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.

Joe Franklin, Red Stater

Question Number 5: Response to Blue Stater question: What makes you a liberal? What are the values that underlie your allegiance to your chosen form of political belief?

I agree with Ms. Falbo that government should not be something outside of us that we try to make "small," but it should never have become the "big" monster that it is today with a tax system so complicated it amounts to a subsidy for tax specialists and accountants. The monster is so big that only corporations and
special interests benefit. These special interests include education, law enforcement, military and etc. All are an extension of the government. Why should any extension of government need a lobbyist?

My work in the corporate scene was short and perhaps my understanding of corporate America is limited, but I truly believe that taxes and the cost of any government regulations are passed down to the consumer. With all the fuss over a major corporation which is now the focal point of criticism for its contracts in Iraq, I thought about literally thousands of workers it employed from Alabama to Texas. The top wages earned at this non-union company bought many homes, supported thousands of families, and brought "The American Dream" to many workers of a poor background and very humble beginnings.

The shenanigans of the CIA and Third World regimes go much further back than the 1970s. I have always remembered President Roosevelt's remark about Nicaraguan Dictator Somoza, "He may be a SOB, but he is our SOB." In dealing with Third World dictators I would imagine the rules are different and I have no problem with that approach. Neither am I condoning the CIA actions. My thoughts on the CIA and some of the elite fighting forces are that they appear to be a wild and crazy bunch, but thank God for them.

After loosing the textile industry in South Alabama in the mid-90s the former governor's administration (a Democrat) was instrumental in bringing the auto industry to this area. Many of the secondary manufacturers of this industry will require skilled workers, but are offering little more than textile wages of 15 years ago.

I can't see any connection of corporate America and partisan politics. When a candidate promises a better economy and more jobs I'm skeptical. These promises only tickle the ears of the ignorant electorate. I realize that the government can manipulate the interest rate and control the money supply, but I believe that the economy rules itself.

Perhaps our greatest division in this country is economic jealousy. I am not jealous of those with more.

I too can remember Reganonomics and "Carternomics" with its double digit interest and inflation.

As Christians, we are obligated to take care of the young, the old, the sick and the needy, but I do not know that this obligation is a responsibility of government. It certainly was not the intention of our founding fathers. I am of the opinion that entitlements are the beginning of the end for a democracy. How can our leaders with such great wealth know and understand the problems of the poor?

Entitlements are simply a means of them prostituting themselves for votes.

I can remember when my father plowed with mules, got his first tractor, our first car, cooking with wood, kerosene, and electric stoves. Telephone and television came in the late 50s. I still reside on a dirt road with little gravel which has two fiber optic cables (belonging to one of the nation's largest cable providers), buried underneath the road bed, but no service is provided to my house. Thank you, corporate America.

My siblings and I graduated college on the income of a small farm and a textile workers salary without loans or grants. I wasn't born on third base, maybe first base, and then advanced to third; but should I be forced to return to second base because of someone else's foul ball?

posted at # 5:24 PM