Looking back

If you really want to get technical, it's all Al Gore's fault....

That was my first attempt at blogging. It was the launching pad of americanlogic. Looking back at the statement itself, politically speaking, it's true. Five years ago despite the contested results, america decided to take a chance on a seemingly humble Texan. He was a Bush, we were familiar with the Bushes and their dynasty. We heard "compassionate conservative" uttered over and over again.

Al Gore, as he proved as Vice President, was an able, intelligent man who would continue the policies of Clinton centrism, a ideal while flawed, had the countries best interest at heart. The media saw Gore as an elitist, by which they meant "smarter than them." Bush was affable, funny at times and seemed uninterested in anything. Why not?

I voted for the Gore/Lieberman ticket and still would. Most people would do the same. Would we be in Iraq? maybe (regime change was the policy of the Clinton administration). Would those at the bottom or near the bottom be less comfortable? probably not.

Despite all their problems, their inability to get it together, the Democratic party still is the party of the afflicted. The GOP is the party of the established, no more is that apparent in the spending package squeaked through this month. Make the wealthy share the burden of war and stuggle? Nope. Cut the only thing that keeps families from completely falling apart? You bet. The party of endless war abroad and at home.

It all started in 2000.