This and That...

[Warph]

Buyer's Remorse: Another Union Comes Out Against Obamacare

(You will not be surprised to learn the IBEW endorsed Obuma for president)

Via Daily Caller:

Another union is crying foul over what it says is Obamacare's negative impact on its members' current healthcare coverage under multi-employer plans.

"If you like your health care plan, you will be able to keep your health care plan. Period. No one will take it away. No matter what," the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) quotes a speech President Obama delivered on July 16, 2009 in new ads running in Roll Call and The Hill.

According to the union, the multi-employer plans IBEW has used for over 65 years to provide coverage for their members are at risk, thanks to what it terms "loopholes in the Affordable Care Act.

"The ACA threatens the viability of multi-employer health plans in four ways: 1) the high employee threshold of the employer mandate 2) the re-insurance fee, 3) the definition of qualified health plans, and 4) the lack of multi-employer specific administrative guidance. We believe it may be impossible to reverse the damage done to these plans if these issues are not resolved. The IBEW cannot afford to sit on the sidelines at the ACA threatens to harm our members by dismantling multi-employer plans," the IBEW explains in a statement released Thursday.

[Warph]

Congressional Black Caucus Rages Against House GOP Over Food Stamps:
"You Don't Care About The 47 Percent, Shame On You"

Via Washington Post:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2013/07/11/black-caucus-member-to-gop-you-all-do-not-care-about-the-47-percent/

Members of the Congressional Black Caucus took to the House floor Thursday to decry the GOP's move to separate food stamps from the Farm Bill, with one of them invoking Mitt Romney's "47 percent" comment.

"Mitt Romney was right: You all do not care about the 47 percent," Rep. Corrine Brown (D-Fla.) said. "Shame on you."

At one point, Republicans objected to Brown's direct attacks, which technically are not allowed on the House floor.

"This is a sad day for the House of Representatives," she said. "Shame on the Republicans."

After she said that, an as-yet-unidentified Republican from Georgia objected, noting that members of the House are not supposed to address each other or launch ad hominem attacks.

Democrats, led by dozens of members of the CBC, have been trying since 9 a.m. Thursday to use procedural tactics to raise points of order and force delays in a final vote.

As lawmakers began debating the rules of debate on the bill, more liberal Democrats and members of the CBC lined up to read similar messages of opposition, saying that the new farm bill "hurts the children of America" or "increases hunger in America."

(You will not find a more loathsome group in Congress than the Congressional Black Caucus.  Read your HISTORY!)

Democrats See "Blacks" as "Useful Idiots"...

Part#1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UObEdF_uhaw&feature=c4-overview-vl&list=PL01C027A419C73164

The Democrats must not allow the Republicans to be a legitimate alternative to their failed policies.
Most Americans believe that the political parties switched shortly after the Civil Rights Act of 1964-The Landmark Anti-Discrimination Law. As the story goes, the Democrats became Republicans in protest of their party apparently supporting Civil Rights for Blacks. In truth, the vote count for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was 93% Republican support to 68% Democratic Party support.

So either the Democrats who did not support this Law left the Democratic Party or their constituents stopped voting for Democrats and elected Republicans. Politics is about Power and Power only comes from the votes cast by your power base. Let's see how it turned out.

Part#2

[Warph]

Dominican Republic Furious With Obuma For Appointing Gay Ambassador To Their Traditionally Conservative Christian Country, "Black Monday" Protests Planned

(uhhh... yeah, I'd say so!  I'm guessing Obuma needs to spread 'em around)

(Never in a million years would Obama appoint an openly gay ambassador to a conservative Muslim country like Saudi Arabia, so why would he do it with the Dominican Republic?  Wait, we already know the answer)

Via The Cable:
Opposition to President Obama's nominee for U.S. ambassador to the Dominican Republic reached a fever pitch this week as religious organizers stage a "Lunes Negros" or Black Monday protest against James "Wally" Brewster.

If confirmed, Brewster will be the first openly gay ambassador to the country, a prospect that is not going over well with some segments of this conservative Christian country of 9 million people. Local reports indicate that church leaders are pressuring the government to reject Brewster's nomination and calling on the faithful to dress in black on Monday in solidarity against him.

Praise Christian Church Pastor Sauford Medrano is quoted in Diario Libre as saying that Brewster could cause "the U.S. promotion of gender beliefs in the country." That supposedly violates a general education law in the country that "all the Dominican education system is based on Christian principles."

