Snappy newsletters. Simple Facebook sharing. Spirited comments. Sweet features are waiting… GET THEM NOW!

Ambassadors: Rich People in Useless Jobs

If posts are just plums for political donors, why have them?

By Kevin Spak,  Newser Staff

Posted May 29, 2009 2:11 PM CDT

(Newser) – Barack Obama opted for politics as usual in his ambassador appointments yesterday, writes David Rothkopf for ForeignPolicy. Like recent predecessors, Obama turned to deep-pocketed campaign donors; hence Japan, the world’s second-largest economy, will deal with a tech lawyer whose sole qualification seems to have been his ability to raise $500,000, while France gets a guy who used to run the Muppets. Which raises the question: Do we even need ambassadors?

“If a job is meaningless enough to be entrusted to someone who is unqualified to do it, do we really need to fill that post?” asks Rothkopf. Once upon a time, we needed ambassadors to carry vital messages, but technology’s progressed a wee bit. Other countries hate dealing with ambassadors—they’d rather call someone consequential at the State Department. Let's put highly skilled professionals in the important posts, and forget the rest.

Then-Utah Governor Jon Huntsman gives his acceptance remarks after his nomination by President Barack Obama as ambassador to China, May 16, 2009.
Then-Utah Governor Jon Huntsman gives his acceptance remarks after his nomination by President Barack Obama as ambassador to China, May 16, 2009.   (AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta, FILE)
Obama actually named a guy who used to run the Muppets as ambassador to France.
Obama actually named a guy who used to run the Muppets as ambassador to France.   (AP Photo/Danny Johnston)
President Barack Obama, right, talks through a translator, center, as he meets with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, Monday, March 23, 2009.
President Barack Obama, right, talks through a translator, center, as he meets with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, Monday, March 23, 2009.   (AP Photo/Gerald Herbert)
When it's so easy for the president and high-ranking surrogates, to talk to foreign leaders like Mahmoud Abbas, what's the point of ambassadors?
When it's so easy for the president and high-ranking surrogates, to talk to foreign leaders like Mahmoud Abbas, what's the point of ambassadors?   (AP Photo/Gerald Herbert)
« Prev« Prev | Next »Next » Slideshow
To report an error on this story, notify our editors.
A snapshot of the day's best news stories.
 
COMMENTS
Showing 3 of 3 comments
kokuaguy
May 29, 2009 8:03 AM CDT
A petty insult and erroneous comparison, yourvoice. But if you disagree with Rothkopf's point I'm on your side. The appointment of an ambassador is a highly symbolic and historic act. I was hoping to see Carolyn Kennedy take her grandfather's place as ambassador to England.
Derni
May 29, 2009 8:00 AM CDT
What do they do? What is their job discription? Are the reqquired to manitian communication with a country? I would say thgat in this age of technology we don't need as many ambassadors as w ehave-we could save some $$$
myvoice
May 29, 2009 7:34 AM CDT
David Rothkopf under your philosophy... what are you needed for? Apparently “If a job is meaningless enough to be entrusted to someone who is unqualified to do it" does not refer to you and your field?!

More Newser Stories

Detroit Bust Would've Been Better Than Bailout

Obama Unveils $3.8T Budget, Targets Rich

White House to Budge on Birth-Control Mandate

Small Donors Gave 48% of Obama's 2011 Donations

No Child Left Behind Waiver Granted to 10 States


NEWS FROM OUR PARTNERS
Other Sites We Like:   24/7 Wall St.   |   Betty Confidential   |   BuzzFeed   |   Cracked   |   Fark   |   Timelines   |   The Frisky   |   Geek Sugar   |   NewsOne