Obama Ambassadorships for Sale - NOT Chump Change you can believe it.

[L. Coyote]

July 29, 9:50 AM, 2009 · No Comment · http://harpers.org/archive/2009/07/hbc-90005443
Ambassadorships for Sale
By Scott Horton


The modern American presidential campaign is a hungry beast. In the 2008 campaign, the three principal candidates raised in excess of $1.1 billion, and spending overall essentially doubled as compared with the 2004 campaign, itself a record-setter. And for generations, one unseemly aspect of fundraising has been the de facto sale of ambassadorships. As the Los Angeles Times noted in a recent editorial, the United States is the only major country that regularly hands out choice ambassadorships as a favor for campaign funding bundlers. The process cheapens our diplomatic relations and sends a bad message to the states to which these ambassadors are sent. And it’s getting cruder and greedier. A cynic studying the latest batch of nominees might conclude that the price of an ambassadorship has soared from roughly $200,000 under the Rovian regime to $500,000 under Rahm Emanuel.

Under Barack Obama, the process of political payoff through ambassadorial appointments has matched and appears poised to exceed the already extremely abusive system that Karl Rove put in place under the Bush Administration. In his first six months, Obama has forwarded 58 ambassadorial nominees to the Senate for confirmation. Retired career diplomat Dennis Jett reports in the Daily Beast that 32 of these nominees—55% of the total—are political appointees.

.....

The point here is not that any of these picks are unworthy individuals, but rather that the main criterion by which they seem to have been chosen is their fundraising savvy for Democratic causes. That creates the impression around the world that these posts are political trinkets, which seriously degrades the post and stands as a barrier to Obama’s efforts to reassert American leadership.

It’s clear that none of these nominees came out of the State Department. The watchdog of political benefices in Camp Obama has consistently been White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel, well known for his streetwise and money-oriented political skills. Emanuel understands that these appointments have real value to a campaign seeking to raise money and that there are expectations to be met. In this view, he is remarkably like his predecessor, Karl Rove.

The political process needs to shine a light on this process in order to rein it in. ..........

[WCGreen]

1. Since out SOS has been, as of late, the main envoy of the US...

The ambassadorships are little more than glorified managerial posts...

[vadawg]

2. lol not sure if you are being humourous or not but that is funny

disent matter if we are selling the ambassadorships as they are pretty meaningless anyway is pretty lame excuse for more of the same political crap.

[WCGreen]

21. It's that way all over the world...

The professionals are the day to day folks. Ambassadors come and go.

[DFW]

30. Not for all countries--we are the worst offenders

A friend of mine was Canadian ambassador to the USA during the Clinton years, and he was a career foreign
service officer all his life. He was later posted as ambassador to France as his last post before retiring.
While ambassador to France, I saw him on TV helping out in some disease-stricken area of the Congo, where he
had been posted when it was still Zaire. As Canadian ambassador to France, he certainly no longer had any
obligation to get his hands dirty down there any more, but he did anyway.

European countries (most anyway) follow the same pattern. Ambassadors come from the ranks of the foreign service,
not the ranks of moneyed contributors to the party in power. The French were horrified when the new Bush Lite
ambassador to France showed up in 2001, and I am not allowed to recount some of the things that went on when
he took up his post, but they were more than a little embarrassing to us. Bush Lite's ambassador to Great Britain
was chosen both due to his Bush contributions and because he liked horses, as does Queen Elisabeth. The fact that
our relations with Great Britain have aspects more pressing than equestrian issues did not figure into the equation.

Luckily for us, the Ambassadors sent to Washington by Canada, Breat Britain and France are not chosen under the same
criteria as our ambassadors to them.

[MADem]

35. Yeah....the King of Saudi Arabia only sends his favorite sons and nephews!

As do most of the royally run Arab entitiies. China only sends people who are "politically correct" and who have family left behind they don't want harmed. Every country has "criteria" for their ambassadors, and it ain't always "The Person Who Understands the Country Best."

Look, this is not news. The Number Two at our Embassies is the foreign service professional, and is a VERY seasoned individual who is also a country expert.

The country that hasn't figured this out (and Canada DOES know who to talk to, they're not that stupid) is a bit behind the bush in the rose garden, as it were....

