Section

The Post-Kennedy Era

Discussion Policy
Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, August 28, 2009; 8:51 AM

When a major public figure dies, journalists have to ask an overarching question, if only to keep stoking the story after the first 24 hours.

Something like "who killed Michael Jackson?" can launch a thousand cable segments.

In the case of Ted Kennedy, who died of natural causes, it seems to be: Who will pick up the mantle of Camelot?

The problem is that there's a fairly boring answer: no one.

Yes, the torch was passed over half a century from Jack to Bobby to Ted. But while there are many fine Kennedy children and nieces and nephews doing important work, there is no outsize figure who will fight political battles and captivate the media. It would be a nice storyline, but it's just not happening.

Patrick Kennedy? He crashed his car on the Hill and went into drug rehab. Caroline Kennedy? She fumbled away a Senate seat in New York with her halting performance. Kathleen Kennedy Townsend? She lost her bid for Maryland governor. Joe Kennedy II? He left the House during a big controversy over his annulment of his marriage. Maria Shriver? Maybe, but she's a career journalist who happens to be California's first lady.

When the Boston Globe did its next-generation piece, the paper had to knock down its own premise:

"For political junkies who have made a parlor game of guessing which Kennedy will run next, and for what office, it may be hard, even unfathomable, to accept the idea of them as primarily a family of private citizens, albeit public-spirited ones.

"Yet the cold reality is that when analysts look up and down the Kennedy bench these days, they don't see a wealth of political talent."

Still, television couldn't resist. "Camelot: Will there be a sequel?" Katie Couric asked last night. "Is there someone who could be a political force, the way he and his brothers were?" Charlie Gibson wondered.

A more useful question, perhaps, is whether the senator's passing will have any impact on the health-care battle. I happen to believe that notion is overblown, that the problems plaguing President Obama's bill -- Republican opposition, division among Democrats, town-hall anger -- are the same as they were before Kennedy's passing. But at least it's an open question.

The New Republic's Noam Scheiber senses a sea change:


CONTINUED     1                 >


© 2009 The Washington Post Company