Big Dem Donors Score Plum Ambassadorships*
EmailABC News’ Jake Tapper and Kirit Radia report:
Yo Gabba Gabba, indeed.
President Obama last night announced his intention to nominate a dozen individuals to key ambassadorships. Among them: entertainment executive and Democratic fundraiser Charles Rivkin, who the president has tapped to be Ambassador to France.
In 2005 Rivkin became president and CEO of W!LDBRAIN, an award-winning entertainment company that produces the Nickelodeon hit “Yo Gabba Gabba!” He served as the co-finance chair in California of then-Sen. Barack Obama’s presidential campaign.
President Obama also named the former Vice Chairman of Citigroup Corporate and Investment Banking Louis Susman to be Ambassador to the United Kingdom of Great Britain & Northern Ireland.
Susman, too, was a top fundraiser for Mr. Obama’s presidential campaign. Four years before that he was the national finance chairman for Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass.
Of the dozen ambassadors named last night, one third — four — have experience serving in government posts abroad: Christopher William Dell, named to be Ambassador to the Republic of Kosovo; Patricia A. Butenis, to be Ambassador to the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka and the Republic of Maldives; Robert S. Connan, to be Ambassador to the Republic of Iceland; and Thomas A. Shannon, to be Ambassador to the Federative Republic of Brazil.
The other eight – while they have myriad other accomplishments — do not appear to have such credentials, despite President Obama’s pledge on January 9 that he would have civil servants “wherever possible” serve in foreign posts.
“We have outstanding public servants,” the president said, “and I’ve spoken with Secretary of State designee, Hillary Clinton, about the importance of rejuvenating the State Department. I want to recruit young people into the State Department to feel that this is a career track that they can be on for the long term. And so, you know, my expectation is that high quality civil servants are going to be rewarded."
The president did at the time allow that there would be some political appointees to ambassadorships.
“There probably will be some,” he said. “It would be disingenuous for me to suggest that there are not going to be some excellent public servants but who haven’t come through — through the ranks of the civil service.”
White House press secretary Robert Gibbs today praised the president for being "exceedingly forthcoming" in January about political appointees.
"Yesterday we rolled out a number of both career and non- career ambassadorial appointments," Gibbs said. "I think you see a group of committed individuals and proven professionals that are eager to serve their country. Some of those individuals were fundraisers. Some of those were career ambassadors. Some of those were people that left — either teaching or some other thing like that, like Miguel Diaz, to become our ambassadorial appointment to the Vatican, somebody who is — has a distinguished record; or a congressman like Tim Roemer, who has served on the 9/11 Commission and with some distinction in Congress to be our ambassador to India."
Gibbs described Rivkin as "a friend of the president" who speaks French and "who has a strong professional background, desires to serve this country. And the president believes he’ll be good — he’ll be good as the next ambassador to France."
Of course, appointing big donors and pals to plum ambassadorships is nothing new.
As was reported at the time, the first 35 diplomatic appointments of this kind made by President Bush donated an average of $141,110 to him and other GOP campaigns and committees in the previous election cycle.
As ABC News’ Justin Rood points out, this 1908 New York Times story asks, “Can a poor man represent the United States in these latter days in a diplomatic capacity in Europe?”
The American Foreign Service Association, the union that represents US diplomats, says that it “urges that only the most qualified individuals be appointed to represent the United States critical interests around the world, especially as ambassadors.”
The organization has urged that that the non-career portion of ambassadors be reduced from the informal historical average of 30 percent to a maximum of 10 percent. By its current totals, AFSA estimates that President Obama’s political non-career appointees are somewhere in between those two percentages.
AFSA cautions that the jury is still out on what the final percentage of political appointees will be as there are 37 ambassador positions still unfilled.
- Jake Tapper and Kirit Radia
* This post has been updated with quotes from Gibbs from the briefing.
Sen. DeMint: GOP Race Could Go Until Convention 
Obama Avoids Questions on Contraception Rule
I love Yo Gabba Gabba, but this is just more of Obama’s politics as usual. Using US Government positions and resources to reward people who give you money. How is that different from what goes on in any third world banana republic?
It’s not.
Another strike for the “Change” lie.
Posted by: paul | May 28, 2009, 2:16 pm 2:16 pm
Ambassadors have been buddy buddy appointees for this country for generations. You are right though, he said he was going to change business as usual and putting cronies in positions of power was something he wasn’t going to do. Is this another broken campaign promise that should be tracked?
