Seem to me that there are some who basically think the U.S. should be actively involved in encouraging the Iranians to revolt. Given the American history in which various peoples have been encouraged to revolt, only to get squashed like a bug as the West merely looks on dissapprovingly, I think this is shockingly irresponsible.
So this is a small clarification of my position in order to clearly distinguish myself from this line of thinking. Personal gun ownership is better than a vote, especially in situations where your two options make little or no difference. Appropriate strategic action is better than mob action in the streets, and communication that aids strategic action is far more valuable than gaining the emotional support of desk jockeys in America via Twitter.
But frankly, it's the Iranians on the ground who need to make an assessment of whether or not they have a decent chance of overthrowing their government- without foreign help. Obama, thankfully, has so far refrained from inflaming the situation; we do not want the protestors thinking we'll back them militarily, nor do we want the Mullah's thinking they can score points against us by destroying the protestors. Remember, these protestors are urban, tech-savvy, and may actually be a minority in the country, so it could be possible for the Mullahs to posit the protests as U.S. interference, crackdown, and actually become more popular among the rest of the population as a result.