Talk about a double standard, said Rich Lowry in National Review. Some of the same liberals “who were hell on Sarah Palin for her lack of experience” are giddy at the possibility that Caroline Kennedy could be appointed to fill Hillary Clinton’s soon-to-be-vacant Senate seat. “How silly the Alaska governor must feel: To think running for office was the best way to build a political career, when what she needed was fashionable charitable causes and a storied last name.”

Comparing Kennedy to Palin is like comparing “apples to ... zebras,” said Kathleen Parker in The Washington Post. Kennedy, a Constitutional scholar, is plenty smart to do the job, people just don’t like the entitlement implicit in her plea for the appointment. Palin, however, “was headed for much bigger business,” and critics had ample reason to question whether she was competent enough to be “a heartbeat away from The Button.”

"Granted, Palin was chosen for a much more critical spot," said Ericka Andersen in Culture11. But if Kennedy has any self-respect, or wants others to respect her, she'll launch her political career by getting elected, not appointed. "For someone of her inexperience to even ask for this position is—dare I use the term in reference to a Kennedy—tacky."

“Kennedy is no Sarah Palin," said The Boston Globe in an editorial. "She is articulate and temperamentally modest to begin with—but she faces some of the same obstacles in persuading the public, and New York Governor David A. Paterson, that she has enough experience to do the job." Being open and accessible—unlike Palin—will help soothe the skeptics.