Glenn relies far too heavily on the NIE report, ignoring these facts;

1. Since the NIE issued their report, one of the authors suggests that it was misinterpreted.

2. Iran continues to enrich uranium and to do so in a more efficient manner. They are getting better at it. The enrichment of uranium is considered one of the more difficult steps to conquer when developing a nuclear weapon.

3. Today Iran brags about their enrichment capabilities, several years ago they denied such an intent.

4. Iran continues to develop and test its missile capability.

5. Iran states that it only wants to use its nuclear technology for peaceful purposes. However, when offered enriched uranium from Russia, Iran didn't like the strings attached to such a deal. The "strings" involved limiting use of the uranium to power plants. This led rational thinkers to conclude that Iran's stated intentions are not their actual intentions.

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).

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.

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

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.

"I'm motivated ... by a strong belief that the gravest danger facing our nation today is a terror group detonating a nuclear bomb in one of our cities," - William Perry, Jan 8, 2009 - Former Sec. of Defense, Clinton Administration

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5hyfEy9mv1XjDov8sGW8cF4NEh7jQ

You want links? google "iran enrich uranium" and "iran missile" and "iran russia uranium" and "iran uranium iaea".

"Also, to those who object to the criticism of Obama, while my temptation is to tell you to just stuff it, I'll instead remind you that vibrant criticism is essential to a well-functioning democracy, and that Obama, being a grown up, not only can handle it, but welcomes it, not to mention needs it. He said so himself on numerous occasions. The man himself is a lot tougher and more mature than some of his supporters appear to be."

Yes, Kovie---"vibrant criticism" is essential, and I'm thinking you probably mean substanitive criticism as well. But what I see on many blogs is a "if he's not going to execute MY agenda, and buy into MY priorities, I'm going to pick up my toys and go home. (Foot stomp) And I wished I'd never voted for him! and he's just another republican!" etc. ad nauseum.

I believe in making one's voice heard, but if you want people to respect your opinion, if not agree with it, than you lay off the snark and the temper tantrums and lay you argument out in a civil way. I'm not saying you don't do this, but there are plenty on the left who sound just like the right when they don't get there way.

imagine a world under the tenure of a Black man who is not beholden to the usual interests groups, religious fools, ethnic extortion..

Very well put! And what's more, who wins by a completely incontestable margin. Okay, okay it's great. But try not to let it capsize your reason like it's already broken your syntax. The post election party can't last forever, as much as we want it to!

Steady on there, GBT, Try to get hold of yourself! Breath deep.

It'll be fine, but not if you give yourself a syncope or aneurysm or a permanent case of the heeby-jeebies. I trust arrhythmia will never be a problem for you, but still, caution is advisable.

pls.

plenty on the left [...] sound just like the right when they don't get there way.

This is an exceedingly generic complaint.

Could you "lay you argument out" for me? Who is doing this? What exactly is it you object to?

The closest we came to having a nuclear bomb detonated in one of our cities was when a Yale student built one in the basement of his apartment building in New Haven, CT. The closest we came to genocide by smallpox weapons was when Lord Geoffrey Amherst gave smallpox infected blankets to the Native Americans.

Washington, with help from London, Tel Aviv and a few other places, has created a whole new hominid species out of these 'terrorists'. Oooh scary! We haven't been at war with a fundamentally different hominid since the Neanderthals, have we?

This is really interesting. The closer we get to the Obama inauguration, the people who were so sure about torture, about terror, about gunboat diplomacy, about neocons and Darth Cheney and all that, are suddenly quaking in their boots wondering if all hell will break loose if the things they advocated really come true. Relax. It will work. It wasn't wrong. Some risk, real or perceived, is natural. The world you were promised in exchange for your freedoms wasn't. Let it go.

Hey, the guy sucks. I read it here; it must be true. Every fucking day.

The low denomination of the $1 bill is not a slight on Satchmo. See the $1 bill, like Louis Armstrong's music, is accessible to almost everybody. That's sort of what I was thinking. In a way, being on the nickel, traditional price of a shoe-shine might be right.

I just know if I saw Louis Armstrong's face on my dollar bills, it would make me very happy. And given today's technology, you know it's actually possible to have digital music embedded in the bills! Anyway, I'm just running it up the flagpole to see who lights it on fire, y'know?

Just bring a stencil and a can of spray-paint. Much easier. Put the stencil over Jesus and, Pouf!

In the meantime, try to stay calm.