One wonders if Obama could seriously be thinking of appointing Anna Wintour to be the ambassador to the UK or France.
This suggestion is frankly an insult to either nation. There are reasons for the diplomatic diplomatic corps, not least confidential data and negotiations. This suggestion smacks of a casual, even a dilettante attitude towards affairs of state.
Finally, it is worth noting that the pro-Assad attitude of this woman fits with the attitudes of the senior members of the Democratic Party. Here, one thinks of Clinton, Reid, Pelossi etc who tried to rehabilitate Syria under Assad and paint it as progressive.
‘Comment is Free’ editor Natalie Hanman asked a question today: Should Anna Wintour be the next US Ambassador to the UK?, CiF, Dec. 5.
Hanman begins her piece on speculation that Wintour, the editor-in-chief of American Vogue, may be nominated as Ambassador to the UK, thus:
“The rumour – and it is far from being confirmed – that Barack Obama is considering nominating Anna Wintour, editor-in-chief of American Vogue, as his next ambassador to either the UK or France has been met with gasps of outrage.”
Hanman quotes Nile Gardiner, in the Telegraph, questioning Wintour’s qualifications for such a prestigious diplomatic position, but then cites Carla Hall of the LA Times suggesting that criticism of Wintour’s background is unfair.
Hanman concludes by asking:
“What qualities and experience do you think qualifies someone for a job as a diplomat?”
While the question is a fair one, it seems that…
View original post 753 more words