Something “big” dropping this week ahead at Dept. State

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Eliminating embassies and consulates in sub-Sahara Africa only. Is there any explanation for this other than straight-up racism?

Yes, MAGA doesn’t see the region as a strategic priority. Which is shortsighted because that’s where a lot of population growth will occur in the future.

Africans really need to control their population if they want any kind of economic development.

Well there were 50 million in condoms to be distributed in Africa . . .

You have to ve civilized and motivated enough to want to use them.

"civilized"

wow, you sound like one of those 18th century propagandists who refer to "deep dark" Africa with those "uncivilized" natives while somehow excusing the looting, pillaging and kidnapping taken place under the banner of "Christianity"

We are talking about a lack of condom use. What's your explanation?

Hmm if only there were efforts to help people in Africa learn about family planning and STI prevention and access the resources needed!

Hmm...don't they have African leaders?

Read a book. Oh wait - you want to run foreign policy with Liberty U grads an AI.

You need to read about the number of condoms distributed for free in Nigeria, but the men won't use them. It's 2025, folks

is that a rational for the US ending PEPFAR in Nigeria? I am honestly confused at the point you are trying to make.

I think PEPFAR is a very good program. I'm just saying that it's 2025 and sad that African leaders can't get most of the African men to use condoms.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Complete reorganization. Getting rid of FSO test.

Wonder if they are going to do what Congressman Wayne Hays tried to do in the 70s and make all State employees be part of the FS?

They want to do hiring based on “charisma” and ideological agreement with POTUS’s foreign policy agenda. Not a joke.

Of course, what happens when a POTUS changes and staff no longer align?

So the State Dept staff should only allign with democrat administrations? I mean, I realize that’s been the defacto standard until now, but why should it be?

You have this backwards. The FSO is neutral and career. Trump is the one creating the loyalty tests, not democrats or liberals.

Agree but realistically, Statw skews very li real (and I am a liberal).

It's called self-selection. MAGAs are too selfish for things like the Peace Corps, which along with Vets and college international relations majors, forms the cornerstone of State Department employees.

So, I guess we just end soft power and diplomacy all together then.

+1. and I hate to say it, MAGAs are less educated. We know that education correlates strongly to voting patterns. Even the top MAGAs are not the best and brightest - I always noticed how Vought menos from OPM during Trump I were written like a Sixth grader and full of errors.

as well - there is an inherently liberalizing impact of living abroad and learning a second language, which all FSOs have done or aspire to do.

Hopefully, elitist snobs like you won't be representing our country in any meaningful capacity anywhere.

So … you want people without college degrees to run out foreign policy? Ok sounds great! let’s also make sure they only speak English and don’t have passports.

PP here. I didn't say that. You're making stuff up. Learn to read.

Please explain to us how getting rid of the foreign service exam ensures the best & brightest will be our FSOs?

You must be confusing posters? I've never even commented on the exam.

the proposal is to get rid of the exam because it is too elitist. It’s too “elitist” apparently because it is very difficult. Like it or not, higher education and foreign literacy is not a strong point of MAGA. they don’t have enough MAGAs or even conservatives to pass the exam. the conservative kids smart enough to pass the exam are uninterested in public service.

Or do you think we need a DEI program for less qualified MAGAs?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Eliminating embassies and consulates in sub-Sahara Africa only. Is there any explanation for this other than straight-up racism?

Yes, MAGA doesn’t see the region as a strategic priority. Which is shortsighted because that’s where a lot of population growth will occur in the future.

Africans really need to control their population if they want any kind of economic development.

Well there were 50 million in condoms to be distributed in Africa . . .

You have to ve civilized and motivated enough to want to use them.

"civilized"

wow, you sound like one of those 18th century propagandists who refer to "deep dark" Africa with those "uncivilized" natives while somehow excusing the looting, pillaging and kidnapping taken place under the banner of "Christianity"

We are talking about a lack of condom use. What's your explanation?

Hmm if only there were efforts to help people in Africa learn about family planning and STI prevention and access the resources needed!

Hmm...don't they have African leaders?

Read a book. Oh wait - you want to run foreign policy with Liberty U grads an AI.

You need to read about the number of condoms distributed for free in Nigeria, but the men won't use them. It's 2025, folks

is that a rational for the US ending PEPFAR in Nigeria? I am honestly confused at the point you are trying to make.