[...]

In June, the AP spoke with Catholic and evangelical church leaders who opposed the nomination. "If he arrives, he'll suffer and will be forced to leave," Vicar Pablo Cedano, told the AP. He said the pick showed "a lack of respect, of consideration, that they send us that kind of person as ambassador." Rev. Cristobal Cardozo, leader of the Dominican Evangelical Fraternity, said the appointment was offensive. "It's an insult to good Dominican customs," he said.


[...]


Mar 15, 2012
At Obama's state dinner for Prime Minister Cameron, gay guests were welcomed -- proudly through the front door

Of the 362 guests invited to the White House last night, here is a list of the LGBT attendees from Towleroad.com: John Berry, Office of Personnel Management director, and Curtis Yee, philanthropist and GeoCities founder David Bohnett, Wally Brewster and Robert Satawake, Washington Post columnist Jonathan Capehart and Nicholas Schmit IV, Joseph Falk and Mark Scott, philanthropist Timothy E. Gill and Scott C. Miller, Chad Griffin and Jerome Fallon, Barry Karas and Bruce Green, Bradley Kiley and James M. Coley, Hilary Rosen, Randi Weingarten and Louise Anne Rogers, and Andrew Sullivan and Aaron Tone

[Warph]

TWEET Of The Day:

[Warph]

Piers Morgan's Gun Grabbing Goofiness Gets More Views On His
YouTube Channel Than His TV Show

(This is a first class moron speaking to our second amendment rights.  I have to wonder why he believes there will be more mass shooting events soon in this country.  Does he know something that no one else is hip to?  Does he have information that he should be sharing with the authorities?  Or is this more of the same stale rhetoric that this bozo is so well known for?  I've chosen the latter, of course!  Who wouldn't... right! Go away Piers... you're one of those very boring liberals that no one listens to)


http://www.deadline.com/2013/03/tv-ratings-piers-morgan-tonight-sinks-to-2013-low-only-87k-viewers-in-key-demo/

"Chicago's supposedly 'tough' gun laws are utterly pointless when states around it have weak gun laws. America needs to take federal action. The gun 'rights' lobby can tell me the only answer to gun violence is more guns until they're blue in the face. It's utter nonsense. There will be more mass shooting atrocities in America soon. And more hollow words from cowardly politicians. Until the people say 'enough.'" –CNN's Piers Morgan

I don't understand how a non-American like Piers Morgan even should have a say in this issue. If he doesn't like our gun laws, he can go back home to Great Britain. Why is he here? Oh, because we have freedom and liberty. Yet, he runs from oppressive government and demands the same stuff here.

This kind of anti-gun logic doesn't make any sense to me. If the problem with Chicago is the states around it, why don't the states around it – you know, where the guns are! – have similar problems. It only stands to reason that those states with less restrictive gun laws would have higher rates of gun violence. The problem is that it simply isn't the case.

Chicago's crime problem is a result of Chicago's bad laws. Why aren't other cities in Illinois suffering the same problems as Chicago? I mean, they border the same states that Piers is blaming for Chicago's violence. They aren't experiencing the same issues because they don't have the same strict laws Chicago does.

When you break down Piers' argument, it's no wonder that he consistently rates at the bottom of the heap of competent news anchors, only scoring a measly 87,000 viewers in the key 25-54 demographic.

He can't even beat Dr. Drew.  The fact that he beat Rachel "Madcow" is a non-event.  A live feed of a snail crossing the sidewalk would get more viewers.  I guess we can take solace in the fact that there aren't many people listening to his tripe.  He gets more views on YouTube when he has a pro-gun advocate on his show like Ted Nugent. Pretty sad when a YouTube video gets more attention than the actual show.

[Warph]

Barack Obama: Tyranny Is As Tyranny Does

by Dr. Robert Owens

During the recent 4th of July celebration of America's independence, Hillsdale College, a bastion of constitutional education and a powerhouse in the promotion of liberty, announced a "Read the Declaration" campaign. This campaign encouraged people who were gathered to celebrate the victory of freedom over tyranny to read the Declaration of Independence in its entirety.

