Contrary to the best efforts of their tenacious spinmeisters to paint them as flawless candidates, both Bush and Kerry, like all men, are flawed. It’s simply not intellectually honest to defend everything either of them does at the expense and denouncement of the other. There are aspects fit for debate in both of their platforms, and it is up to each individual voter to decide which one of these candidates actually most closely represents what he or she perceives to be in the best interests of our nation.

It can be argued that George W. Bush, though very clear and resolute about his plans, sometimes sticks to principle to a fault, is destructively impulsive, and is often unwilling to cooperate with other countries in various global issues. It can also be argued that John Kerry lives and dies by polls, often places popularity—both domestically and abroad—above principle, deflects questions about his senate voting record, and repeatedly fails to actually outline his plans for anything.

But people love these candidates. And they hate these candidates. And they love and hate the people that love and hate these candidates. And neither extreme is particularly healthy for our country.

As we collectively get more apathetic, vicious and partisan, we lose something: respect for each other. These days, differences in belief are taken as personal attacks, and we fixate on winning the argument instead of winning the war. Not the one in Iraq, but a bigger war against a world where many people—including many in our own country—actively hate us