John said he sees two Americas. His sidekick agreed with him. Of course, his opponents attacked him for dividing the nation. But of all the rhetoric blowing out of all the political camps, you have to say Mr. Kerry nailed The Truth. Even though his motive was to spread malignant unrest for personal ambition, give the man credit. He unwittingly confirmed a reality—America is a nation of people sharply divided, more divided than at any time in the Republic’s history, including the Civil War. What? Are you nuts? Maybe. That’s not the point. Slavery and state’s rights issues drove a political wedge between the North and South. But the men in gray and blue who fought in the trenches were cut out of the same cloth. They fought over specific pragmatic principles yet shared common values. Today’s Americans are also split into two camps, but the breach between them can never be reconciled. There is no common ground. Facing that fact, we should agree to the creation of two Americas—say, the United Socialist Republic of America and the United Capitalist Republic of America. It’s a simple concept. Each State would vote to join the Republic for which it stands. Very likely, one Republic would be composed of more States than the other. Not to worry. The two Republics would not require that the country be split in half geographically. State boundaries would remain fixed, as they are today. Each Republic would be free to retain the Founding Father’s vision, or change it. With this brilliant plan, the millions of Americans (primarily Democrats) who continually press for a Socialist government can finally realize their aims and way of life under greater centralized control. The Capitalist Republic (primarily Republicans) will give up almost all authority to member States, thrilling millions who simply want government out of their lives. The plan does have a flaw — the rather massive relocation of people who would be opposed to their State’s choice. On the bright side, however, these crossover migrations could spark the economies of both Republics. This would not be hard to do. The infrastructure is already in place. Digital technology can easily transfer citizen records to their respective Republics. And off we go. Oh, there’s one other thing. The States would have to get a handle on immigration issues. We wouldn’t want one Republic to become overcrowded, now, would we?

Well, well, well. More than a few pundits have agreed with Fodder that we are a nation deeply, steeply divided. It took them long enough to figure it out. Maybe they got the message when one of the eminent spokespersons on the losing side blurted the “S” word. His anguished tirade on national media went something like this: “We’re the smartest, the brightest, the most enlightened and most creative; we produce most of the art and music; we do most of the work and we pay most of the taxes to make this country run. Something’s seriously wrong when a bunch of Bible toting, right wing fanatics let an ignorant cowboy hijack this country. We have no choice but SECESSION.” Hallelujah, brother! Now you know how the South felt in 1860. But perhaps what you don’t know is that millions of 2004 country bumpkins would gladly grant you a divorce. They would urge you to gather together all of your blue-hearted elite and establish a new United States conceived in socialism — a nation of the government, by the government and for the government. Of course, you would have to adjust for the immigration of millions of your superior followers now living in abject misery among us red-hearted rabble; and we in turn would be bound to accept the millions of Blue State morons whose ignorance would blend in very nicely with the mental deficiency of the Red States. Then again, why go to all this trouble? Secession isn’t necessary. All you have to do is take money off the political battlefield. Because, you see brethren, war is always about the money. If the Feds (and for that matter, states and cities) didn’t have your money to pass around, you wouldn’t be all that concerned whether you elected a cowboy or a gigolo or (heaven forbid) Slick Willie’s bride. Politics, like crime, is almost always about money. Whom you elect president or senator or congressman wouldn’t cause so much hate if it weren’t for the money. The abortion issue wouldn’t cause so much hate if it were a private matter. But, no, abortion rights advocates want government money — your money— camouflaged as taxes — to pay the tab. Hundreds of special interests, including small farmers and private corporations, want your money. Millions of American citizens want your money. Money they haven’t earned. They always vote for the politicians that give them your money. A seat in Congress is worth millions. A Federal job is cradle to the grave benefits. Isn’t this a good time to start over? Whether your loyalty is blue or red, just agree to keep your own money. Then we can all live together peacefully. Otherwise, now indeed may be a good time for the nation’s blue ruling class to secede under a new, blue banner. The rest of us — the dull-witted and miserly — will just have to make out somehow. Somehow.

People who despise G.W. Bush sneeringly refer to him as a “cowboy.” Actually, the term fits him and T. Blair quite nicely, although it’s hard to imagine the Brit in a roundup scene of “Lonesome Dove.” But G.W. could pull it off easily. He hath that lean look, the thin-lipped smirk and that “aw shucks, ma’am” manner. Four letter words suit him just fine…Mr. Dillon. Only two famous cowboys could have matched G.W. for simple talk. Gary Cooper and Clint Eastwood. But the three have more in common—much more. As Marshal Will Kane in “High Noon,” Cooper single-handedly faced down a bunch of killer outlaws as the townspeople, cowards every one, hid behind shuttered windows. They half-wanted Kane to fail to assuage their massive guilt. In “High Plains Drifter,” The Stranger, aka Clint, rides into the miserable town of Lago and (for a price) saves the place from evil thugs. The tale is as old as time. Go to any schoolyard at recess and you’ll find the resident bully who never stops abusing the weak until somebody takes him down. Dirty Harry knew the score. So did Charles Bronson who looked evil in the eye and saw it for what it was. Evidently, Hollywood doesn’t believe in the rightness of its own scripts. It would rather stand alongside the pacifists, the PC crowd and the CLU to protect a beast from “moralists” like G.W. Oh, well, nobody likes a do-gooder from Texas. And who really cares if a dictator butchers a couple of million people. It’s his country. If the Iraqi people don’t care enough to rise up, maybe they deserve to be thrown into plastic shredders, gassed and tortured. Cutting out tongues and hanging up menustrating women by their feet is a bit extreme, but it was, after all, during peacetime. As long as death and mutilation don’t occur during war, they don’t seem to have the same appeal. At least, it’s hard to recall how many of our idealistic citizens jammed the streets of New York, Washington and San Francisco to protest minor episodes like acid baths and random beheadings. Ethnic cleansing and genocide does keep the world population in check. Yes indeed. In the final analysis, who is the U.S. to pass judgment anyway—a country that practiced slavery at its birth and even now allows a private golf club to discriminate against women. For shame. We have a lot to learn. Maybe the protestors are trying to tell us we actually deserved 9-11. Perhaps they believe if we turn the other cheek, the bad people will go away. Instead of resorting to violence, God forbid, they will want former Presidents Carter and Clinton to travel the world to apologize for America’s bullying excesses and to search for diplomatic compromises. Meanwhile, others—many others—would rather put their lives, and the world’s fate, in the hands of a cowboy.