The tail actually does wag the dog!
Daniel Levy reports the following at TPM; And the inestimable Juan Cole does as well.
“U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was left shamefaced after President George W. Bush ordered her to abstain in a key U.N. vote on the
“She was left shamed…a resolution that she prepared and arranged, and in the end she did not vote in favor,” Olmert said in a speech in the southern town of
“In the night between Thursday and Friday, when the secretary of state wanted to lead the vote on a ceasefire at the Security Council, we did not want her to vote in favor,” Olmert said.
“I said ‘get me President Bush on the phone’. They said he was in the middle of giving a speech in
“I told him the
Juan Cole:
http://www.juancole.com/2009/01/israeli-pm-ehud-olmert-claims-to-be.html
Dog denies being wagged–not very convincingly
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/news/2009/01/w_house_reports_of_olmert-bush_call_inaccurate.php
Just think. The Dog days will soon be over, and another star is rising.
It will be interesting to see what influence AIPAC will have in the new administration. I remember reading during the primaries that the AIPAC membership had a 2 to 1 preference for Hillary Clinton over Obama (no real surprise there), but Obama made a speech to AIPAC early last summer that influenced Rahm Emanuel, who belongs to an Orthodox synagogue in Chicago, to change his support from Clinton to Obama. (Emanuel may of course also have done the delegate math and realized that Clinton couldn’t catch Obama.) Though my perception is that Obama will be much more his own man that Bush was as president, Emanuel, as the new chief of staff, will have his boss’s ear on a daily basis. And word has it that Emanuel is not a shy fellow when it comes to voicing his opinions.
(Aside: About a month ago, C-Span re-ran a roast of Emanuel that took place in Chicago in 2006, I believe. Many political figures were in attendance, including both Senators Clinton and Obama. There were many comments about Emanuel’s liberal and sometimes aggressive use of profanities when he was part of the Clinton Administration and as a congressman. Clinton got off the best line of the night, IMO: “Rahm, you can’t dilute a profanity by putting the word ‘mother’ in front of it.”)
Like it or not, when you take the Queen’s shilling, you do the Queen’s bidding.
Condi (and her predecessor) could have taken the high ground and resigned rather than sacrifice their principles (assuming they did/do) just to keep their jobs.
What will be the evolution of Condi Rice. Here is a woman obviously aware of the obstacles to her gender, in a administration of outrageous testosterone. And how much did it include, to the detriment in my opinion, of religious patriarchs and oligarchs. David Brooks gives us a hint of his intimate surroundings. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/13/opinion/13brooks.html?_r=1&ref=todayspaper
Will Condi write a tell all? A lot of money there. Or will she just fade away into comfortable academia?
Bill: You linked to David Brooks’s essay on the death of Fr. Richard John Neuhaus. Was that your intention?