I think PEPFAR is a very good program. I'm just saying that it's 2025 and sad that African leaders can't get most of the African men to use condoms.

Do you have anything useful to add or do you believe you are making a point with your nonsequiturs?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Complete reorganization. Getting rid of FSO test.

Wonder if they are going to do what Congressman Wayne Hays tried to do in the 70s and make all State employees be part of the FS?

They want to do hiring based on “charisma” and ideological agreement with POTUS’s foreign policy agenda. Not a joke.

Of course, what happens when a POTUS changes and staff no longer align?

So the State Dept staff should only allign with democrat administrations? I mean, I realize that’s been the defacto standard until now, but why should it be?

You have this backwards. The FSO is neutral and career. Trump is the one creating the loyalty tests, not democrats or liberals.

Agree but realistically, Statw skews very li real (and I am a liberal).

It's called self-selection. MAGAs are too selfish for things like the Peace Corps, which along with Vets and college international relations majors, forms the cornerstone of State Department employees.

So, I guess we just end soft power and diplomacy all together then.

+1. and I hate to say it, MAGAs are less educated. We know that education correlates strongly to voting patterns. Even the top MAGAs are not the best and brightest - I always noticed how Vought menos from OPM during Trump I were written like a Sixth grader and full of errors.

as well - there is an inherently liberalizing impact of living abroad and learning a second language, which all FSOs have done or aspire to do.

Hopefully, elitist snobs like you won't be representing our country in any meaningful capacity anywhere.

So … you want people without college degrees to run out foreign policy? Ok sounds great! let’s also make sure they only speak English and don’t have passports.

PP here. I didn't say that. You're making stuff up. Learn to read.

Please explain to us how getting rid of the foreign service exam ensures the best & brightest will be our FSOs?

You must be confusing posters? I've never even commented on the exam.

the proposal is to get rid of the exam because it is too elitist. It’s too “elitist” apparently because it is very difficult. Like it or not, higher education and foreign literacy is not a strong point of MAGA. they don’t have enough MAGAs or even conservatives to pass the exam. the conservative kids smart enough to pass the exam are uninterested in public service.

Or do you think we need a DEI program for less qualified MAGAs?

Maybe ask Harvard how to admit weaker candidates.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Complete reorganization. Getting rid of FSO test.

Wonder if they are going to do what Congressman Wayne Hays tried to do in the 70s and make all State employees be part of the FS?

They want to do hiring based on “charisma” and ideological agreement with POTUS’s foreign policy agenda. Not a joke.

Of course, what happens when a POTUS changes and staff no longer align?

So the State Dept staff should only allign with democrat administrations? I mean, I realize that’s been the defacto standard until now, but why should it be?

You have this backwards. The FSO is neutral and career. Trump is the one creating the loyalty tests, not democrats or liberals.

Agree but realistically, Statw skews very li real (and I am a liberal).

It's called self-selection. MAGAs are too selfish for things like the Peace Corps, which along with Vets and college international relations majors, forms the cornerstone of State Department employees.

So, I guess we just end soft power and diplomacy all together then.

+1. and I hate to say it, MAGAs are less educated. We know that education correlates strongly to voting patterns. Even the top MAGAs are not the best and brightest - I always noticed how Vought menos from OPM during Trump I were written like a Sixth grader and full of errors.

as well - there is an inherently liberalizing impact of living abroad and learning a second language, which all FSOs have done or aspire to do.

Hopefully, elitist snobs like you won't be representing our country in any meaningful capacity anywhere.

So … you want people without college degrees to run out foreign policy? Ok sounds great! let’s also make sure they only speak English and don’t have passports.

PP here. I didn't say that. You're making stuff up. Learn to read.

Please explain to us how getting rid of the foreign service exam ensures the best & brightest will be our FSOs?

You must be confusing posters? I've never even commented on the exam.

the proposal is to get rid of the exam because it is too elitist. It’s too “elitist” apparently because it is very difficult. Like it or not, higher education and foreign literacy is not a strong point of MAGA. they don’t have enough MAGAs or even conservatives to pass the exam. the conservative kids smart enough to pass the exam are uninterested in public service.

Or do you think we need a DEI program for less qualified MAGAs?

Maybe ask Harvard how to admit weaker candidates.

so DEI for MAGA FSOs it is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Getting rid of the exam is wild. The best people.

There have long been complaints about the exam. A republican-tied career ambassador told me that he found it impossible to get his best people through it and they were limited to other functions. In general, the selection process does seem to favor bland personalities.

