Updated

Caroline Kennedy officially pulled herself out of the running for Hillary Clinton's New York Senate seat this week. Now, Empire State Congresswoman, Kirsten Gillibrand, is the logical Paterson pick.

[caption id="attachment_6034" align="aligncenter" width="199" caption="Rep. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY)"][/caption]

Sure, after all the doubt, drama and delay anything could still happen. Politics is full of surprises.

Gillibrand makes total sense. Why? She's a solid, blue dog. A conservative Democrat from an expansive, rural county in Upstate New York who boasts far-reaching money ties into downstate, money rich New York City.

Geographically, she's ideal. She represents Delaware County, the stomping ground of Clinton's predecessor, Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan. Though Moynihan's wife endorsed Kennedy, naming a local Democratic daughter would be a hat tip to the leftist legend. Paterson could also appease liberal, pro-women groups who have demanded that Clinton's successor wear high heels, by electing a female -- and not just any female -- a young, energetic, mom who was reared in political roots.

Why not current New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo? Besides being far too obvious, selecting Cuomo over Kennedy would be more than an affront to Camelot. It would also be a slap in the face to a prominent, political dynasty.

Politically, Kennedy never made any sense for the current Governor, who some hypothesize would have stuck a deal with Kennedy to garner her family's political and financial heft when he runs in 2010. But that type of quid pro quo would likely be less than fruitful for Paterson. -- Just ask Andrew Cuomo who ran for New York governor in 2002 when he was married to a Kennedy. The "power" was with him. But sadly, the votes were not. Not only did Cuomo not win the Republican line on the ballot, he only garnered roughly 15,000 votes on the liberal line. So much for Kennedy clout.

Gillibrand would be a savvy, logical move for Patterson.