Obama (like the rest of the left) has a default anti-Israel, anti-American bias, especially when it comes to dark skinned savages who hate the West.
Obama wasn't necessarily "pro Muslim Brotherhood", just biased (and stupid) enough to think political engagement could change them, particularly if we withdrew support from a pro-American dictatorship.
Soros is just a funder of obnoxious NGO's having little or no power outside the US or Western Europe: it's only in the decadent West that people are actually naive enough to think Twitter can overthrow a government. As soon as the Brotherhood took power, the left of center groups funded by Soros were shoved aside, as such useful idiots usually are. Having had a taste of incipient sharia lunacy, a lot of their members are now siding with the new military government.
“I just think you are according way too much forethought to both Obama and Soros.”
I wish I was, but that is where the facts lead to. Remember when it was “CRAZY!!!” to think that Soros was funding a shadow-party outside of Dem Party control?
They have successfully comprised the US Press, as well. They were more than willing to lead with the wildest conspiracies and rumors about Bush, or even Romney, but they remain silent, WILLINGLY, about what Obama and his minions, (in fact almost any Democrat), are doing.
I think you are not giving enough forethought to Obama.
Obama's basic core value is he believes in shifting power to the "people" and taking it from the establishment. Obama supports Islamic revolutions because they are popular among the citizenry, and he always opposes established leaders. This goes back to his Alinskyite community organizing days.
This naive bias of "the people" over "the powerful" sometimes leads to conundrums and disaster, especially when applied to a third-world model.
Obama wanted the Muslim Brotherhood to rule Egypt because he believed the Muslim Brotherhood was a noble, peaceful, reformed political movement which represented 100% of the Egyptian people. Any Egyptian who thought differently must be suspect. They could not be a legitimate part of "the people"--they must be a beneficiary of Mubarek's government. Likewise, and American who opposed or feared the Muslim Brotherhood must be a xenophobic racist who could not accept the Muslim Brotherhood was actually a reformed political party and not a terrorist organization.
It was exactly this thought which led the political left to support Mao against Chiang Kai-shek in China, and Khomeini against the Shah in Iran.
Remember, Alinsky did not believe in a small "d" democratic system, where the meek gain power though numbers and the ballot box. He believes in replacing the powerful overthrowing the powerful, where the new power simply gains the popular support of the people through organizing and propaganda, but is not responsible to them.