Posted by: KR | May 28, 2009, 2:27 pm 2:27 pm
Can you say “Pay to Play!”
Posted by: Mr.Smith | May 28, 2009, 2:30 pm 2:30 pm
I’m really disappointed with his choice for Japan.
Posted by: MayBee | May 28, 2009, 2:42 pm 2:42 pm
paul – From MSNBC -Top campaign fundraisers have long gotten these plum posts in past administrations — Democratic and Republican alike. And then-President-elect Obama, in a Jan. 9 press conference, said, “There probably will be some” ambassadors chosen who were top donors. “It would be disingenuous for me to suggest that there are not going to be some excellent public servants but who haven’t come through the ranks of the civil service,” Obama added. — So it seems both the Repubs and Dems have done this, why only outrage when this Pres. does? He didn’t lie about it as you say. So what is your issue?
Posted by: Try the truth | May 28, 2009, 2:50 pm 2:50 pm
So much for his promises to end this kind of cr@p. Are you feeling the change, America?
Posted by: W. Axl Rose | May 28, 2009, 2:52 pm 2:52 pm
Mr.Smith – I guess that goes for Bush 2, Clinton, Bush 1, Reagan et al.
Posted by: Try the truth | May 28, 2009, 2:52 pm 2:52 pm
Obama has been for sale since day one
Posted by: LMAO | May 28, 2009, 2:58 pm 2:58 pm
“Another strike for the “Change” lie.”
As was reported at the time, the first 35 diplomatic appointments of this kind made by President Bush donated an average of $141,110 to him and other GOP campaigns and committees in the previous election cycle.
Out his first 12 announced ambassadors, 8 were political donors.
And while the message below is good to keep in mind, I am pleased he has made some progress.
“AFSA cautions that the jury is still out on what the final percentage of political appointees will be as there are 37 ambassador positions still unfilled.”
Posted by: Ryan C | May 28, 2009, 3:05 pm 3:05 pm
“Try the truth” – Reread my post. When I said “politics as usual” — that refers to the fact that this is a negative activity that has gone on far too long. Obama promised to “change” this kind of corrupt practice and he has continued it!
You’re clearly too partisan to see straight or that would have been obvious to you.
Posted by: paul | May 28, 2009, 3:07 pm 3:07 pm
“As was reported at the time, the first 35 diplomatic appointments of this kind made by President Bush donated an average of $141,110 to him and other GOP campaigns and committees in the previous election cycle.”
Again, Ryan C, I repeat, why is Obama continuing this CORRUPT practice? When did copying everything that idiotic Bush did become the ideal? Or even “ok” because Bush did it? Amazing. How about some standards instead of excuses?
Posted by: paul | May 28, 2009, 3:11 pm 3:11 pm
“You’re clearly too partisan to see straight or that would have been obvious to you.”
ROFLMAO!
Hypocrisy thy name is right winger.
Posted by: Ryan C | May 28, 2009, 3:12 pm 3:12 pm
Carrots for Democrats and sticks for Republicans.
A list of closing Chrysler dealership owners were overwhelmingly found to be sponsors of GOP candidates and organizations, and a handful were supporters of Barack’s Democrat rivals (Hillary Clinton and John Edwards in 2008, for example).
A lawyer for Chrysler dealers facing closure as part of the automaker’s bankruptcy reorganization said he believes Chrysler executives do not support a plan to eliminate a quarter of its retail outlets. The decision to close dealerships was made by the President’s task force, not by Chrysler.
“It became clear to us that Chrysler does not see the wisdom of terminating 25 percent of its dealers,” Bellavia said. “It really wasn’t Chrysler’s decision. They are under enormous pressure from the President’s automotive task force.”
Posted by: ScaryTimes | May 28, 2009, 3:13 pm 3:13 pm
try the truth: BO is the one that brought this outcry upon himself. Stop tyring to bring everyone else from the past into it. I have not seen anyone on these posts say that past presidents have not done these things. The difference is, BO said he WASN’T going to do them and that there would be change. He needs to keep his word.
Posted by: whatashame | May 28, 2009, 3:17 pm 3:17 pm
“Again, Ryan C, I repeat, why is Obama continuing this CORRUPT practice?”
