I'm not sayin' he needs to be always right, but I do think Obama is thoughtful, smart and tough.

Obama is smarter and tougher than McCain, Krauthammer, or any of the GOP guys who are calling him weak. I can't think of any one of them who would be so cool under pressure! They lose their cool over ANYTHING Obama does.

It's incredible to me that the neo-cons are aligning with the protestors in Iran as if somehow the rest of us aren't. Who are the neo-cons to judge the rest of us for not caring about unfair elections?!

Unreal.

There is only one logical explanation for the persistence of neoconservative demands that Obama "do more," no matter how much he does. Everyone understands that the US siding with the uprising will galvanize the reactionary forces in Iranian politics — the neocons can only be making these declarations and pronouncements and demands with that in mind.

The simplest explanation that fits the evidence is that they must want to see a massive pro-government reaction, and the resulting failure of the uprising — as spectacularly and violently as possible.

The situation points to an interesting predicament for the neoconservatives, reminiscent of their bleating and dithering over the fall of the Soviet Union. Fundamentally, the problem is that this is not how it's supposed to happen. The demise of our hated enemy is supposed to be at our own hand, not through some kind of internal process outside of our control.

The right-wing universe depends absolutely on a tidy, immutable, well-ordered world in which fossilized, implacably polarized factions brutalize one another on whatever terms make the conflict most viscerally satisfying.

Popular revolutions — not to mention popular Islamic revolutions — bust that neat little universe right open. People aren't supposed to be able to rise up, in any country, and just seize power from the ruling elites — especially when we depend on those ruling elites as immovable adversaries who can only be stopped through ruthless action abroad and regimented social control at home.

What the right wing wants is carnage in the streets of Tehran, with the protests bloodily, and videogenically, crushed under the jack booted sandals of the ayatollahs. Right now they are desperate to see this happen and will (not may, will) go to any length no matter how absurd to prod Obama into facilitating it.

What Obama and the Democratic leadership need to hear, early and often, is that this is not what Americans want them to do.

Gotta get down to it

Soldiers are cutting us down

Should have been done long ago.

What if you knew her

And found her dead on the ground

How can you run when you know?

Remember Liz Cheney saying, "It doesn't matter who wins?" Had Mousavi won (as many people think he did), they would have dismissed him "Don't be taken in."

It's the hawkish Right who is threatened by the disappearance of a government easy to demonize and useful as justification for Pentagon dollars. Moreover, since the neocon agenda for the Middle East failed miserably, they certainly don't want any positive change on Obama's watch.

We have limited leverage over developments in other countries. GHWB pursued essentially the same "hands-off" policy toward China and the Eastern bloc in 1989 in which developments diverged dramatically. When East Germans appeared at the gates of out Embassy in Berlin after a exodus had started through Czechoslavakia, staff was instructed not to assist them. Don't get involved.

We don't have any type of diplomatic relations with the Islamic Republic which makes it hard to know what's even going on there.

I admit that I'd like to hear something more rousing from Obama, but he's done exactly what he should - not given the Ayatollahs an ounce more ammunition. And what's more he's spoken to the point, and the facts. The talking necks who've used the crisis as a political football don't do "freedom of speech" any favors. When people are dying for our privileges, it's a little unseemly to do backflips to leave them out of the story.

Zimbabwe, Angola,Tanzania, Russia, Krgyzstan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Sudan, Egypt, Moldava all had recent elections which were questionable.

Have to disagree. When even the Western Europeans have stronger comments about sham elections and human rights violations then our President does, it's time to rethink what we're saying.

Nobody, I think, is calling on Obama to militarily overthrow the Iranian regime. But, you might want to know what he's allowing the CIA to do or to pay for there with your tax money before you praise his coolness and desire not to meddle.

And, as for strong words angering Iran, Iran buys "humanitarian goods" from the U.S. even while calling us "The Great Satan." Chavez in Venezuela launches anti-American tirades while he continues to pocket the money he gets from selling oil to the U.S.

Meanwhile, does Obama REALLY think talks with Ahadinejad could lead to Iran giving up its assumed nuclear weapons program? If so, why hasn't he arranged for the U.S. to have the same level of diplomatic representation in Tehran that Iran has in Washington, D.C.?

Honestly, The fact that Obama even openly said we support the Iranian protestors is dangerous. America is pretty much in the crosshairs of the Iranian ultra-right and -any- action we take, even a verbal condemnation, no matter how warrented, ia adding fuel to the fire. Odds are, Ahmadinajad -wants- the US to come out against him more strongly, since it gives him the perfect opportunity to call his opponents the puppets of a hostile foreign power.

Sadly, I have a feeling the GOP knows that's the case. They just want to make themselves look more pro-Democracy than the Democrats (irony, no?) and don't mind if we get into another war with 'those brown people over there'.

or something like that

deranged neocons and Republican opportunists demanding Obama do more.

This is the same GOP who was outraged during the campaign that Obama said it was necessary to talk to Iran? How the worm has turned...