As for criticism, isn't it just possible for us all to wait until he's in office and actually starts DOING things

1. Appointing people to jobs is "doing things"

2. Speaking of intentions and plans is material worthy of thought and critique.

3. Often leaks and such are trial balloons and failing to respond may give someone the idea that they can get away with whatever. Once the bad idea is formally announced, it is MUCH more difficult to derail it. If it is just a leak, they can just deny the story and it never happens.

I know most people who say the above aren't this dumb, but you should really look at yourselves because the sentiment is just. fucking. moronic. When Bush announced he was going to fuck with social security, did you all say "well, we should wait until he actually does something before criticizing!"

Of course not, that's not how government works. You start organizing and opposing immediately because by the time a formal announcement is made, or a vote is scheduled, it is usually too late to stop it.

If Glenn is wrong and Obama will do the better thing on all the things Glenn has discussed, then there is no harm done. If Obama does even 1 thing differently because (even slightly) of something Glenn wrote, then it was all worthwhile, and if Obama goes and does everything the village approved way and proves Glenn's fears correct then also no harm done for having objected in advance.

All politicians need pressure to do the right thing. After the 1993 budget passed, Clinton came up to Bernie Sanders and said "You should have issued a statement complaining about the budget not having anything for the left. I could have used that to get more concessions."

Even leaders who want to do the right thing benefit from pressure from the left to do so.

6. Since becoming president elect, Obama has received security briefings that were unavailable to him a year ago (when he commented about the NIE report).

Ah yes, secret intelligence the rest of us haven't seen. Trust our leaders, they have secret information we don't know. That always works out well.

7. Many of the past loony-left conspiracy theories are soon to be proven untrue (marshal law, permanent seizure of power by Bush and Cheney, and the "self-pardon" of Bush by Bush). Correct me if I'm wrong on or after January 20, 2009.

Not for nothing but Bush seizing power and overthrowing the constitution isn't a "conspiracy theory" and because it didn't happen doesn't mean it was crazy or implausible. Bush didn't get assassinated either but that's because the Secret Service did good work protecting him. Bush didn't seize power not because he's such a power averse type but more likely because the existing democratic safeguards were strong enough to prevent it. Rice actually suggested funding the Iraq war out of the treasury without Congress' approval if the Democrats had stood firm on timetables. That would be a full fledged coup as it would invalidate Article I of the constitution and reduce Congress to being an advisory body.

Gross violations of the constitution are no small issue. Neither is a nuclear blast in one of our cities.

Gee, the world managed to see the USSR face the USA for decades without such a thing happening, and why? MAD. Why would MAD fail to work on Iran? The US could obliterate every square inch of Iran dozens of times, would they really nuke America? Even if a "suitcase bomb" were possible and given to terrorists, they would have to fear America would nuke them no matter what if such a thing exploded. Ditto for Israel which has second strike capacity.

When former Sec. of Defense and other leaders, who have no apparent axe to grind, warn of the current and future threats we face, . . . I think it's obvious that Obama is taking their advice to heart.

Perry is a long time worrier over nuclear proliferation threats. I say that not to dismiss him, but only that his being quoted being concerned about the issue generally means very little regarding Iran or the probability they would give terrorists nuclear bombs to smuggle into America. After Bush utterly blew it with North Korea, to be quoting Perry supportively now when he was sounding alarms about North Korea in 2003 is bleakly amusing.

Surprise J! Welcome to the reality of people living in a fantasy land. Abstract principle is more important than any possible consequences of following that principle.

This is exactly the kind of thinking that led to the tragedy of Willie Horton.

I wouldn't call the torture endured by the many innocent people held by the Bush administration "abstract" - tell Maher Arar or Jose Padilla about how abstract their suffering is.

Then we can discuss the abstract ways of governments that abandoned habeas corpus and prohibitions on torture like Augusto Pinochet (a hero of yours I expect because he tortured only left wing people) and abstract our ways into mass atrocity.