The practice itself is not corrupt.
Its ambassadorships, not a SC Justice.
“When did copying everything that idiotic Bush did become the ideal?”
He’s not copying Bush.
35 of Bush’s 1st ambassadorships went to political donors.
Out of the 12 Obama has nominated 8 were political donors with the overall percentage projected to be between 10 & 30% though that remaisn to be seen.
“Or even “ok” because Bush did it?”
This has been going on since the beginning of our country, this isn’t about Bush did it first.
Posted by: Ryan C | May 28, 2009, 3:17 pm 3:17 pm
From the same article:
A spokeswoman for Chrysler said the decision to cut a
quarter of the dealers was “not coming from the task force.”
“Our position is that the market can’t support the number of
dealers that are out there,” said spokeswoman Carrie McElwee.
“This has been our plan for more than 10 years to combine
Chrysler, Dodge and Jeep under one roof.”
The decision about cutting dealers took into consideration
factors like location, customer satisfaction, and sales
potential, she said. Nearly half of the terminated dealers also
carry non-Chrysler brands, and most rely on used vehicles for
the bulk of their sales.
Chrysler has more than double the number of dealers of
rivals Toyota, Nissan and Honda, which each have about 1,200
retail outlets
Posted by: Ryan C | May 28, 2009, 3:20 pm 3:20 pm
whatashame:” The difference is, BO said he WASN’T going to do them and that there would be change. He needs to keep his word.”
Did you even read the post? Obama did NOT say that. You can’t just make up lies about what he promised for the sake of your two minute hate. Obama clearly allowed that there would be some of these traditional type appointments.
“The president did at the time allow that there would be some political appointees to ambassadorships.
“There probably will be some,” “
Posted by: jhw539 | May 28, 2009, 3:30 pm 3:30 pm
To everyone on BOTH sides of the aisle who are whining about this, GROW UP!
This is how things have been done in the political arena for centuries. It is not going to stop today ar anytime in the future! It a non-issue!
Posted by: Mike_C | May 28, 2009, 3:31 pm 3:31 pm
Ryan, I never expected Obama to not put his cronies in positions of power. But it IS a corrupt practice that every President has engaged in. It is payback to live in Paris as the Ambassador in a plush home provided by tax dollars. It is part of the CULTURE of DC, something he said he wanted to change, yet it remains the same. There are those in the department of state who have lived their entire life in diplomacy, likely served in these countries and know them best, and instead of an Ambassadorship they become an aid to some dolt who only knows the cute coffee shops and 5 star hotel locations.
The Ambassador goes on the create his own little feifdom of cocktail parties and rubbing elbows with the French elite, occasionally called on to pass on diplomatic information.
Point being, its part of the culture of corruption of the government and DC. He promised to change it, yet we see the same thing.
This is a valid observation by anyone. It goes to show he is just another politician who sold people a bill of goods he never intended to make good on.
Posted by: KR | May 28, 2009, 3:32 pm 3:32 pm
ScaryTimes:”A list of closing Chrysler dealership owners were overwhelmingly found to be sponsors of GOP candidates and organizations, ”
What a meaningless observation, when it is considered that according to donation records from the last cycle almost 90% of car dealer donations went to Republicans. Of COURSE most of the closing dealers donated Republican; most of the remaining dealers also donated Republican. Next you’re be pitching a fit because most of the dealers shut down were Christians, and American citizens too!
Posted by: jhw539 | May 28, 2009, 3:33 pm 3:33 pm
“This is how things have been done in the political arena for centuries. It is not going to stop today ar anytime in the future!”
Then why did he say he was going to change it, have the slogan of change, and all of his followers brough beating the change he would bring?
Posted by: KR | May 28, 2009, 3:35 pm 3:35 pm
KR:”Point being, its part of the culture of corruption of the government and DC. He promised to change it, yet we see the same thing. ”
The FACT is that he is changing it – we are seeing fewer such payback appointments. The reduction in the number of lobbiests in his administration has also been dramatic. But in your all or nothing world, I suppose if he is not 100%, walk on water perfect, then he is a complete and total failure.
Posted by: jhw539 | May 28, 2009, 3:36 pm 3:36 pm
“The FACT is that he is changing it – we are seeing fewer such payback appointments.”
Why do we have to see any?
