"he's basically correct that there are some Zionist types in the Obama administration who would strongly advise against his meeting with Wright. Rahm Emmanuel, for instance, who as Chief of Staff would have a role in that decision, and who has devoted much of his energy to supporting pro-Israel policy in the Democratic party."

You're factually accurate but your inferences are off. Obama is the President today because he distanced himself from Wright. Perhaps there are Jews and Zionists who have advised Obama to distance himself from Wright. But there were plenty of non-Jews and non-Zionists providing similar advice. When it became clear that Obama had an association with Wright and that Wright had fairly extreme views in a variety of areas, Obama's candidacy was seriously threatened. At the time, polling indicated most Americans found several of his statements outrageous and offensive. Obama was wise to distance himself from Wright at the time. He is wise to distance himself from Wright now.

I'm not one to throw around the "anti-semite" label as frequently as it is weilded on the Salon comment pages and elsewhere. I would just say that pointing out that Rahm Emmanuel is Jewish and a Zionist seems irrelevant here. We do not know that he is the one guiding Obama on his relationship with Wright. And if he is telling Obama to continue to avoid contact with his former pastor, it's hard to say that this isn't the same advice Obama would get from any decent advisor, Jewish, Zionist or otherwise.

Thank you for sharing the Haaretz poll. As you mention it does demonstrate that the debate on this topic may have a different flavor within Israel than in the US. But, it is important to also state that this is a meaningless poll in terms of reality. The likelihood that a nuclear Iran would target Israel has nothing to do with the percentage of Israelis that think it might happen and everything to do with the desires of the person who has a finger on the Iranian button sometime in the future. In early 2003 many Americans told pollsters they thought Iraq had WMDs. Now, many Americans will tell pollsters they don't think Iraq had WMDs at that time. Is this information worth anything? Does it tell us anything about whether Iraq did or did not have WMDs?

The real story of the Haaretz poll is similar to other polls we too frequently see cited: when asked, people will respond to questions relating to topics about which they know very little.

I enjoy when Salon articles show an interest in truly understanding an issue rather than (or at least in addition to) preaching to the choir. Pointing out the role of the driver in accident cause and avoidance is important. But we should also recognize the role of the driver in fuel efficiency. A while back Edmunds.com did an informal test of the impact of various factors on fuel efficiency. Driving style had, by far, the biggest impact on fuel efficiency. Slowing down and avoiding frequent acceleration reduces fuel consumption much more than just about any other factor. I would also add that how often and far you drive is another huge factor. Reducing your commuting distance and driving conservatively would have a far greater impact in reducing fuel consumption than trading in your Explorer for a Prius.

In the interest of truth I wish this article would at least acknowledge the role that vehicle safety has played in fuel consumption. Yes we drive cars that are big and powerful and therefore get poor mileage. But modern cars that meet crash standards and have hundreds of pounds of airbag inflation assemblies and other safety equipment are necessarily less efficient than they would be absent these safety features. We often hear about 'those fuel efficient cars in Europe.' Well there's one reason why they're not sold here and it's not because GM is evil. It's because bringing them up to US safety and environmental standards would make them less efficient and less appealing. I'm not suggesting we abandon our safety standards (although some such as the recent rollover safety standards requiring a car roof to be strong enough to support multiples of the the car's weight seem excessive and a direct contributor to reduced fuel efficiency). But we should at least be aware that we are balancing many goals and sometimes our ability to meet one is compromised by our commitment to the other. In this case, we could have much more efficient cars on sale at our dealers tomorrow but our commitments to safety and clean air stand in the way.