- The Jerusalem Post tells readers to relax about Barack Obama: "The lesson in all this? Israelis would be wise not to panic at the first sign of turbulence in Jerusalem-Washington relations. American interests in the Middle East are not always in harmony with Israel’s. But we have every reason to expect that Obama will support the Jewish state in its quest for defensible borders and genuine acceptance by its neighbors."
- Ha’aretz says it’s clear that U.S. policy will be changing: "Israel was not mentioned in the speech, but its leaders need to listen carefully to the message that went out from Washington yesterday. It was impossible to mistake: Obama intends to put an end to the policy of his predecessor, George W. Bush, which encouraged the use of force over diplomacy. The new president intends to speak with states and leaders that were boycotted during the Bush era such as Iran and Syria. Like other governments worldwide, the new government in Jerusalem after the elections will be judged by its ability to integrate into the processes Obama will lead and its willingness to cooperate with him. In short, on its success in building, not destroying."
- Herb Keinon agrees: "This is a clear indication that the Obama doctrine for the Middle East will be decisively different from that of his predecessor. A new way forward with the Muslim world is all fine and good, from an Israeli perspective, as long as Israeli interests are not sacrificed to achieve it."
- Readers of the Washington Post-Newsweek religion blog debate the merits of Rick Warren’s decision to pray "in the name of the one who changed my life, Yeshua, Isa, Jesus (Spanish pronunciation), Jesus."
Political Tidbits: Obama and Israel