Despite writing the piece I did, I agree about the AIPAC argument you, and many others, have made. But if made SOS, Clinton is not going to be making speeches or doing thing generally that Obama doesn’t want her to make.

Ok, fine. What exactly are the “things” Obama wants her to do?

Given current most critical foreign policy issues, what has Obama put out there? Quick inventory:

a) undying support for Israel… very public. Only qualification I’ve seen is his possible hedging on Jerusalem partitioning, but very vague in this regard.
b) publicly committing US policy to confronting “Russia invasion of Georgia” meme and all the associated “resurgent Bear” stuff. Sounds a whole lot like W’s SadamWMD propaganda, and we all know how that leveraged massive mis-allocation of US resources played out. I assume people here are aware that US media got “Russia invasion” completely wrong… actually, got it entirely upside down and are only in last week or so beginning to kind’a sort’a clarify. Just in case, the hi-lights:

* Georgia who dropped cluster bombs, not (as reported here by AP/Rueters/ABC…) Russia.
* Georgia’s cluster bombs were Israeli made.
* Israeli special ops/trainers were on the ground in Georgia right up until Sark launched his mis-adventure.
* Georgia clearly took first action, moved troops into South Osseta and affected significant damage/death, yet issued statements, repeated here (US) ver batem and as fact, attributing gross violations to Russia: eg. accounting facts of this “war” written straight out of Sark’s office. If there’s one observation from operation of Bush WH last 8 years most maddening, it has been their proclivity to flood media with false messaging in support of neo-con fantasy du-jour while seemingly of the philosphy that, in doing so in saturation fashion day after day, both public opinion and correction mechanisms are simply overwhelmed… shock and awe. That’s what this one looks like to me.
* Coinky dink or not, Rove was in Georgia in week prior to this event, meeting with SARK under media cover of Beijing Olympics focus.

The more I peel back the covers and look at details, the more upside down this all looks. I assume the consequences of this are obvious to people. This event is a prime candidate for one of EW’s timelines IMO… there’s a real picture to be painted here.

c) BO has repeatedly, in forceful fashion, stated agreement with the “Iran threat” meme, assiduously reinforced by same saturation methods described above. Critical mass of US public has taken Iran “threat” as fact, although loathe to duplicate another Iraq-like war effort. From Eisenhower’s Mossadeq coup, propping up Shah while training his secret police to “disappear” political dissenters, how all that incubated Khomeni’s opportunity… US policies/actions through decades gave Persians enough good reason to loathe us, yet most of this history is unknown to US citizenry.

Instead, through last couple years fanning the “invade Iran” thingie, Rice has proffered Iran-Iraq war as evidence of their aggressive tendencies. Yet prior, she cited same war as evidence of Sadam’s.

And I would add: W’ has supported nuke acquisition by Iran’s 2 largest neighbors, w/long history of antagonistic relationship, yet w/in this context the idea Iran has no right to do the same seems like a “threat” to US? What kind of foreign policy is this?

That AP has repeatedly… virtually every single time, entirely misstated Iran IEAA inspections, reporting their “findings” as transgressions which were nowhere to be found in the same reports.
…

Hillary as been behind A/B/C from the git-go.

Is Rahm crafting BO, or BO Rahm?

…

Ok, I’ve been pissing into the wind with my warnings here and elsewhere… fair enough. I really hope I’m wrong.

But this is what I’ve seen: COS Rahm… you all want to say he’s mellower now, he’s only serving at pleasure of BO, an extension of his boss’ vision/policy(s), effective on congressional floor… ok, fine.

My view: he was for centralizing DNC resources and power & wanted his hand on those levers. He & Hillary shared this position, and fought to establish the same, all the while flogging Gov Dean. We all agree Howard was not only right, but AFAIC rather heroic in his roll-up-the-sleeves-and-get-the-job-done efforts. If anyone worked for meaningful change and produced results it was Gov Dean, and BO reaped the rewards. Yet Rahm still maneuvers to deny Dean acknowledgment of this contribution.

Conclusion: I question purity of Rahm’s moral compass, and wonder about his inclination to put principle of ambition. I get he’s effective at getting things done. But so was Delay.

I’d also remind that Dean also criticized Israeli intransigence in Palestinian policy, and did so in pointed fashion. So where’s Dean in BO’s plans? And where’s BO/Hillary drawing a line of Palestinian “problem”?

Is Hillary’s selection influenced by Rahm’s persuasion of BO? Is there any clarity of intentions/policy here at all?

There’s an awful lot in Rahm/Hillary’s on-the-record history to raise that question in my mind, especially given what, to date, is major “go with the flow” BO ME policy statements mentioned above.

Does Rahm have a history w/AIPAC? Seriously, I don’t know.

…

Watching the president elect’s 60 mins thing last, my concerns reinforced : deliberately obtuse on everything, even dodging IMO… w/only vague statement on GM. This does not align w/any of his image crafting through campaign. All these cabinet/staff appointments require huge leaps of faith in maintaining any “hope”.

Given utter black hole from BO camp on econ proposals… an area I considered his greatest strength and opportunity, as I’ve said elsewhere, my concerns heightened more. Only solace in this area right now is Roubini seems to think highly, so…

I really hope I’m wrong. I also really wish the larger community would start demanding something from these guys… it’s past time. None of these appointments look anything like change to me.

I’d remind… after Bush “won” 2k election, complete control staffing his WH was immediately handed over to CATO. It sent shivers down my spine, and looking back those were well justified shivers.

Compare to Clinton’s appointments in ‘92… whole lot of very good people he found, well out of beltway, who proved their worth and then some. Tyson especially comes to mind… her models, strategy & everything else has not been well publicly documented. Doing so and comparing to previous/subsequent models is very enlightening, not the least reason being current situation many times more dire than ‘92-4 econ woes.

There’s a whole lot of Laura Tyson(s) on the sidelines in USA right now, and it sure looks to me BO’s entirely ignoring them.