[L. Coyote]

33. So, you didn't even read the article.

[RB TexLa]

3. I don't think the president ever said he was giving up the political tool of selling

certain appointments. I also can't think of a reason he would.

[Pirate Smile]

9. He was asked directly if he would do away with the practice of giving them to donors and he

refused to say that he would halt the practice.

How shocking that he is doing something that he never said he wouldn't do.

Guess what - I never said I was giving up ice cream and, OMG, I'm eating some RIGHT NOW! How could I.

[Hannah Bell]

32. "the 'political tool' of selling appointments". lol.

the political tool of bribery
the political tool of graft
the political tool of assassination
the political tool of provocateurs
the political tool of paid media operatives

[Cruzan]

4. Presidents have always done this, and I have no problem with it.

The fact is that for closely allied countries the ambassadors don't have a lot to do, which is why under Clinton, Mondale was ambassador to Japan and some fund raising guy not worth looking up was ambassador to Luxembourg (or maybe it was Lichtenstein). It's only for the countries where our dealings are less than entirely friendly where ambassadorships are reserved for 'career diplomats.'

[ProSense]

5. That's a fairly definitive headline based on a lot of speculation

The point here is not that any of these picks are unworthy individuals, but rather that the main criterion by which they seem to have been chosen is their fundraising savvy for Democratic causes. That creates the impression around the world that these posts are political trinkets, which seriously degrades the post and stands as a barrier to Obama’s efforts to reassert American leadership.

It’s clear that none of these nominees came out of the State Department. The watchdog of political benefices in Camp Obama has consistently been White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel, well known for his streetwise and money-oriented political skills. Emanuel understands that these appointments have real value to a campaign seeking to raise money and that there are expectations to be met. In this view, he is remarkably like his predecessor, Karl Rove.

Bush appointed people who were unworthy picks.

[Buzz Clik]

8. That's been standard operating procedure lately. We see misleading or wrong subjects in OPs.

The author of the OP will hide behind the dodge, "Hey! That's the headline of the story."

We can assum that the author of the OP has read the article, so he/she knows that the headline is wrong, but they make no changes or comments. It's more than annoying.

[L. Coyote]

15. I worked behind the scenes in politics, so I'm a first-hand witness to the felonies,

not a naive novice. If you think there is no connection between fund raising and who gets what, you are naive!!

[Buzz Clik]

18. No one was impugning your vast experience.

It's the article that is making a strong accusation based on weak evidence presented.

[FrenchieCat]

6. Should he be appointing people that smile in his face,

and then stab him in the back?

"not that any of these picks are unworthy individuals"

So I guess it's ok...
or has Obama become so close to Jesus, that he is now the immaculate conception?

Meanwhile the Republicans do whatever they want, whenever,
as have past President from both parties,
But let's Nit pick Obama to death,
Like that will get us something.

I swear if the man scratches his ass sideways,
there is someone there to tell him that it was wrong,
it should have been up and down.

[L. Coyote]

7. "nominations that come purely out of the White House, substituting for the professional candidate

list from the State Department"

Why not appoint professionals instead of politicos "buying" the posts?

[FrenchieCat]

12. Cause it doesn't matter who he appoints,

because someone's bound to find something wrong with every single one of them.

That's what happens when you elect a President and start treating him like your whipping Boy...
There's always someone there to ask how come he dare not be perfect,
as though anyone else has ever been.

Sorry, but I'm just sick and tired of folks walking around with a magnifying Glass
waiting to find some reason to stick their foot up Obama's ass.

[L. Coyote]

13. That must be why the Bush USAs are still in place!

The man can't do anything cuz someone might react :rofl:

[FrenchieCat]

14. That's all they do....is react to every goddamn thing.......

and forget what's really important....like getting their arses out there and making a real difference.

Obama is only one man, but it seems like he has a million armchair quarterbacks speculating and calling all of the plays before they are even played.

[L. Coyote]

16. In this Democracy, that's 300 million quarterbacks.

There is a reason we call it democracy!

And, goddamn right we can expect the jingle "Change you can believe in" to mean a difference, not the jingle in the pocket kind of change!

[MADem]

10. OH MY GOD WHAT A SHOCK!! THIS HAS NEVER EVER EVER HAPPENED BEFORE!!

I cannot BELIEVE this!!!!!!!

