Obama nominates radical idealist Samantha Power as ambassador to the UN

Obama is continuing to build his circle of radical friends in high places throughout DC and his newest hopeful addition is Samantha Power, wife of Obama's former regulatory czar Cass Sunstein. It seems that the only requirement to join Obama's administration is to have an extreme radical ideology and be friends with the Obama's, which IMHO is an extremely dangerous combination for the future of our nation.

Granted this is only a nomination and she still must be confirmed and we should all hope that her confirmation is denied by congress.

The former White House adviser and longtime Obama friend nominated Wednesday as the next U.S. ambassador to the United Nations has a history of controversial comments that could haunt her in confirmation -- including likening U.S. foreign policies to those of the Nazis.

In a March 2003 New Republic magazine essay, Samantha Power wrote that American foreign policy needs a "historical reckoning" which would entail "opening the files" and "acknowledging the force of a mantra we have spent the last decade promoting in Guatemala, South Africa, and Yugoslavia."

She continued: “Instituting a doctrine of the mea culpa would enhance our credibility by showing that American decision-makers do not endorse the sins of their predecessors. When (German Chancellor Willy) Brandt went down on one knee in the Warsaw ghetto, his gesture was gratifying to World War II survivors, but it was also ennobling and cathartic for Germany. Would such an approach be futile for the United States?"

LINK

reply to post by Nucleardiver


On the surface, I don't see what's wrong with her nomination.

She has been a part of reporting and working on human rights issues and "multilateral" affairs for quite some time now. A quick look at her resume makes me think she could be fit for the job.

If this is because she's married to Cass Sunstein....meh. Who cares?

I'd hate for my wife to be unable to find employment in her field just because of my actions or statements, so I will not hold her spousal choices against her.

reply to post by Nucleardiver
Maaaaan....Obama sure is on a roll this week.
Something wicked this way comes!

Idealism is now considered radical? LOL

Those crazy radical EMTs, trying to save as many lives as possible. What IDEALISTS! Ew, the word just feels gross and Un-American, right?

reply to post by Nucleardiver


Seems an awfully lofty post for someone that was not born in the US

Source

Does not make sense to me that someone born in a country other than The United States would qualify to be UN Ambassador for the United States.

reply to post by Elostone


As far as I know, the US presidency is the only post in which "made in the USA" is a requirement. I know Schwarzenegger would disagree with your assesment.

reply to post by Nucleardiver


So basically, she takes the same view as Ron Paul.

I guess that makes her radical alright.

And I believe that She is married to none other than Cass Sunstein of all people !!

We know him.

I wonder what influences HE will have on U.S. / U.N. policies ??
Hmmm.

Here are some old threads about 'Ol Cass.....


Cass Sunstein - Obama's Regulatory Czar


Keeping an Eye on Mr. Sunstein: The Government Official who Called for "Infiltration" of ATS


Veeerrreee Inteeeelesting


Samantha Power wiki

Personal life

On July 4, 2008, Power married law professor Cass Sunstein, whom she met while working on the Obama campaign.[12] On April 24, 2009, she gave birth to their first child, Declan Power Sunstein.[13] On June 1, 2012 they had a daughter, Rían Power Sunstein.

reply to post by Sankari


If her policies are like Pauls, it might be that her nomination is a possible and early sign of the start of the end to 'the war on terror'...?

If it is decided that TWOT (the war on terror) or TWAT (the war against terror) has been sufficient for purpose, and achieved it's aims, this could be the start of a planned winding down of the Terror rhetoric and a winding up of financial dividend of all being friends again. (not that it would be a bad thing)

reply to post by sheepslayer247


Indeed born in the USA may not be a requirement, but I must say that the position of UN Ambassador for the US is a far cry higher office than Gov of California.
The UN Ambassador is the leader of the U.S. delegation, the U.S. Mission to the United Nations.

It also grants a seat at the 15 member UN Security Counsel, a seat which wields veto power that is reserved for only Ambassadors from China, Russia, France, The UK and US.

Quite lofty indeed for a young lady from Dublin.

IMHO, of course

Originally posted by Sankari
reply to post by Nucleardiver

 

So basically, she takes the same view as Ron Paul.

I guess that makes her radical alright.

I really hope you are kidding because if you're not then you need to take some time off from ATS and research Ron Paul some. I have never seen Ron Paul compare our actions throughout history as being similar to Nazi's, nor did Paul push for military action in Lybia in order to remove a leader that was an ally to the US for 15+ years just to replace him the Muslim Brotherhood (which is very closely tied to and a financer or Al Qaeda and the Taliban). Nor have I seen Paul suggest we send troops to intervene in the Israel-Palistinian conflict.

Here's why I say she is a radical and should never be appointed to her nominated position.

She has made numerous comments that are derogatory to America's interests and our past policies, which by all accounts would make her ineligible to pass a military or civilian background check for a National Security or even Dept of Energy security clearance. Her relations with some of her former faculty from the University of Chicago Law School would be enough to disqualify her from receiving any form of a NSA Security Clearance.

When you have a person with views that she has and that she has vocalized on several occasions being nominated to a position of not only representing the US to the rest of the world but that could also entail her handling of material sensitive to national security, her comments and ideals should prohibit her appointment. Just as Obama's fraternization with a known terrorist, Bill Ayers, would have prohibited him from receiving a civilian or military security clearance.

