Quite a projection there.

I'm sure Israel is important to many of Obama's Jewish supporters. Probably around 8th on their list of priorities, maybe first on some.

"Joined at the hip". Trees, fresh swimming water, car-free zones join me at the hip.

Only if you consider Rahm the Knife saying 'fuck' all over country as change.

I don't know. I am not convinced that this is true. What are you basing this on? Obama did not seem to have trouble raising funds even before the Jewish establishment jumped on the bandwagon (I would say they did it very late in the game, when Obama was already believed to have set his stage for his election as president). Even if having the Jewish establishment on his side would've been a plus, it would not have been a game-changer, I would argue. At least there is no indication that this is the case. Are you saying that the American-Jewish community at large is attached to AIPAC at the hip? If so, that would raise the issue of dual loyalty in a most alarming manner (AIPAC being, let's not mince words, a foreign lobby group). If this is so, then American Jews need to know that they can't have their cake and eat it too. With great power comes great responsibility, and when those responsibilities are ignored and trampled, it is only natural for people to start asking questions, and when no answers are forthcoming from Jews, attempt to answer those questions themselves. No ethnic or Religious group in America has wielded such immense power and used it so irresponsibly and for the service of another country, as American Jews have, let us not mince words. After all, your AIPAC lobbyists might hold Israeli citizenship, but they also hold American citizenship. They are Americans. And they are openly serving the interests of another nation, at the expense of the welfare of the country that has facilitated their functioning. Unless the American Jewish community exorcises the demon that is Israel from its racist, sick soul and identity, it will be threatening its welfare and, who knows, even endangering its very existence. Tragic.

Who joins the American GIs at the hip?

For context, consider this article from the normally naive Nation magazine:

http://www.thenation.com/blogs/dreyfuss/381513/obama_and_iran?rel=hpbox

Look for more rabid zionists to assume important positions in Obama's administration.

His unrealistic supporters will respond to the coming war by first displaying signs of denial, "You can't blame Obama, he gave the Iranians a chance," and finally when they see the civilian effects of another bombing campaign, you will see disillisionment and depression.

In this respect, the true vote for peace would have been one for McCain, whose incompetence would have meant that he would be unable to motivate anyone. I myself voted third party– as I couldn't stomach voting for the maverick.

My only hope is that Obama succeeds in destroying the Democratic party with the same speed that Bush has destroyed the Republican party. Enough of Democrats and Repuglicans– we need a new start.

Q: Senator, for the first time since the Iranian revolution, the president of Iran sent a congratulations note to a new U.S. president. I'm wondering if, first of all, if you responded to President (Mahmoud) Ahmadinejad's note of congratulations and, second of all, and more importantly, how soon do you plan on sending low-level envoys to countries such as Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Cuba, to see if a presidential-level talk would be productive?

OBAMA: I am aware that the letter was sent. Let me state … repeat what I stated during the course of the campaign.

Iran's development of a nuclear weapon I believe is unacceptable. And we have to mount an international effort to prevent that from happening.

Iran's support of terrorist organizations I think is something that has to cease.

I will be reviewing the letter from President Ahmadinejad, and we will respond appropriately. It's only been three days since the election. Obviously, how we approach and deal with a country like Iran is not something that we should, you know, simply do in a knee-jerk fashion. I think we've got to think it through.

But I have to reiterate once again that we only have one president at a time. And I want to be very careful that we are sending the right signals to the world as a whole that I am not the president and I won't be until January 20th.

[Count on it: War with Iran is coming, and us little people ain't gonna be able to stop it]

A librarian will not get a job if it is not okay with the jewish community.

Nor will a parking ticket attendant.

Now we are discussing what Obama can do with or without the jewish establishment.

They could break him in two in three seconds, that won't need to happen, it is understood.

He is already threatening Iran.

The question is: is emanuel gonna prove to be a step too far.

He was a diretor at fannie Mae. And at other investment banks, which is when he made millions.

He is so clearly wealthy, and Israeli, and pro Iraq war. Is he not confrontational to all those who dreamed of change.

One really needs to understand the Neocon agenda. Ond day after the election, and the disussion is back to Neocons.

The prognosis is not good. A recession is beckoning, and Rahmfeld is going to be a focus for anger.