Presidents always picked ambassadors based on MERIT before this!!!!!!!!!! Especially to the "good" embassies, like, uh...LONDON....and uh...PARIS, and uh, .....ROME!!!!!!!

:sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm:

Seriously, when will this Ace Reporter come out with his "Sky Is Blue" expose? Doesn't this dipshit know that it's the Number Two at the High Profile embassies who actually does all the work? Sheesh.

:rofl:

[NYC_SKP]

20. pssssst. (let's secede from the union)

Thanks for the laugh, your reply is Spot On!

:rofl:

[Tangerine LaBamba]

11. Ambassadorships are now

rewards for big giving to successful campaigns.

The days of Jefferson going to France because of his skills are long gone.

Last week, I was at the hearing for an old friend of mine who's been appointed by Obama to be an ambassador to a European country. The country where her parents were born, and where she still has a whole lot of family.

The hearing was as solemn and choreographed as anything in DC, and she got through it just fine. Of course, I didn't remind her until later, over drinks, of her time as a Young Republican. She promised to slap me later. But we laughed.

She's from a very wealthy family, married a man who made a bundle and who happens to be related to some prominent Democratic members of Congress, and they raised and donated thousands and thousands and thousands to the Obama campaign. In fact, she and her husband have been behind Obama since he first ran for office in Illinois. (My friends are from Chicago.)

I figured she was angling for a government job for her daughter, who's almost thirty, but, no, she wanted this for herself. She's slick, my old pal.

So, I'll go to her swearing-in, and I'm invited to the ceremony when she presents her credentials to Queen Beatrix. Maybe I'll go, just because there should be at least one loud snort from the assembled guests during the ceremony.......................

[ellenfl]

17. i think ambassadorships have long been awarded this way.

why is this news? because obama's doing what almost every president before him did? i guess he's supposed to follow the sterling example of george the second?

ellen fl

[earth mom]

19. Obama has lots of rich friends. Ambassador Oprah anyone?

Hell, Oprah can afford to pay double to get a really good location.

Obviously, NOTHING has "changed". :puke:

[anonymous171]

23. Sure why not. I don't really care. I'm more worried about healthcare.

"Good Government"-type reforms aren't really all that important right now.

[MadBadger]

26. I agree, you make me vomit too.

[KittyWampus]

36. thanks for the laugh. That DU'er has posts nothing but unrelenting negativity

It does get tiresome.

[anonymous171]

22. What's wrong with that? Ambassadors don't really do anything anyways. nt

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

24. We've matured as a country. What used to be called graft is now "just politics".

Paying off the money bosses with ambassadorships is no longer criminal, just "practical politics".

And, we wonder why 40% of the people don't bother to vote.

[noamnety]

25. I want to bold this part:

The United States is the only major country that regularly hands out choice ambassadorships as a favor for campaign funding bundlers. ... the price of an ambassadorship has soared from roughly $200,000 under the Rovian regime to $500,000 under Rahm Emanuel.

Back in 2004, lerkfish wrote that this uniquely US tradition "INSULTS THE COUNTRY OF ASSIGNMENT: This demonstrates to that country that you care so little about them you'll assign ANYONE to the post as a political favor. This means paying back friends is more important than diplomatic relations with the assigned country.
This erodes goodwill, rather than fostering goodwill, WHICH IS THE JOB OF AN AMBASSADOR. So in other words, this tradition actually works directly against the intent of placing a diplomatic staff in the first place."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x780388

Details in the article linked in the OP support Lerk's 5 year old statement:

"... Phil Murphy, a Goldman Sachs executive who served as the Democratic Party’s national finance chairman, tapped to represent the United States in Berlin. The Murphy appointment so troubled German leaders that they held up agrément–the diplomatic process under which the receiving nation agrees to accept the ambassadorial designee–so that Chancellor Angela Merkel could press the case for a career diplomat or serious political figure. Merkel made her appeal at the G-8 meeting at L’Aquila, but Obama was unswayed."

As for the degree that this goes on with every president, back in the 2004 thread, I see I wrote (with pre-coffee grammar apparently): "A month or so ago I looked through some of Clinton's appointments, and they appeared to be much more qualified. I was randomly looking, admittedly, but I found about a half dozen that appeared to be well qualified, with cultural or language appropriate to the country, and poli sci or similar backgrounds. And I found one that appeared to be the wealthy widow of someone important, so that one was questionable. But overall, it was nothing like the current lot."