Many of our fellow citizens have never read this foundational document. Many who have may have stopped after famous second sentence of the preamble, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." In the Dream Time before political correctness, no child left behind, and the dumbing down of America most of us memorized that sentence in grade school and never forgot it. Sadly many of those same people never read or remembered anything in the document after that sentence. The rest of the Declaration is a litany of the reasons why our ancestors felt that they needed "to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them." Or as they expressed it, "a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation."
The litany that sought to enlighten the opinions of mankind was a long list of the grievances they had with the King of Great Britain: George III.

I believe it would be a good exercise to see how many items on this list would make sense today if we substituted "The Federal Government" or "The President" for the "He."
America was born out of the desire for people to be free from what they perceived to be tyranny.

At this stage in America's History we seem to have come full circle. That which we rejected at our birth we find encumbering us once again. Through our own indifference we have forged our own chains and allowed the low-information voters to become the majority of those whose votes are counted. Those who should represent the true majority have been sidelined and cast aside almost as subjects in an occupied state. However people are willing to bear with injustice long and to suffer the insufferable in silence. As our ancestors framed it, "Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed."

Our ancestors finally reached the end of their rope when the stated, "But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security." Obviously we have not reached this state. The tyranny which we face holds the seats of power. It calls itself by the old names and all the old forms are still in place. Just as there was still a Senate in Rome even after Octavian became Augustus.

Looking at our present day litany:

The president refuses to enforce laws duly passed by the legislature and signed by the executive.

The Justice department incites racial division and covertly interferes in the judicial process.

The administration spies on its citizens and mandates that its employees spy on each other with legal penalties for those who fail to report.

The Federal Reserve creates money without any oversight and irreparably damaging the earnings and savings of the American people.

The Federal Government which is charged with protecting every state from invasion has refused to secure our borders and allowed tens of millions of people to enter and stay illegally adversely impacting every aspect of American life.

The IRS has targeted groups and individuals that hold opinions opposing the Obama administration.

The President has made recess appointments when Congress was in session; he has waged war without Congressional approval or notification, he took an apology tour around the world, he casts our allies aside, and he promotes our enemies.

Look at this long train of abuses and the subjugation of our God-given rights to a capricious and overbearing perpetually re-elected government dominated by two parties that are merely two heads on the same bird of prey. At such a time as this it is good to recall "That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to affect their safety and happiness."[/b]

A word to the wise they say is sufficient. After 50 years of ringing the bell of liberty I am beginning to wonder.

It is to the preservation of limited government, personal liberty and economic opportunity that we the descendants of the founders, the children of the Framers should "with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence" and "for the support of this Declaration ... mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our Sacred Honor."

Be vigilant in the protection of freedom, keep the faith, keep the peace, we shall overcome.

[Warph]

Obama's EPA Regulations Force Coal Plants To Close – Produces Unemployment & Sends Your Energy Bill Skyrocketing

EPA regulations force utility to shutter coal plant rather than revamp it

http://dailycaller.com/2013/07/12/epa-regulations-force-utility-to-shutter-coal-plant-rather-than-revamp-it/


In less than two week since Obama announced his war on climate change and coal, two Pennsylvania coal plants are scheduled to close. The war on coal has progressed and America can add another coal-fired plants to the list of victims, bringing the total to three. American Electric Power (AEP) has been forced by the cost of complying with the federal environment regulations to shut down an Ohio coal plant rather than convert it to a natural gas burning power plant. According to Reuters, AEP's Muskingum River coal plant will retire the 585 megawatt Unit 5 in 2015.

The Daily Caller reports that AEP, in February, reached a "settlement agreement with environmental groups, eight US states and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to modify a 2007 lawsuit to stop burning coal at three power plants in Indiana, Kentucky, and Ohio by 2015." The power company was given the option to modify the plant in Ohio, but "high regulatory costs and market conditions made the company decide to retire the plant instead.

In its report, the Daily Caller indicated:

Environmental regulations, lawsuits brought by activist groups and low-priced natural gas have contributed to the shutdown or slated retirement of more than 15,000 megawatts of coal-fired power plants. Power companies are scheduled to shut down more than 37,000 megawatts of coal-fired electrical generation in the next decade. As a reminder, one megawatt of coal-fired electrical generation can power 1,000 homes.


