Is President Obama "Accepting the Result in Iran?"

At Commentary Magazine, Abe Greenwald seems to believe so.

I think that is an overly critical reading of both President Obama's statement, as well as the greater role the President should be playing during the course of this situation. As I stated earlier, the situation in Iran right now is reaching critical mass, and any statement from President Obama that would give the mullahs and clerics any "rallying cry" would undermine the "courage of the protesters" Greenwald refers to.

Providing the current Iranian regime with the ability to portray the protesters, or Moussavi, as U.S. stooges would be the absolute worst development in this situation. The next 24 hours in Iran are going to be crucial. The fear is that the regime will resort to even more hard-handed tactics to quell the uproar, but given the energy and passion we have seen over the past few days from those in the streets, it is unclear what it would take to quell this uprising. However, the portrayal of the protesters and Moussavi as U.S. stooges would be a most unfortunate development. It would weaken the movement, peeling off those on the fringes and diminishing the numbers in the streets.

Despite Greenwald's statements to the contrary, the United States is still a "political football" in this scenario. The regime cannot be allowed to point the fingers of blame outside Iran's borders. The United States cannot serve as a distraction at this time, and the Iranian regime cannot be given the opportunity to point their fingers at the U.S. and state with convicton "they are interfering with your country, with your sovereign state."

I wish President Obama were able to state with conviction that which Greenwald argues for in his piece. Sadly, now is not the time nor the moment. Now is the time for restrained anger. A trait this President has displayed time and time again.