Updated from mistersite's comment below.
Many Kossacks have contrasted the Twitter Revolution underway in Iran with our weak response to the 2000 election. They think that, in 2000, we should have taken to the streets, thrown stones and fermented a popular revolt.
Personally, I'm damn glad we didn't.
Yes, the Bush years were a travesty and the whole world would be better off if we'd had 8 years of President Gore.
But should we have rioted to overturn the 2000 election?
I don't think so.
First, no one knew what a terrible gang of criminal thugs the Bush administration would turn out to be. If we had known about Cheney, Yoo and the rest in 2000, potentially violent protests might have been justified.
But there was no hint in Dec. 2000 that the Bush gang would be as awful as they were. To have taken to the streets based on what we knew then would have been a terrible over-reaction.
Second, the peaceable transition of power is worth something in itself.
Iranians, whether they know it today or not, yearn for a system in which power is granted through a valid political process. The peaceable transfer of power, through democratic elections, is the goal to which Iranians aspire.
When it comes to political transitions, we're 44 and 0. That is something to be proud of. I'd have to check, but I don't think any other country can match that record.
Bush et al were evil Fuck-ups
But we didn't know that in 2000.
Given what we did know, honoring our 200+ year tradition of peaceable transfer of power was the right thing to do.
Iranians long for that. Even if it occasionally breaks down and produces a Bush/Cheney administration.