When I stated that the "reasonable application of appropriate pressure was unquestionably appropriate how did you get from that I was demanding that "Obama not critized?"

Let me be as clear as possible, I am advocating full-throated criticism of the Obama administration, when warranted. But it should be done soberly. Haven’t we had enough jumping up and down without empirical facts for the last eight years?

Before we go breaking our arms patting ourselves on the back, let’s remember that correlation does not equal causation. Just because these events happened within close proximity does not mean that the latter was caused by the former.

While the application of reasonable pressure is unquestionably appropriate (an obligation that was abrogated by many during the last eight years)let’s not turn this whole thing into a circular firing squad before the man even takes office.

I was just reading about a plan last week that a resort in Dubai put forth to air condition the sand on its beach by means of chilled water piping. Clearly, it is not just Americans who are doing insane things in deserts.

People want stuff. They want cars, they want big houses. They want to hit hard eights, parlay, and hit it again (it is a conversation about Las Vegas after all). From Buddha to Jesus to Mao, there is an unbroken kick line of people who have offered belief systems that press individuals to subvert personal wants, desires, and goals for the benefit of a higher good. The result? As Charles de Gaulle once noted “the cemeteries are full of essential men.”

If we can’t stop the wheel of desire (and how could we? You can’t make tigers eat snap peas.), then the goal is to make it hurt less. A lot less. Clean, green, and low cost baby.

As a general observation, it worries me that so many of the posts here seem to have taken as gospel the notion of impending doom presented by global climate change. This is not who we are as a people. Goodness sakes, we’re a nation who hacked its very existence out of the wilderness, who builds opulent palaces in the desert. When did “it is what it is” become the national mantra?

Global climate change is both an unprecedented challenge and an opportunity. It is an opportunity to grown high quality middle class jobs in new industries while honing the way that we live around new realities. Enough with the sack cloth and ashes.

For some time now, I have cautioned about need for incremental change, to not be too hasty in rushing moderate, even conservative Democrats out of the party. Until now, I have seen no need to make a hash out of such folks without first establishing in the minds of the voting public that the Democratic Party, writ large, represents a party of competent leadership and progress for all Americans.

I now, officially, give up.

Joe Lieberman is a rat. A turncoat weasel of the first order. He has turned his back on both his party and the American people in spectacular ways. If the Senate Democrats in their infinite wisdom cannot see fit to punish the most scurrilous of traitors, then I surrender. I’m going to send Accountability Now some cash as soon as I can get to my checkbook.

First, everyone remembers that the current resident of the Oval Office made the following statement after the resolution of the Florida recount:

"The spirit of cooperation I have seen in this hall is what is needed in Washington. It is the challenge of our moment. After a difficult election, we must put politics behind us and work together to make the promise of America available for every one of our citizens."

Everyone knows now that this was rubbish. So why are we all wringing our hands that Claire McCaskill is somehow the Obama clarion? She’s going to say what the Obama campaign tells her to keep things calm. The real proof will be in the cabinet selections in the next two months.

Second, when Mike Steele – professional idolater (to use Glenn’s phrase) and unrepentant lover of all things Republican says he sees a problem, it really means they are going down in flames.

As someone who bleeds burgundy and gold, this is awful. I mean, the only joy that I've had this election season is the performance of my beloved Redskins. Now I have to root against them?

Oh well, they can still make the playoffs with 3 loses and the fate of our republic is far more important. May the Steelers beat them without remorse, and may Obama pull the same trick come Tuesday.

"Who cares if Nancy Pelosi and Steny Hoyer have a 62-seat margin instead of a 67-seat margin. What difference does it make?"

The difference could be significant, depending on the voting patterns of the individual members. This is not, after all, a parliamentary systems where the iron cage of party discipline keeps people from breaking ranks. Moreover, it may not be a choice between swapping a crappy incumbent Democrat for a better progressive one. It might be swapping a crappy Democrat (and their contribution to the majority) for a Republican.

Right now, the Democrats have a 31 seat majority. The Blue Dogs Coalition has 47 members. Chop out too many of them and it could be trouble.

Also, I think it would be helpful if you or someone could articulate what the criteria are for targeting and removal?