Posted by: paul | May 28, 2009, 3:47 pm 3:47 pm
One company kept popping up on the list of dealerships remaining open. The company is RLJ-McLarty-Landers, which owns six Chrysler dealerships. All six dealerships are on “the safe list.”
RLJ’s owners “are Steve Landers (long-time car dealer, 4th-generation dealer), Thomas “Mack” McLarty (former Chief of Staff for President Clinton), and Robert Johnson (founder of Black Entertainment Television and co-owner of the NBA’s Charlotte Bobcats)… McLarty campaigned for Obama in 2008, and Johnson has given countless amounts of money to Democrats over the years.”
And, all their local competitors were eliminated.
In another case, Lithia Motor Group’s owners gave $15,000 to two Democrat candidates and support nationalized healthcare. They will likely lose just two of 29 dealerships and gain 5 more.
One report claims the odds that these Chrysler closings occurred without partisan bias are less than 1%.
The task force, which is calling the shots on which dealerships will close and stay open, headed by investment banker Steven Rattner, is comprised of Cabinet members and Obama administration officials who have extensive backgrounds in finance. They include Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood, Commerce Secretary Gary Locke, Energy Secretary Steven Chu, Labor Secretary Hilda Solis, Office of Management and Budget Director Peter Orszag and Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa Jackson.
Posted by: ScaryTimes | May 28, 2009, 3:47 pm 3:47 pm
“The reduction in the number of lobbiests in his administration has also been dramatic. But in your all or nothing world, I suppose if he is not 100%, walk on water perfect, then he is a complete and total failure.”
I believe Obama framed it as all or nothing, not me. So your cool with corruption, just less of it being an accomplishement. Can still do it, just do less of it, sweep it under the table kinda. Kinda sneak it in there and justify it as “less”. Gotcha. Moronic, but I’m following.
Posted by: KR | May 28, 2009, 3:50 pm 3:50 pm
ScaryTimes:”One report claims the odds that these Chrysler closings occurred without partisan bias are less than 1%.”
Wow, ‘one report’ said. Well, that’s just so compelling.
Posted by: jhw539 | May 28, 2009, 3:51 pm 3:51 pm
KR:”I believe Obama framed it as all or nothing, not me.”
Not surprisingly, your belief has nothing to do with reality.
“There probably will be some,” he said. “It would be disingenuous for me to suggest that there are not going to be some excellent public servants but who haven’t come through — through the ranks of the civil service.”
Posted by: jhw539 | May 28, 2009, 3:53 pm 3:53 pm
whatashame- Please read this article again, and my earlier post. HE NEVER SAID HE WASN’T GOING TO DO IT! What part of that is not clear to you!?
Posted by: Try the truth | May 28, 2009, 4:04 pm 4:04 pm
Paul, no you didn’t. You said Obama’s politics as usual. ”
I love Yo Gabba Gabba, but this is just more of Obama’s politics as usual. Using US Government positions and resources to reward people who give you money. How is that different from what goes on in any third world banana republic?
It’s not.
Another strike for the “Change” lie.
But when caught in your lie you attempt to backtrack, and call me to partisan to see straight.
Posted by: Try the truth | May 28, 2009, 4:10 pm 4:10 pm
“One report claims the odds that these Chrysler closings occurred without partisan bias are less than 1%.”
By a right winger blogger who comes to this conclusion without knowing most of the info that went into any decisions made including sales, cust. service, market share etc.
Posted by: Ryan C | May 28, 2009, 4:29 pm 4:29 pm
To the victors go the spoils I guess.
Posted by: LongT | May 28, 2009, 4:32 pm 4:32 pm
““There probably will be some,” he said. “It would be disingenuous for me to suggest that there are not going to be some excellent public servants but who haven’t come through — through the ranks of the civil service.”
That was Jan. 9th. I am refering to his promise involving the “culture of corruption in Washington” during his campaigning, pointing to a lack of integrity. Its nothing new, he already broke that promise with his lobbyist buddies in the cabinet. This just piles more on.
Posted by: KR | May 28, 2009, 4:44 pm 4:44 pm
I wouldn’t even care if they hadn’t started this Change we can believe in.. stuff.. D.C. is ruled by money, Wall Street is ruled by money and our whole society seems to believe into the sanctity of money.. Change no, believing, the verdict is still out.