Why would an ambassador’s best people suddenly be taking the foreign service exam?

And maybe there’s a reason why the adjective “diplomatic” is not synonymous with flamboyant, charismatic, etc?

Not everyone in the State Department is in the foreign service. There are even ambassadors, such as this one, that are part of the career service.

His beef was more with the oral portion than the written part. He said it favored milquetoast personalities who are mostly comfortable asking everyone else at the table to share their opinion. He's right that we do need to be at least a *little* assertive to get anything done. I'd be fired if I refused to take a position on anything.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Getting rid of the exam is wild. The best people.

There have long been complaints about the exam. A republican-tied career ambassador told me that he found it impossible to get his best people through it and they were limited to other functions. In general, the selection process does seem to favor bland personalities.

Why would an ambassador’s best people suddenly be taking the foreign service exam?

And maybe there’s a reason why the adjective “diplomatic” is not synonymous with flamboyant, charismatic, etc?

Not everyone in the State Department is in the foreign service. There are even ambassadors, such as this one, that are part of the career service.

His beef was more with the oral portion than the written part. He said it favored milquetoast personalities who are mostly comfortable asking everyone else at the table to share their opinion. He's right that we do need to be at least a *little* assertive to get anything done. I'd be fired if I refused to take a position on anything.

You mean … a test for our jr diplomats assessed how diplomatic they are? Shocking!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Getting rid of the exam is wild. The best people.

There have long been complaints about the exam. A republican-tied career ambassador told me that he found it impossible to get his best people through it and they were limited to other functions. In general, the selection process does seem to favor bland personalities.

Why would an ambassador’s best people suddenly be taking the foreign service exam?

And maybe there’s a reason why the adjective “diplomatic” is not synonymous with flamboyant, charismatic, etc?

Not everyone in the State Department is in the foreign service. There are even ambassadors, such as this one, that are part of the career service.

His beef was more with the oral portion than the written part. He said it favored milquetoast personalities who are mostly comfortable asking everyone else at the table to share their opinion. He's right that we do need to be at least a *little* assertive to get anything done. I'd be fired if I refused to take a position on anything.

how often do candidates get dinged just for the oral portion of the test? It seems like you would have to really tank it to be failed on that alone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Complete reorganization. Getting rid of FSO test.

Wonder if they are going to do what Congressman Wayne Hays tried to do in the 70s and make all State employees be part of the FS?

They want to do hiring based on “charisma” and ideological agreement with POTUS’s foreign policy agenda. Not a joke.

Of course, what happens when a POTUS changes and staff no longer align?

So the State Dept staff should only allign with democrat administrations? I mean, I realize that’s been the defacto standard until now, but why should it be?

You have this backwards. The FSO is neutral and career. Trump is the one creating the loyalty tests, not democrats or liberals.

Agree but realistically, Statw skews very li real (and I am a liberal).

It's called self-selection. MAGAs are too selfish for things like the Peace Corps, which along with Vets and college international relations majors, forms the cornerstone of State Department employees.

So, I guess we just end soft power and diplomacy all together then.

+1. and I hate to say it, MAGAs are less educated. We know that education correlates strongly to voting patterns. Even the top MAGAs are not the best and brightest - I always noticed how Vought menos from OPM during Trump I were written like a Sixth grader and full of errors.

as well - there is an inherently liberalizing impact of living abroad and learning a second language, which all FSOs have done or aspire to do.

Hopefully, elitist snobs like you won't be representing our country in any meaningful capacity anywhere.

So … you want people without college degrees to run out foreign policy? Ok sounds great! let’s also make sure they only speak English and don’t have passports.

PP here. I didn't say that. You're making stuff up. Learn to read.

Please explain to us how getting rid of the foreign service exam ensures the best & brightest will be our FSOs?

You must be confusing posters? I've never even commented on the exam.

the proposal is to get rid of the exam because it is too elitist. It’s too “elitist” apparently because it is very difficult. Like it or not, higher education and foreign literacy is not a strong point of MAGA. they don’t have enough MAGAs or even conservatives to pass the exam. the conservative kids smart enough to pass the exam are uninterested in public service.

Or do you think we need a DEI program for less qualified MAGAs?

Maybe ask Harvard how to admit weaker candidates.

DP

Yikes! Show us on the doll where Harvard hurt you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Getting rid of the exam is wild. The best people.