"Across the country, the coal industry faces unprecedented setbacks as its share of electrical generation plummets and the cost of coal continues to skyrocket," said Jody Perras, Indiana Campaign Representative for the Sierra Club's Beyond Coal campaign. "This agreement is only the latest sign of progress as our country continues to transition away from dirty, dangerous, and expensive coal-fired power plants."


EPA regulations have contributed to the shutdown of two Pennsylvania coal plants; upgrading the Hatsfield's Ferry and Mitchell plants would have cost the company $275 million.

Rep. Tim Murphy, Pennsylvania Republican who represents the district where the coal plants are located said, "The front line of the administration's war on coal is right here in Southwestern Pennsylvania, and the casualties are the factories and homeowners who will pay higher electric bills, as well as the hundreds of utility workers, boilermakers, and miners who will be out of work. With the shutdown of the Mitchell plant and Hatsfield's Ferry, which just four short years ago underwent $1 billion in upgrades, the president is making good on his promise to 'bankrupt' anyone who operates a coal plant."

According to Reuters:

AEP said the addition of Muskingum River 5 brings AEP Ohio's total retirements to 3,123 MW. The remaining 10,725 MW of AEP Ohio-owned generation – including 2,427 MW slated to be transferred to Appalachian Power and Kentucky Power following state regulatory approvals – will consist of coal and natural gas plants and a small hydro plant.

The company previously announced its intent to retire Muskingum Units 1-4 (840 MW) in 2015. AEP said about 95 employees working at Muskingum will be affected.

AEP said it will work to provide displaced employees with opportunities at other AEP facilities.


In a statement just before the November 2012 elections, Valerie Jarrett, Obama's brain, said, "After we win this election, it's our turn. Payback time. Everyone not with us is against us and they better be ready because we don't forget. The ones who helped us will be rewarded, the ones who opposed us will get what they deserve. There is going to be hell to pay. Congress won't be a problem for us this time. No election to worry about after this is over and we have two judges ready to go."

Basically, Valerie Jarrett informed the nation before the November Presidential election the tone of the Obama administration after winning. Did America catch that statement or did America sleep right through it? When that statement was made, "After we win this election, it's our turn," it was before the election which could mean Jarrett knew the election was in the bag. Obama's second term as President, according to Jarrett, who is Iranian born, was to be one of punishment, payback and those opposed to the administration "paying hell." The Obama administration has been all about revenge; no interest in the country, its people or the laws of the land, just revenge on those who are not standing with the administration. In her obvious anger toward America, which she is an extension of the illegitimate President, Jarrett stated "no election to worry about after this is over and we have two judges ready to go." Could it mean no elections any more for President or Congress?

Whatever those statements meant, Obama has stepped up his game in the war on America comprising future economic growth, employment and America's way of life. More coal-fired electrical plants may be slated for retirement in the future as this out of control EPA regulation stranglehold continues to grip the power industry. The funny thing is, Obama carried the union states where most of the coal mines are located: guess President Obama (Jarrett) forgot about those states. It looks like hell hath no fury like an empty suit borrowing an Islamic brain scorned.

[Warph]

A few reasons why I dislike Barack Hussein Obuma:

*I strongly dislike his policies.
*I strongly dislike his fundemental transformation!
*I strongly dislike the fact he is intentionally destroying the Constitiution of the *United States of America.
*I strongly dislike the fact he wants to make The United States of America a cradle to grave nanny state!
*I strongly dislike the fact he is trying to make The United States of America into a third world country.

Here are just a few more examples.  I could go on, but this is an opinion site.. right?... and in my opinion anyone paying the slightest bit of attention has to realize that Obuma is not the path America should be going down.

Anyone bidding on a government contract may soon be required to reveal their polititcal affliations. Why? If you belong to the wrong party you can't sell things to the government?
http://pajamasmedia.com/files...

Obuma now thinks he can tell businesses where they will and will not build their business.  Wow... unbelievable !
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/0...

And he tells the CEO of a pharma company that he must quit his job if the company wants to sell any more drugs to the government for Medicare and Medicaid.  What in the hell is going on people?  This seems more like the Soviet Union than the United States.  We had better stand up soon!
http://marketplace.publicradi...

We all remember when he tried to kick Fox out of the news outlet pool and then he went after the Boston Globe.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/ne...