Posted by: DontGet818OnMeNow | May 28, 2009, 4:51 pm 4:51 pm
JHW539: I do not hate BO. I do not even know him. I find it impossible to hate someone I do not know. I do think it is wrong of you to jump to such a conclusion about me just because I think he did something that he eluded to in his campaign he would not do. It doesn’t mean I have given up on him. I am just a bit disappointed. That does not make me hate him. You appear to be the hater here — you seem to hate everyone that does not agree with your point of view. Maybe you and “try to trust” should have gone to some of his campaign stops like I did and heard first hand some of his promises: not what you read in the paper or on these sites.
Posted by: whatashame | May 28, 2009, 4:53 pm 4:53 pm
KR – We get it, the man can do no right in your eyes! The number of lobbyists is how many? But in your eyes one would be too much! It’s all or nothing with you. I only hope in your private life you hold yourself to the same standards you hold our President to!
Posted by: Try the truth | May 28, 2009, 4:54 pm 4:54 pm
whatashame – I did go and I listened most importantly I comprehended. Your words “The difference is, BO said he WASN’T going to do them and that there would be change. He needs to keep his word.” HE NEVER SAID THAT! If you still believe he said it, please provide the link. Can’t be hard, everyone of his campaign stops was written about and is on video. You just want to bash him for something HE NEVER SAID! His statement has been posted by Jake, by me and others! Stop pointing the finger and prove your statement as we all have here!
Posted by: Try the truth | May 28, 2009, 5:00 pm 5:00 pm
Let’s all try to name a U.S. ambassador (say in the last 35 years) that was appointed because they were qualified for the job. I’m not going to participated, because I can’t name any ambassadors…
Posted by: DontGet818OnMeNow | May 28, 2009, 5:05 pm 5:05 pm
“That was Jan. 9th. I am refering to his promise involving the “culture of corruption in Washington” during his campaigning, pointing to a lack of integrity”
Obama has sought to make government more transparent and has done a pretty good job so far.
I am having trouble finding a quote of Obama saying culture of corruption though that certainly was a Democratic mantra in 2006. Got any?
Posted by: Ryan C | May 28, 2009, 5:08 pm 5:08 pm
try to trust: doesn’t matter what I send or what I say, you have your opinion and I have mine. That is the American way. But don’t say I hate him because that is a lie you are starting. Shame on you. If you believe he never said it, that is all that will ever matter to you. I hope he really turns out to be the perfect president you want him to be….for all our sakes. But you really need to get rid of your distain for anyone who doesn’t share your opinion. You will soon learn that no one is perfect, including BO. When you do, I hope it does not destroy you. Have a great day.
Posted by: whatashame | May 28, 2009, 5:08 pm 5:08 pm
DontGet818OnMeNow —-
Utah Gov. Jon M. Huntsman Jr. to China
Posted by: Try the truth | May 28, 2009, 5:09 pm 5:09 pm
“I love Yo Gabba Gabba, but this is just more of Obama’s politics as usual.”
“Try the Truth” – That statement clearly says that Obama is carrying on with “politics as usual” as he has been. That means that he is doing nothing different than those who came before him — he carries out the same corrupt “politics as usual” policies that Bush carried out before him. Again, you seem to be too partisan to see clearly, but you may want to read more carefully and also take the advice of your own moniker.
Posted by: paul | May 28, 2009, 5:10 pm 5:10 pm
whatashame – Ok, now please show me my post that said you hated him. Another thing you won’t be able to find. When cornered you turn victim. All I asked was factual back up for you statements. You know there are none. Oh, and it’s TRY THE TRUTH!
Posted by: Try the truth | May 28, 2009, 5:12 pm 5:12 pm
First, I don’t know what an Ambassador does day to day so why should I care? Secondly, who should get the appointments? A career politician?…if you could find someone who would take such a meaningless job. Or an outsider who has not contributed financially to any campaign?..somone like Joe the Plumber?
In the end ambassadorships are pretty meaningless and I see no harm rewarding contributors..
Posted by: indy_voter | May 28, 2009, 5:12 pm 5:12 pm
I thought about Huntsman, good answer.. after he’s confirmed..if he wasn’t already…
I always think of Papa Joe Kennedy and the kids going to Great Britain.. the cruel irony of an Irish Catholic serving (and he was also the first SEC head)…
Posted by: DontGet818OnMeNow | May 28, 2009, 5:16 pm 5:16 pm
paul – No it’s not saying that. You specifically say ” Obama’s politics as usual.” Not politics as usual. With the Obama’s your denoting ownership. Are you dizzy from trying to spin that one yet!? Call me partisan all you like. Your showing your partisanship. Your words are there, yet you try and spin and deny. I have read your post carefully and comprehend it’s meaning. Funny, you speak to me of truth when your own words are staring you in the face and you deny what you wrote. Pathetic!
