Apparently my perspectives as delineated in various posts, as well as comments here, became too complicated for some people to understand. And my pointers to non-partisan websites apparently really confused the already confused. So let me answer their question, “What were you thinking?” in the kind of simple terms they might be able to understand:
1. I link to non-partisan sites because I read about both sides and make my decisions based on who’s the bigger obfuscator. Bush wins by a mile. And so he loses my respect and anything else he might want to get from me. And those losers who thought I linked to those sites by mistake must be, well, let’s just say, shallow thinkers.
2. I have the deepest respect for the men and women of our armed forces who are prepared to defend this Constitutional democracy from attacks by other nations, groups, and individuals. I have the deepest compassion for those men and women of our armed forces who believed that they waged war on other soils for altruistic reasons and were mained and tortured for their bravery. I am afraid of those men and women of our armed forces who never learned to understand the difference between wars fought as a very last resort and wars fought for ego, oil, revenge, or any other reason based on self-serving lies and more lies — and who are not able to bring themselves to admit that military brainwashing only serves to turn them into fighting machines that can’t think for themselves when it comes to making moral decisions on the battlefield.
2. I do not want a president who
–a. believes that he is God’s co-pilot and an instrument of His will.
–b. insists that he will continue to pursue an unjust war against a country that never had the WMDs that were the reason he says he went to war in the first place
–c. will not admit he screwed up big time both nationally and internationally and internationally again.
–c. chooses the most manipulative and crooked advisors to lead him by the nose (or maybe even whisper in his ear)
–c. only could get Poland as the sole eastern European country to back up his stupid and exit-empty plan. (Even though I’m Polish and proud of it, I have to wonder: WHAT WERE THEY THINKING! It must have had a lot to do with money.)
So, even if I assume that the propaganda generated by each side cancels the other out, Kerry still comes out as the better presidential choice to:
— come up with carefully thought-out strategy to help fix the mess in Iraq and help get the country into a stable situation politically and economically
— rekindle the global respect and support we used to have for our efforts to do the above
— live his personal life by his religious beliefs BUT lead our country according to our Constitution, Bill of Rights, and democratic processes
— thoughtfully begin the long, difficult process of fixing what Bush has broken of the American infrastructure of due process, equal rights, personal choice, and economic possibilities, recognizing that everything is a trade off, and the goal is to find a balance so that no American feels disenfranchised, dismissesd, or ignored. This last one is going to be a long hard road because of the success of Bush’s single-minded, self-indulgent, and seriously misguided push toward his own peculiar vision of our country and its place in a global society
— implement a better and more effective system of protecting our country from attacks by terrorists, while at the same time, building coalitions to both help do that and increase our effectiveness as global peacebuilders rather than pre-emptive attackers
— make as one of his priorities efforts to dispel the polarization among Americans that Bush has successfully instituted with his short-term, narrow-minded, and disingenuous thinking and speaking processes
Now, we have to keep in mind that Kerry, as president, would have to lead within the context of the balance of powers provided by the Congress and the Supreme Court. As a lawyer, Kerry understands the importance of those checks and balances. Something Bush doesn’t seem to understand. What that means is, Kerry might hope and plan to do all sorts of great things, but he would not be an emperor, after all, and would not make unilateral decisions.
Well, you asked me, “What were you thinking???” Now you know.
You don’t have to follow my lead, boys. Just follow my links.

From the Cheney-recommended factcheck.org
Two Bush ads full of misleading and false statements ran more than 9,000 times in 45 cities last week.
Summary
Two misleading Bush ads accusing Kerry of supporting tax increases on gasoline and middle-class parents were running heavily last week. According to the Campaign Media Analysis Group of TNS Media Intelligence, which tracks TV ads in the top 100 markets, the two Bush ads accounted for nearly half of the estimated $16 million spent by Bush and the Republican National Committee during that week alone.
Both ads repeat claims we’ve repeatedly disputed here. They both attempt to portray Kerry as eager to raise taxes on middle-income taxpayers, which Kerry has said consistently he won’t do. One ad characterizes Kerry’s votes against proposed tax cuts as votes to “raise taxes,” an outright falsehood.
Click the link below for the full article:
http://www.factcheck.org/article286m.html

The “have-lesses” of America usually have their fingers on an important national pulse that the “have’mores” don’t have to care much about.
The United Auto Workers Union magazine, “Solidarity” offers some telling facts about the effects that the Bush regime has had on the hard workers of America. These are just a few of the article titles in their current issue:
“The Rich Get Richer and the Poor Get…”
“Republicans Condem Bush”
“Things About John Kerry that George W. Bush Doesn’t Want You To Know”
“Things Bush Wants You to Forget”
There’s lots more good information here that the guys who are waging a futile war with me here don’t want to know. It’s about twenty against one (me) and I still haven’t given up. It’s the Xena in me.
Two former presidents of the UAW put in their pitch for Kerry:
[excerpt]
Why is this election so critical? Because George W. Bush has set a radical