Of course we could go into the oil issues and the seemingly never ending printing of money to prop up the stock market and the idea of bailing out anyone and everyone that is having a problem, to the point of spending taxpayer dollars on bailing out homeowners who can't pay their mortgage and sending that same tax payer dollar overseas to bail out foreign banks.  I could go on, but America is on the wrong path and The Big Zero Obuma seems to think it is his job to take from one group and redistribute to others, even if those others don't live in this country.

Is this the kind of Amerikka you want to live in.  Perhaps it is if you don't wise up and pay attention to what is going on in this country.


So, what's your reasons, Forum??  Go ahead and rant... lets see your reasons.  Or are you too scared, afraid that that the NSA will read your posts and they will come and get you.  Or are you too liberal and think he is doing a great job as president but you don't want anyone to know that.   

Well let me try to explain to all you liberals on this forum and those who voted Barack Hussein Obuma in for a second term, you must have misunderstood the stance of an Islamic, Communist, Marxist, Socialist, Sharia law, narcissistic, psychopathic, racist, little boy, lost individual seeking the office of the President of the United States. 

To ensure there will be no more misunderstandings, it is spelled out for you here... using simple sentences so you can understand:

Islam is not a religion of peace.  Islam is an oppressive, totally controlling political system using Sharia law.  Sharia law is based on the rantings of a mad man, who was also a pedophile, and has no equal or fair justice system.  To anyone who is Islamic, those who do not believe as Islam are considered infidels.  Infidels are to be subjugated, converted or killed.  There is no freedom in Islam.

Communism has only two classes of individuals... rich and dirt poor.  People who accept their flawed logic and political system are considered to be useful idiots. Are you a useful idiot? You are if you voted for Obuma this last election!  Useful idiots are the first ones to go when their plans are close to being fulfilled.  There is no equal or fair justice system in Communism.  Communism forces individuals to submit and those who don't like it are killed or imprisoned.  There is no escape and there is no freedom. The members of the Communist elite get richer and richer off the slave labor of their subjects.  There is no equality.  There is no equal living standard.

Any person who has as many philosophies playing out all at once as Obuma has no solid foundation and bases decisions and actions on an emotional whim.  A person like this bends with the wind and supports any fad that makes himself richer and everyone else poorer.

If these ideas cannot be grasped, the Communist education implemented in this country has done its job.  You can be secure in the knowledge that it was YOU who ushered in the days of destruction of the last bastion of freedom in the world.

...Warph

[Warph]

(The Obuma suitcase... you know, the one he is hiding under his bed... fill be full before he leaves the WH.  Oh.. don't worry about Mooch getting her hands on it, I have it on good authority that they sleep in separate bedrooms)

Obama Selling Ambassadorships at $1.8 Million a Pop

By Dan Greenfield

"Can you SPOT the difference"

Unemployment is a real problem in America. And Obama has found the solution. He's offering ambassadorships for a bargain price of 1.8 mil each.

Don't have a job? Want to have an important position in London or Rome that will get you invited to free dinners and important events with top government officials? Just mail at least $1,800,000 to "Barack Obama/Organizing for Action 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue" and you will receive your prominent diplomatic posting in 6-8 weeks.

Who says Obama isn't creating jobs?
Barack Obama has rewarded some of his most active campaign donors with plum jobs in foreign embassies, with the average amount raised by recent or imminent appointees soaring to $1.8m per post, according to a Guardian analysis.

State Department veterans are increasingly concerned about the size of donations raised by political supporters who go on to take up top foreign postings. Thomas Pickering, who recently led the investigation into lethal attacks on the US embassy in Libya and represented the US at the United Nations, claimed the practice had become nothing more than "simony" – the selling of public office.

"It has the effect of diminishing perhaps the sense that the US is treating these countries with the respect they deserve," Pickering said.

Susan Johnson, president of the American Foreign Service Association (AFSA), which represents career US diplomats, added: "The giving of ambassadorships to people who have raised a lot of money for the campaign has increased and that's a concern to us in particular.

"There was some thought that with Obama being such a 'change agent' that he might really do things differently – but it has just been a bigger let down."

I assume we're not supposed to roll our eyes at this.
The 16th century Villa Taverna in Rome has just gone to John Phillips, a Washington lawyer who raised at least $500,000. John Emerson, a Los Angeles fund manger, will get to meet future contacts as ambassador to Germany after he raised $1.5m. Jane Stetson, heiress to the IBM fortune, is tipped as frontrunner for Paris after she raised $2.4m for Obama.