[hfojvt]

29. why a career diplomat though? and what is a 'serious political figure'?

Murphy has experience heading up the German division of Goldman Sachs, where he worked in Frankfurt. So far, I cannot find his educational background. Another site claims this article is positive, but I cannot translate it well enough to know

http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/0,1518,625420,00.html

this article spins it positive

http://www.thelocal.de/politics/20090519-19379.html

I cannot believe US-Deutschland relations are in serious danger under Obama.

Wait, has he ended the Bush policy of strange backrubs?

[noamnety]

37. I'm guessing they want a diplomat with a background in politics

because it's a diplomatic position, requiring an expertise in politics.

Crazy, I know.

[inna]

38. good post. i can't believe the mindless cheerleaders of this practice. nt

[provis99]

27. the Canadians have been pissed off for years about this practice

They consistently have been getting loud-mouthed morons as US ambassadors to Canada, who do nothing but shoot off their yaps, insulting their hosts, and degrading relations between the US and Canada. Of course, the ambassadors are always big political contributors, and look on a posting to Canada as an excuse to do little more than loaf around Ottawa and attend fancy dinners, while pissing off the Canadian populace and politicians with their diplomatic ignorance.

I don't think a $500,000 political donation is enough to have the few countries in the world that can stand us, constantly being offended over the stupidity of our ambassadors.

[ContinentalOp]

28. I can't imagine that the ambassadors who get posted to Canada really contributed THAT much money.

:P

[DFW]

31. A friend of mine was Canadian ambassador to the USA under Clinton

He was a career diplomat all his life, not afraid to roll up his sleeves and help out in third world
countries when they were stricken with disease out breaks. He was probably the finest foreign service
office I have ever met--of ANY country. Even Clinton's appointments, such as Phil Lader to Great Britain
or Jim Rosapepe to Romania, took their jobs far more seriously than Cheneybush's horse enthusiast in
Britain or the country club denizen they sent to Paris.

[MADem]

34. The Canadians haven't figured out YET that you go to the Number Two if you want something done???

Jeeez, the pragmatic Italians have had that down for only...oh...DECADES (during much of which time they were changing their leadership like most people change their drawers). And they've had to put up with some blazing idiots that make the worst Canadian ambassador look like a Rhodes scholar. When the only American who can't speak Italian in the entire embassy is the frigging AMBASSADOR, they know what the deal is.

Thing is, they know what's up, and they know how to "work it."

The Canadians need to just "roll with me Henry" on this one. Go to the Number Two if they want something, nod and laugh at the moron in the big chair, and stop griping.

Why is it so hard to figure out?

[PopSixSquish]

39. So I Looked Up a Current List of Ambassadors and Found

Christopher Hill - Iraq
who was appointed in 06 by W and seems to have a long diplomatic career and was part of the team that negotiated the Bosian peace settlement with Holbrooke, was also ambassador to Korea

Jon Huntsman - China
former Gov of Utah, speaks Standard Mandarin Chinese fluently, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Commerce and U.S. Ambassador to Singapore in the administration of President George H.W. Bush and a deputy United States trade representative in the George W. Bush Administration

Karl Eikenberry - Afghanistan
West Point Grad and served in Afghanistan twice, rank of Lt General when appointed by Obama in 1/09, MA in Eastern Studies from Harvard, MA in Political Science from Stanford

Howard W. Gutman - Belgium
He's a contributor to Obama but also served as a Special Assistant to F.B.I Director William H. Webster, focusing on counter-terrorism and counter-intelligence; as a law clerk to Justice Potter Stewart on the United States Supreme Court; and as a law clerk to Judge Irving L. Goldberg on the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.

It seems that there are many career diplomats in positions around the world and there are some like Gutman who are contributors but perhaps are qualified nonetheless and I'm sure there are a few clunkers.

Another word about percentages and statistics - If Obama nominates 4 ambassadors for posts and two are contributors then 50% of the people he nominated are contributors. Remember the polling during the election?

Just food for thought...

[noamnety]

40. was that random sampling, or did you pick and choose which to post? (nt)