Posted by: Try the truth | May 28, 2009, 5:19 pm 5:19 pm
At least his appointee to France speaks fluent French. All of Bush’s appointees did not speak the language of the country and most made no attempt to learn it. While Obama did not get rid of the tradition of appointing fundraisers, he at least is trying to appoint more qualified people.
Posted by: Tom Ledford | May 28, 2009, 5:21 pm 5:21 pm
DontGet818OnMeNow – Thanks, you brought up something I’m not sure of. They confirm Ambassadors? For some reason I thought it was just an appointment. Any info would be appreciated.
Posted by: Try the truth | May 28, 2009, 5:22 pm 5:22 pm
Bush’s appointees were selected by a BBQ Rib Cook-off.. ties were broken by a three alarm chili contest…
Posted by: DontGet818OnMeNow | May 28, 2009, 5:24 pm 5:24 pm
I always thought that the ambassadors to England and France actually had to know something about foreign policy. I guess not.
This is all so corrupt.
Posted by: Arnoldresignnow | May 28, 2009, 5:25 pm 5:25 pm
I don’t know if they have to be approved, maybe they just get a plane ride.. I only come here to read.. I hate politics.. I ignored it until the market crashed and they started talking about tax increases… otherwise I would just go to the Bloomberg and WSJ.
Posted by: DontGet818OnMeNow | May 28, 2009, 5:26 pm 5:26 pm
Anyone know why a plum is a good thing… other than Jack Horner.
Posted by: DontGet818OnMeNow | May 28, 2009, 5:27 pm 5:27 pm
hey try the truth: whatashame was talking to me! posted to wrong article.
Posted by: try to trust | May 28, 2009, 5:28 pm 5:28 pm
Tom Ledford – Had to go there! Now, I’m just waiting for the “well, the people over there should speak English posts” LOL!!
Arnoldresignnow- Yes I would think they would have to also, since we have such tenuous relations with both England and France, (sarcasm)
Posted by: Try the truth | May 28, 2009, 5:28 pm 5:28 pm
try to trust – Oops my bad! Still stand by what I said to it! :)
Posted by: Try the truth | May 28, 2009, 5:30 pm 5:30 pm
“paul – No it’s not saying that. You specifically say ” Obama’s politics as usual.” Not politics as usual. With the Obama’s your denoting ownership. Are you dizzy from trying to spin that one yet!? ”
Sorry, I didn’t realize that you had difficulty understanding what you read. “Politics as usual” is a well established term among the grown ups of the world, and we grown ups all know what it means. It refers to typical corruption from ALL politicians as a whole, throughout time. It is what politics has always been. Believe it or not, Obama does not have a monopoly on this concept…or any other. That is why “Obama’s” was added to “politics as usual” — to denote that it is “Obama” who is carrying out “politics as usual” this time. Perhaps the time you are spending here would be better spent with a reading tutor.
Btw, in spite of your sad attempt to distract, this appointment is STILL more of Obama’s politics as usual approach to governing. There’s been no “change”. Same corruption and pay to play, different dude. Obama = Bush.
Posted by: paul | May 28, 2009, 5:55 pm 5:55 pm
“Same corruption and pay to play, different dude. Obama = Bush.”
ROFLMAO!
Never ceases to bring a smile to my face when a right winger uses Bush as a pejorative even when the comparison is ridiculous.
Posted by: Ryan C | May 28, 2009, 6:00 pm 6:00 pm
paul – I understand politics as usual, but THAT IS NOT WHAT YOU WROTE! I have copied and pasted your words and you still persist. Oh, English and journalism major for my first degree, so maybe you should listen and I can tutor you. Your still spinning, and it’s no longer funny, but rather sad at this point. If you made a grammatical mistake, say so. Stop trying to rewrite what you wrote!
Posted by: Try the truth | May 28, 2009, 6:09 pm 6:09 pm
“Never ceases to bring a smile to my face when a right winger uses Bush as a pejorative even when the comparison is ridiculous.”