There have long been complaints about the exam. A republican-tied career ambassador told me that he found it impossible to get his best people through it and they were limited to other functions. In general, the selection process does seem to favor bland personalities.

Why would an ambassador’s best people suddenly be taking the foreign service exam?

And maybe there’s a reason why the adjective “diplomatic” is not synonymous with flamboyant, charismatic, etc?

Not everyone in the State Department is in the foreign service. There are even ambassadors, such as this one, that are part of the career service.

His beef was more with the oral portion than the written part. He said it favored milquetoast personalities who are mostly comfortable asking everyone else at the table to share their opinion. He's right that we do need to be at least a *little* assertive to get anything done. I'd be fired if I refused to take a position on anything.

how often do candidates get dinged just for the oral portion of the test? It seems like you would have to really tank it to be failed on that alone.

The oral test is harder than the written test.

It's designed to test for adaptability, improvisation, information gathering and not causing indavertent offense in a cross cultural context.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Rubio is calling the NYT report fake news. But I’m not so sure. They clearly have major changes planned for State. Maybe they plan to implement them under the radar in a slow drip sort of fashion?

Rubio also told USAID to be patient and that life saving aid would be preserved. He’s a liar like the rest of them

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Eliminating embassies and consulates in sub-Sahara Africa only. Is there any explanation for this other than straight-up racism?

Yes, MAGA doesn’t see the region as a strategic priority. Which is shortsighted because that’s where a lot of population growth will occur in the future.

Africans really need to control their population if they want any kind of economic development.

The GOP (and more recently, Trump) have been fighting against US efforts to educate and provide birth control in Africa for decades.

Wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Getting rid of the exam is wild. The best people.

There have long been complaints about the exam. A republican-tied career ambassador told me that he found it impossible to get his best people through it and they were limited to other functions. In general, the selection process does seem to favor bland personalities.

Why would an ambassador’s best people suddenly be taking the foreign service exam?

And maybe there’s a reason why the adjective “diplomatic” is not synonymous with flamboyant, charismatic, etc?

Not everyone in the State Department is in the foreign service. There are even ambassadors, such as this one, that are part of the career service.

His beef was more with the oral portion than the written part. He said it favored milquetoast personalities who are mostly comfortable asking everyone else at the table to share their opinion. He's right that we do need to be at least a *little* assertive to get anything done. I'd be fired if I refused to take a position on anything.

You mean … a test for our jr diplomats assessed how diplomatic they are? Shocking!

Diplomacy isn't about being pleasant. It's about pushing America's agenda overseas. And neither the left nor the right has been particularly pleased with the way the State Department has done its job over the past couple decades. I don't think the democrats will push hard against this shake up. If at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Getting rid of the exam is wild. The best people.

There have long been complaints about the exam. A republican-tied career ambassador told me that he found it impossible to get his best people through it and they were limited to other functions. In general, the selection process does seem to favor bland personalities.

Why would an ambassador’s best people suddenly be taking the foreign service exam?

And maybe there’s a reason why the adjective “diplomatic” is not synonymous with flamboyant, charismatic, etc?

Not everyone in the State Department is in the foreign service. There are even ambassadors, such as this one, that are part of the career service.

His beef was more with the oral portion than the written part. He said it favored milquetoast personalities who are mostly comfortable asking everyone else at the table to share their opinion. He's right that we do need to be at least a *little* assertive to get anything done. I'd be fired if I refused to take a position on anything.

how often do candidates get dinged just for the oral portion of the test? It seems like you would have to really tank it to be failed on that alone.

Then most people tank it. The foreign service is very, very competitive and the vast majority of applicants get bounced. Here's what chatgpt says:


ChatGPT said:

The pass rate for the Foreign Service Oral Assessment (FSOA) is typically around 30–40%, though it can vary slightly year to year depending on the applicant pool and hiring needs.

To put it in perspective:

Written Test (FSOT) pass rate: ~40-50%

QEP (Qualifications Evaluation Panel) pass rate: ~30-40% of FSOT passers

Oral Assessment (FSOA) pass rate: ~30-40% of QEP passers

So overall, only a small fraction (around 3-5%) of initial test takers end up receiving a job offer.

[Anonymous]

I took the FS exam 3 times. I passed the written three times. I failed the oral twice. The third time I was invited to the oral I declined. Obviously this is just one anecdote.