The NYT's Irrelevance In The Freeman Matter

Calderone gets a response:

The bureau chief argued that Freeman wasn't a "high enough appointment to go nuts over in a big way," and offered up a challenge: "Go Google his predecessor and see how much coverage he got."

But isn't that why it's interesting? It is a minor appointment, but even minor appointments in the president's own staff cannot proceed if the appointees question the p.c. line on Israel. The enforcement of this orthodoxy even in minor appointments - to the extent of character assassination - is what makes this a news story. And the repercussions of that orthodoxy for future foreign policy, especially with Iran, are enormous.