Red State / Blue State | An election season blog

In the December 2001 edition of the Atlantic, David Brooks wrote an essay titled "One Nation, Slightly Divisible," in which he suggested that America is divided largely into two political cultures, one "red" and one "blue." His idea is based on those electoral maps in 2000 that colored majority-Republican states in red and majority-Democratic states in blue. Brooks' witty essay pictures the red-state voter as trending rural, a salt-of-the-earth type, concerned with individual liberty and family values, whereas the "blue" voter trends urban, more of a book-reader, a Beltway-savvy intellectual, the environmentally conscious soccer mom or dad.

Cliches? Maybe. But Brooks does have his finger on two very strong currents in the American votership. It's not that Pennsylvania is a "blue state" or Alabama is a "red state." It's that our two political cultures don't talk to each other much, or even know much about each other. To bridge that gap, we've brought together two "red" voters - John Franklin and Cynthia Sneed - and two "blue" voters, Terri Falbo and Timothy Horner. Each week, they'll ponder and debate the issues arising in the election campaign. The hope is that they'll model an intelligent discussion, a great big conference room where red and blue sit down together.

Cynthia Sneed, Red Stater

Question Number Seven: John Kerry is telling audiences that U.S. involvement in Iraq was the wrong war at the wrong time. President Bush has continued to describe the war and subsequent occupation as a central front in the war on terrorism. Is war in Iraq connected to a war against terrorism?

President Bush has been tricked by Clinton acolytes. Democrats, knowing all along that Iraq is harmless, convinced neophyte Bush that Hussein was a serious threat. I weep when I think that our planet has been deprived of Saddam Hussein and his Renaissance sons, Mean and Meaner.

The 1997 plan is the brainchild of Susan Estrich, James Carville and Paul Begala. Prescient liberals, relying on Nancy Reagan's astrologer and pseudo-Kabbalist movie stars, divined that George W. Bush would be the Republican candidate for 2000 and that, alas, the father of the Internet (and protagonist of Love Story) would win the election only to have it stolen by Supreme Court justices appointed by Republicans.

The actors: John Kerry, President Clinton, Al Gore, Sandy Berger and Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton. The proof is below. I am expecting a call from Michael Moore any day!

Nov. 12, 1997: "Where's the backbone of Russia? Where's the backbone of France? Where are they in expressing their condemnation of [international terrorism]? But in a sense, they're now climbing into a box, and they will have enormous difficulty not following up on this if there is not compliance by Iraq." - John Kerry on MSNBC's Crossfire

Feb. 23, 1998: "Saddam . . . is a threat to the stability of the Middle East. It is a threat with respect to the potential of terrorist activities on a global basis. It is a threat even to regions near but not exactly in the Middle East." - John Kerry

Oct. 9, 1998: "We urge you . . . . to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." - Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others

Oct. 10, 1998: "We know from our largely unsuccessful attempts to enlist the cooperation of other nations, especially industrialized trading nations, in efforts to impose and enforce somewhat more ambitious standards on nations such as Iran, China, Burma and Syria, that the willingness of most other nations - including a number who are joined in the sanctions to isolate Iraq." (Translation: The French, Germans, Russians and Chinese ain't never going to help us). - John Kerry, Senate floor speech

Jan. 23, 2003: "Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ... " - John Kerry

Sept. 8, 2004: " 'The only legitimate reason was the weapons of mass destruction question,' he explained yesterday. 'But after you have built the international coalition, exhausted the [United Nations] inspections and you have no other choice.' " - John Kerry (Is this the same international coalition he said on Oct. 10, 1998 could not be built?).

Sept. 1, 2004: "We were misled into the war by President Bush." - John Kerry (Compare this with his statement on MSNBC's Hardball with Chris Matthews from Oct. 13, 2003: "So did I get misled? No, I didn't get misled.")

Enter President Clinton:

Feb. 4, 1998: "One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line." - President Bill Clinton

Feb. 17, 1998: "If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program." - President Bill Clinton

Enter Sandy Berger, national security adviser for President Clinton:

Feb.18, 1998: "He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has 10 times since 1983."

Here comes Al Gore:

Sept. 23, 2002: "We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."

And Sen. Hilary Rodham CLinton (D., N.Y.), who cannot be president since she was not in the Vietnam war:

Oct. 10, 2002: "In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock. . . . He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al-Qaeda members ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."

So, is the Iraq war connected to the global war on terror? Given the above statements by Democrats, obviously so. Now, doesn't everyone feel better?

posted at # 2:16 PM