How do I know this? I spent 15 yrs as a Naval SWCC Operator and before I could receive my NSWG Designation I had to pass a federal background check and obtain certain security clearances. While I was active I had the usual TS/SCI security clearances as well as L and Q Clearance through Dept of Energy as well as Yankee White Category 2 Clearance.

DOE Q Clearance is equivalent to DOD Top Secret and requires an extensive background check that covers not only the individual seeking clearance but also their immediate family. Yankee White is a DOD designation required for DOD personnel that are working close to the POTUS and Vice POTUS. These clearances require a Single Scope Background Investigation which is conducted by the U.S. Office of Personnel Management and include a Federal Background Check on the individual applying for clearance, their immediate and extended families, and their known associates. Samantha Power, her husband, and even President Obama would never be given these clearances if they were performed as civilian or military personnel due to prior statements made and known associations, but since their positions are appointed, nominated, and elected they receive the clearances.

I knew a young sailor when we were going through our training at Coronado that couldn't progress on through BUD's to become a SEAL because he had gotten a DUI when he was 17 and had resisted arrest and had called the cops certain names. The reason for his denial wasn't the crime of a DUI, it was denied because his calling the officers certain names was considered "radical political acts".

So yes from my prior experience she is a radical.

reply to post by Elostone


I can understand...but I happen to disagree.

Quite lofty indeed for a young lady from Dublin.

If I weren't a super genius and all, I may have thought you were saying something bad about women and Irish-folk. But I know better...hope everyone else does as well.

reply to post by sheepslayer247

well, I happen to be female, and my ancestor came to this country from Ireland in 1680s.

ETA Curious to know how calling her a young lady or stating the fact she's from Dublin can be construed as derogatory?

Originally posted by Sankari
reply to post by Nucleardiver

 

So basically, she takes the same view as Ron Paul.

I guess that makes her radical alright.

I've never heard of Samantha powers before this thread, at least not that I recall.

When I saw this I got interested, and began looking up her policies, and ideals.

I agree you can call Ron Paul a radical as far as normal politics go.

I don't agree that you liken him to Samantha.

To add to the thread

I find it interesting that Obama would make this woman the UN ambassador of foreign policy.
She is anti Israel, and pro Palestine (not that I care) and everyone knows the UN's views on Israel.

I'm starting to believe the Obama is a Muslim thing. I know,I know I'll catch hell for that, but seriously look at his choices for office, and his views with his foreign policy.

I've heard his words I've seen the increase on war on terror, but it's what's not that apparent that gets me.

What the hell?

Powers wants boots on the ground in Isreal yeah Obama sure can pick them.



Obama nominated a neocon.

Originally posted by Elostone
reply to post by sheepslayer247

 

Indeed born in the USA may not be a requirement, but I must say that the position of UN Ambassador for the US is a far cry higher office than Gov of California.
The UN Ambassador is the leader of the U.S. delegation, the U.S. Mission to the United Nations.

It also grants a seat at the 15 member UN Security Counsel, a seat which wields veto power that is reserved for only Ambassadors from China, Russia, France, The UK and US.

Quite lofty indeed for a young lady from Dublin.

IMHO, of course

Amabassador is a puppet position, it isn't indiciative of the will of the people but the whims of a leader. If I wanted a cushy job, I'd take amabassador, but if I wanted to matter I'd be a Gov.

Derek

reply to post by Elostone

ETA Curious to know how calling her a young lady or stating the fact she's from Dublin can be construed as derogatory?

Just pointing out what could be misconstrued by other people to be, possibly, offensive. I know what you mean......just saying and I mean nothing by it.

Originally posted by terriblyvexed
and everyone knows the UN's views on Israel.

The UN consists of 193 different countries. It does not have a single 'view on Israel.' It accommodates dozens of different views, many of them at odds with each other.

These competing views influence UN resolutions, which are voted on by the 193 different countries which comprise the UN. Sometimes those votes go against Israel. Sometimes they favour her.

I don't think you understand what the UN actually is, or how it works.

Originally posted by Elostone
reply to post by sheepslayer247

 

Indeed born in the USA may not be a requirement, but I must say that the position of UN Ambassador for the US is a far cry higher office than Gov of California.
The UN Ambassador is the leader of the U.S. delegation, the U.S. Mission to the United Nations.

It also grants a seat at the 15 member UN Security Counsel, a seat which wields veto power that is reserved for only Ambassadors from China, Russia, France, The UK and US.

Quite lofty indeed for a young lady from Dublin.

IMHO, of course

No it really is not. A Gov runs a state. An Ambassador simply represents a nation. They do not make policy, they do not decide anything. They present what the State Deparment and/or the President tells them. In many ways they are a glorified messenger. This is why through out American history Ambassadors tend to be friends or supporters of the President. They do not need to know anything, their views on things do not matter they simply present what they are told and report the response. The fact she was Irish until she was 9 years old is does not make any difference.

The U.N. has always prided itself on their human rights declarations, commisions, proclamations, soapboxings, hopes and dreams, conventions, covenants, and all-around good-guy-idness. So if she can add to that mandate - brought to us by Eleanor Roosevelt and her gang of 10 - she is a very interesting choice and more power to her. You go girl!