I think I would feel the same way if I ever saw that happening. At least I would be relieved that they could finally see clearly that he was a loser and that they were willing to admit, albeit much too late.
Oh, you were referring to me?
ROTFLMAO!
Too bad I happen to vote about 70/30 in favor of Democrats. It’s confusing for people like you when someone has the ability to think for themselves, isn’t it?
ROTFLMAO!
Posted by: paul | May 28, 2009, 6:14 pm 6:14 pm
paul – “Sorry, I didn’t realize that you had difficulty understanding what you read. “Politics as usual” is a well established term among the grown ups of the world, and we grown ups all know what it means.”
But you wrote (copied and pasted) Obama’s politics as usual.” I’m sorry you don’t understand what you wrote. We adults know what it means! Are you dizzy yet?
Posted by: Try the truth | May 28, 2009, 6:14 pm 6:14 pm
“Too bad I happen to vote about 70/30 in favor of Democrats”
Sure you do.
“It’s confusing for people like you when someone has the ability to think for themselves”
Thinking for yourself is parroting right wing media?
I realize that delusion is common among right wingers but the widespread of ignorance does not make the ignorance any less so.
Posted by: Ryan C | May 28, 2009, 6:18 pm 6:18 pm
“Thinking for yourself is parroting right wing media?
I realize that delusion is common among right wingers but the widespread of ignorance does not make the ignorance any less so.”
You’re apprently so far gone to one extreme that you can’t even comprehend the concept of independence. All I can do is shrug my shoulders and feel sorry for you. Hopefully you’ll grow out of it and learn to stand on your own some day.
Posted by: paul | May 28, 2009, 6:24 pm 6:24 pm
“the first 35 diplomatic appointments of this kind made by President Bush donated an average of $141,110 to him and other GOP campaigns and committees . . .”
Tapper is able to identify 2 appointments made to financial supporters or organizers of Obama’s campaign.
At this point, cutting it back from 35 to perhaps 2 is an exceptional change.
Posted by: danita | May 28, 2009, 6:41 pm 6:41 pm
“Tapper is able to identify 2 appointments made to financial supporters or organizers of Obama’s campaign.”
Great point.
Posted by: Ryan C | May 28, 2009, 6:45 pm 6:45 pm
Let’s all try to name a U.S. ambassador (say in the last 35 years) that was appointed because they were qualified for the job.
============
Walter Mondale== Japan (under Clinton)
Howard Baker == Japan (under Bush 43)
Posted by: MayBee | May 28, 2009, 6:53 pm 6:53 pm
this is certainly “CHANGE” that “we can believe in”. Ambassadorships, especially to certain countries, has since time immemorial has been a perk given to political cronys, a reward to those who served in more hardship areas, and to big donors.
But Obama was all about “CHANGE”. “Change” from the corrupt, or at least nepotisitic Washington system. And “Change” from the corrupt, often criminally so, politics from the city in which he first gained experiencing “community organizing”…Chicago. Yet, again and again, all we see are friends going to prison, supporters under indictment, rules like paying taxes on time or being a lobbyist being “waived”, etc. Some “Change”! I guess we can “HOPE” that Barak will “CHANGE” his ways but I doubt it.
Posted by: Ed | May 28, 2009, 8:11 pm 8:11 pm
Danita, I know your comment inspired an ‘attagirl’ from Ryan_C, but I think you need to rethink your statement. You pull Tapper’s quote about the Bush initial appointees, mention the 2 specific cases mentioned in the piece, and then crow that knocking the number of donors appointed from 35 to “perhaps” 2 is “exceptional change.” Even if you just read the Tapper posting, without additional research, you would know that Obama has done nothing of the sort. This is far from “exceptional change.”
There were at least four big donors (all top bundlers) named to ambassadorships today: Rivkin to France, Sussman to Britain, Fulton to Denmark, and the surprise of Roos to Japan. Does Roos not count because Tapper did not specifically name him in the piece? A powerful attorney who was a big supporter, Vilma Martinez, goes to Argentina. Tapper does say that only 4 of today’s appointees are career diplomats, those folks Obama said early on he would try to appoint “wherever possible” (as spelled out in this piece and in many other places since he made that statement on Jan. 9) We already knew about Steelers’ owner Dan Rooney’s ambassadorship to Ireland, announced weeks ago.