In total, nine sought-after postings in Europe, the Caribbean or Asia have been given to major donors in recent weeks, with a further three in France, Switzerland and Hungary earmarked to come soon. Of these 12, the precise bundling data is available for 10. According to a Guardian analysis, using the figures leaked to the New York Times, the average amount raised by each donor is $1.79m.

Fortunately we have no vital interests in distant places like England, France or Germany that require us to have professional diplomats posted there. Instead like some dirty Third World kleptocracy, our "ambassadors" are crooks and pedophiles (see Belgium) who paid enough money to the head warlord to be able to spend their time in a posh mansion at government expense.
The percentage of ambassador posts given to political appointees rather than career diplomats has remained roughly steady under Obama at around 30%, but most of these are in parts of the world unattractive to wealthy donors. The share taken by political appointees in western Europe and wealthier Asian capitals has reached between 70% and 85%, the AFSA estimates.

70 to 85 percent of our ambassadors in vital parts of the world are Obama donors.
Many of the capitals have grown resigned to the process. "All that really matters is that the ambassador is close to the White House – and his top fundraiser usually is," said one British diplomat, speaking anonymously about Barzun's appointment.

But to State Department veterans, the notion that only fundraisers can get messages through the West Wing is even more alarming. "To some extent, this question of having the ear of the president, and who has it, shows the seriousness of the issue," said Ambassador Pickering.

Why would Obama listen to anyone who doesn't give him cold hard cash?
The Foreign Service Act of 1980, states that "contributions to political campaigns should not be a factor in the appointment of an individual as a chief of mission."

But you know, it's Obama. He doesn't follow laws. Laws are for little people who can't afford to give him $1.8 million.
The White House insists all its ambassadors are well qualified, regardless of their campaign history. "I am proud that such experienced and committed individuals have agreed to serve the American people in these important roles," said Obama in a statement issued with Barzun's appointment.

That's the punchline. Now you can laugh.

[Warph]

US diplomats cry foul as Obama donors take over top embassy jobs

Former ambassador likens practice to 'selling of public office' as figures show average amount of cash raised is $1.8m per post

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jul/10/obama-donors-top-embassy-jobs-rewards

US officials are increasingly concerned about the size of donations raised by political supporters who go on to take up top foreign postings. Photograph: Alamy
Barack Obama has rewarded some of his most active campaign donors with plum jobs in foreign embassies, with the average amount raised by recent or imminent appointees soaring to $1.8m per post, according to a Guardian analysis.

The practice is hardly a new feature of US politics, but career diplomats in Washington are increasingly alarmed at how it has grown. One former ambassador described it as the selling of public office.

On Tuesday, Obama's chief money-raiser Matthew Barzun became the latest major donor to be nominated as an ambassador, when the White House put him forward as the next representative to the Court of St James's, a sought-after posting whose plush residence comes with a garden second only in size to that of Buckingham Palace.

Obama's chief money-raiser, Matthew Barzun

State Department veterans are increasingly concerned about the size of donations raised by political supporters who go on to take up top foreign postings. Thomas Pickering, who recently led the investigation into lethal attacks on the US embassy in Libya and represented the US at the United Nations, claimed the practice had become nothing more than "simony" – the selling of public office.

"All these people want to go to places where the lifestyle issues [are pleasant], and to some extent that produces this notion that life in these western European embassies is like Perle Mesta," he told the Guardian, referring to the "hostess with the mostest" who was ambassador to Luxembourg between 1949 and 1953 and who was known for her lavish parties.

"It has the effect of diminishing perhaps the sense that the US is treating these countries with the respect they deserve," Pickering said.

Susan Johnson, president of the American Foreign Service Association (AFSA), which represents career US diplomats, added: "The giving of ambassadorships to people who have raised a lot of money for the campaign has increased and that's a concern to us in particular.

"There was some thought that with Obama being such a 'change agent' that he might really do things differently – but it has just been a bigger let down."


Clutch of foreign appointments

Obama has made a clutch of foreign appointments recently. The 16th century Villa Taverna in Rome has just gone to John Phillips, a Washington lawyer who raised at least $500,000. John Emerson, a Los Angeles fund manger, will get to meet future contacts as ambassador to Germany after he raised $1.5m. Jane Stetson, heiress to the IBM fortune, is tipped as frontrunner for Paris after she raised $2.4m for Obama.

