I was surprised, too -- but maybe it does make sense if you consider Obama's psychology.
If the past few months have taught us anything at all about Obama's approach to the world, it's that he's big on ill-considered Grand Gestures.
I'm pretty sure that Obama's juvenile take on current events had pre-disposed him to want to go after the CIA, for all of the reasons that the loony-left hates the CIA.
His Grand Gesture in the case of the CIA would be some sort of very public and visible house-cleaning, reform, and show-trials.
So in choosing a DCI, Obama's first criterion was almost certainly that the DCI must be a reliable Party man. Panetta fits the bill admirably as a "Party man." To Obama the narcissist, "party man" would automatically translate into "Obama's man."
That does not mean that Panetta actually is a "reliable Obama man," however. In fact, I think Panetta most likely remains a loyal Clinton man ... whatever that actually means these days.
Supposing that to be the case, perhaps the more interesting place to watch is not the Pelosi charade, but rather Hillary Clinton's State Dept.
I can definitely see CIA and State having a commonality of interests against Obama's thrashings and bumblings.... One could actually imagine them working together against the POTUS.
Yup, that’s workable too, BillandHillary wanted one of their own, Panetta, in there.
A juicy slot for a former political operative as well.