Jack Ross writes: Not sure what to make of what happened except to say that it is not a
signal of anything in actual policy terms. To illustrate the point,
read the following blog from two days ago by Steve Walt, and notice
that it makes absolutely no mention of Freeman. (Also notice the
absolutely dashing picture of Obama that pushes my bi-curious button).
I also noticed that the Lobby shrewdly used the lack of MSM coverage to its advantage, in
other words they were able to stay under the radar as long as the other
side was as well. Ever since MSNBC became decisively on the left, they seem to just avoid any coverage of the Middle East
at all costs. And it seems that since Gaza all of the MSM is there as
well. The Lobby can adapt to that situation, but they remain
weakened. I suspect it really was Freeman's decision to step aside,
considering how it caught everyone off guard, but even if the Lobby has
won this skirmish I don't see how they can return to the electoral
arena to take on Baird, Ellison et al, for instance.
