Matt Ortega

Featured in Sunday’s New York Times, Thomas Friedman conducts a little bit of revisionist history. For instance, take this paragraph:

Mr. Gore lost the presidency, but in the dignity and grace with which he gave up his legal fight, he united America. Then, faced with what to do with the rest of his life, he took up a personal crusade to combat climate change, even though the odds were stacked against him, his soapbox was small, his audiences were measured in hundreds, and his critics were legion. Nevertheless, Mr. Gore stuck with it and over time has played a central role in building a global consensus for action on this issue. [emphasis added]

In accepting the Supreme Court decision to hand the presidency to George W. Bush, Gore showed great humility and despite his tone of reconciliation, it was hardly a uniting experience. Bush was met with massive protests at his inauguration. “Demonstrators lined the streets,” CNN reported nearly seven years ago.

Police said the protests could be the largest at an inauguration since President Richard Nixon assumed the office in 1973.

The protesters had diverse agendas but seemed united by anger over the contested election and mistrust of the new president.

Elsewhere in the United States, more than 10,000 protesters marched in San Francisco and Los Angeles.

Ashley Banfield of MSNBC interviewed inauguration historian Jim Bendat who noted that there were just as many Bush protesters as there were supporters. (There are a number of protest videos on YouTube of the demonstrations.)

That hardly speaks of “united,” and really no fault of Gore’s, either.