1. DavyG says

    Isn’t it kind of annoying that George W. Bush was actually much more progressive with his ambassadorial appointments than Obama is being? A gay ambassador to New Zealand is hardly even worth mentioning. New Zealand is very accepting of gay people. Appointing Guest to Romania is genuinely progressive because Romania’s track records on human rights is almost uniformly terrible especially when it comes to gay rights and acceptance.

    I know Obama fucked us over, and tries to disguise it with silly platitudes and words, but I never imagined I would ever say that Bush II was -more- progressive on any gay issue.

    Also, Mark Dybul was never appointed as an ambassador to any country. He was in charge of PEPFAR, right?

  2. says

    Couldn’t the President have taken the 90 seconds out of his day it would have taken to swear this guy in? Does he even know that this appointment is being used by his apologists as evidence he’s not completely indifferent to the queers?

  3. gu senior says

    If the idiot haters on this thread knew anything about how the State Department worked, they’d realize that Michael Guest was a career foreign service officer and as such was not “appointed” as ambassador as a political favor, but because he had worked his way up through the Foreign Service. They’d also realize that the President almost never personally swears in ambassadors; that’s the Secretary of State’s job.

    In fact, Michael Guest resigned in 2007 to protest the anti-gay personnel policies of the Bush Administration and served on the Obama transition team. He was instrumental in creating the most expansive partnership benefits yet for gay FSOs, benefits that would never have been granted under the Bush administration.

    So please, Obama haters – do some basic research before you start your bitching.

Leave A Reply