i have to laff everytime i hear someone say that al gore wouldn't have invaded iraq. go back to the late nineties and start reading the rhetoric of the democrats under clinton about the need to attack iraq. it was brought out as more evidence of the justification for bush's invasion in '03. clinton bombed iraq, mercilessly and repeatedly during his eight years in office. and lest we not forget, he also bombed the crap out of serbia with no un backing too. it sounds like you are a democrat who is under the impression that your own party are not hawks. the history shows just the opposite.
as to al gore and cheap oil. i beg to differ. google al gore and carbon credits and sift through all the info on his business interests there. then tell me he doesn't benefit from the fraud of "peak oil".
as to obama, i will grant you that there is probably something there that people feel that reflects that he has more of a soul than the rest(ron paul, kusinich and gravel excluded). i'm not sure his record reflects that, but it's really not much of a record in the first place. he certainly voted for all the police state legislation so i don't have much hope for him. the socialism thing speaks for itself so i'll just stay away from that. we have try to create the country(or world, if you will) that we want to live in from the ground up. get involved locally. those who are allowed to get to the top don't represent us so i think we just have to put up with it until something changes. and speaking of change, here's a little research i did on obama's donors a couple of months ago. yeah, real big change there....