In total, nine sought-after postings in Europe, the Caribbean or Asia have been given to major donors in recent weeks, with a further three in France, Switzerland and Hungary earmarked to come soon. Of these 12, the precise bundling data is available for 10. According to a Guardian analysis, using the figures leaked to the New York Times, the average amount raised by each donor is $1.79m.

Official campaign finance records give only minimum figures for how much each donor raised among friends and family (a process known as bundling). Even using the published 'minimum' donations declared for these bundlers, the amount raised by donors rewarded with foreign postings has soared. The appointees to those same 10 embassies raised at least $5m in 2013, compared to a minimum of $3.3m in 2009, at least $1.3m under George W Bush in 2005 and at least $800,000 for Bush donors in 2001.

Many of the capitals have grown resigned to the process. "All that really matters is that the ambassador is close to the White House – and his top fundraiser usually is," said one British diplomat, speaking anonymously about Barzun's appointment.

But to State Department veterans, the notion that only fundraisers can get messages through the West Wing is even more alarming. "To some extent, this question of having the ear of the president, and who has it, shows the seriousness of the issue," said Ambassador Pickering.

Johnson, the AFSA president, said many donors have less political influence than their host countries like to imagine. "Some foreign countries like the idea that they are getting a friend of the president, but our experience has been that genuine friends are pretty small; most of these people are friends of friends; and they don't get to call the president right away," she said.

"In a few exceptional cases they are not detracting from credibility of diplomatic service, but at the scale it's being done it is undermining the concept of a career diplomatic service and weakening the strength and capacity of the diplomatic service."

Johnson estimates the percentage of ambassador posts given to political appointees rather than career diplomats has remained roughly steady under Obama at around 30%, but most of these are in parts of the world unattractive to wealthy donors. The share taken by political appointees in western Europe and wealthier Asian capitals has reached between 70% and 85%, the AFSA estimates.

One factor cited by defenders of the practice is that private means are needed to fund the lifestyle led by ambassadors, but the importance of this is disputed by State Department veterans.

"In the embassies I've been in, normally you have a representation budget," said Johnson. "Whether we skimp on it in places like London and Paris and these people add to it so they can serve the best champagne and canapes I don't know, but I don't think it's necessary to be wildly wealthy any more."

She also said many are disappointed by the reality of embassy life. "If the dog ruins the furniture, you have to pay for it. It's like being a guest in someone's house."


Dysfunctional leadership

This can cause problems of its own. A report by the State Department inspector general into a crisis at the embassy in the Bahamas found that Obama campaign finance chair Nicole Avant presided over "an extended period of dysfunctional leadership and mismanagement, which has caused problems throughout the embassy". Prior to her appointment as ambassador, Avant was vice president of Interior Music Publishing and was absent from the embassy 276 days between September 2009 and November 2011, according to the report. In response to the report Avant said she "had inherited a dysfunctional embassy".

Another official report into the Obama campaign donor appointed to Luxembourg, Cynthia Stroum, found she had been "aggressive, bullying, hostile and intimidating" and left her embassy in a "state of dysfunction". Stroum resigned after the report.

State Department veterans say motivations vary among political donors. "Some go to pleasant islands where the climate and residence are delightful, others just want the title, like British people lust after peerages," said AFSA's Johnson. "People think: gee, I really want to call myself ambassador, so I can go buy myself one. Others are perceived to want to just meet people, broaden their contacts of future business contacts people who can help them in their day job."

The White House insists all its ambassadors are well qualified, regardless of their campaign history. "I am proud that such experienced and committed individuals have agreed to serve the American people in these important roles," said Obama in a statement issued with Barzun's appointment.

The Foreign Service Act of 1980, states that "contributions to political campaigns should not be a factor in the appointment of an individual as a chief of mission."

At at time when the US is reaching the limits of its "hard power", career foreign service staff argue it is time for professional diplomacy to mount a comeback.

"We tried a lot of military stuff and have we come to the realisation that not every problem out there can be solved by troops, no-fly zones and drones," concludes Johnson.

"Diplomacy and managing the inter-relationships between countries is actually important, and we ought to be taking it more seriously, preparing people for it and seeing it as a long-term career – not as just something you do for a few years while you are preparing to do something else."