As the article makes clear, the professional diplomats wanted Obama to reduce the number of fat cat appointments from the usual 30 percent to something approaching 10 percent. He has not done so yet, although he has reduced the percentage. Sounds like the usual “promise them the moon, they’ll be satisfied with a Moonpie” style Obama is perfecting. Maybe he should stop making the big gesture statements in the first place, rather than raising expectations and then not quite carrying through.
Posted by: moderate | May 28, 2009, 8:34 pm 8:34 pm
Moderate . ..
Tapper doesn’t mention Roos OR Fulton.
You were able to bump the number of supporters being appointed from ‘to out of 12′ to ’4 out of 12′. It’s still not that impressive a figure compared to ‘the first 35′ by Bush.
I presume there will be more appointments to be made. We’ll see exactly how this shakes out – and you may be right.
This is quoted from the article above . .
“The president did at the time allow that there would be some political appointees to ambassadorships.
“There probably will be some,” he said. “It would be disingenuous for me to suggest that there are not going to be some excellent public servants but who haven’t come through the ranks of the civil service.”
Sounds like he was being honest to me.
Posted by: danita | May 28, 2009, 11:51 pm 11:51 pm
how is it that only 5 months into his presidency, obama’s supporters have seemingly forgotten that his campaign was about “CHANGE”? that almost everything he hinted at doing involved overturning almost everything that was the status quo in washington politics? now that he’s in office, he hasn’t “changed” anything…except for the mouthpieces spewing misinformation and post hoc rationalizations. how long will it take before his supporters admit (because unless they’re brain dead they must have already realized it) that he’s just another politician who was willing to say anything to get elected. from his first day in office he’s been breaking campaign promises.
Posted by: davidfrat21 | May 29, 2009, 1:28 pm 1:28 pm
“how is it that only 5 months into his presidency, obama’s supporters have seemingly forgotten that his campaign was about “CHANGE”? that almost everything he hinted at doing involved overturning almost everything that was the status quo in washington politics? now that he’s in office, he hasn’t “changed” anything”
Changes by Obama.
Executive orders closing Gitmo and banning torture, allowing families to visit Cuba, rescinded the Mexico City gaga order, changed the focus of the war to Afghanistan, to name a few changes.
The lesson as always? Right wingers lie.
Posted by: Ryan C | May 29, 2009, 2:31 pm 2:31 pm
Pay-to-play Chicago-style politics? Who saw this coming? I’m shocked! Shocked I tell you!
Posted by: Stacey | May 29, 2009, 7:41 pm 7:41 pm
I read the comments regarding President Obama’s appointment of fund raisers with limited diplomatic experience to various ambassador posts, and I wanted to alert you to the fact that even Ambassador Ronald Neumann, President of the American Academy of Diplomacy, a critic of the appointee/spoils system, and one of our nation’s most respected diplomats, agrees with the President on at least one appointment.
Ambassador Neumann recently commended the White House Personnel Office on nominating Mr. Chet Edward “Ed” Cunningham (a leading business/legal/disaster relief expert in Asia, served on Obama’s National Finance Committee, along with his wife contributed $85,500 to the Obama Victory Fund, and gave $15,000 to transition/inaugural efforts) for the position of U.S. Ambassador to the Asian Development, and wrote a letter to Rahm Emanuel praising the qualifications of Mr. Cunningham.
Just because someone contributed money or worked to get a President elected does not mean they are not qualified to serve. I hope that you will provide your readers with the other side of this issue.
Posted by: CL Long | June 15, 2009, 9:51 am 9:51 am
Granny sex.
Granny sex.
Posted by: Granny sex. | February 4, 2010, 3:16 am 3:16 am
Adipex.
Adipex phentermine vs. Adipex no prescription. Adipex. Adipex phentermine.
Posted by: Adipex. | February 4, 2010, 7:02 am 7:02 am
Granny sex.
Granny sex.
Posted by: Granny sex. | February 5, 2010, 10:55 am 10:55 am
Free granny sex.
Granny sex. Hot granny sex. Granny reality sex.
Posted by: Granny sex old. | February 5, 2010, 7:37 pm 7:37 pm
Askjolene com animal porn sex.
Animal sex movies. Animal sex.
Posted by: Animal sex with human. | February 5, 2010, 8:12 pm 8:12 pm