Why the Ben Rhodes profile in the New York Times Magazine is just gross.

Yep. Nothing Iran could have done would have caused Obama from walking away from the table.

Guarantees a bad deal, and required a "narrative" to sell it to the public:

 

From fiction writer to crafting life and death foreign policy decisions. Experience is overrated.

 

It hasn't been mentioned much, but his brother is the President of CBS News.

They both have very similar jobs. They craft narratives, based on current events, which are designed to sway public opinion.

 

The establishment -- sorry, the blob -- really hates this article.

 

At some point John Kerry has to offer comment, right?

 

Nope. He can just let the next big meaningless inside Washington deal replace it. Shouldn't take more than a week.

 

Does anyone even believe his story about seeing an Arab man crying on the subway on 9/11? (What subway lines were even running?)

It's part of his personal narrative. It's what he told job interviewers.

It's a lie.

 

The Washington media does not like to be made to look like fools. Rhodes is now getting hit from all sides.

 

I think Kerry's ego will sooner or later get the best of him and he is going to want to grab back some credit for the deal.

 

Tension between White House aides and Secretaries of State over policy and credit/blame for same has been a constant since at least the Kennedy administration.

 

Kerry is already lining up his next gig as Secretary of Commerce for Iran: