The pundits and talking babblers have talked adnauseum about class warfare in the days leading up to and after the election.  Obama did all he could to ignite a class war with his tax the rich and give to the poor policies.  In the end it became the rallying cry for so many and the final decision point for others.  But I am not sure there is a class war at least as these learned journalists and politicians have stated.

I did a lot of studying of the electoral map in the last day or so.  It is obvious there is a "class" war in these Sort of United States when you look at the picture but it is not about low - middle -high income brackets at all.  It is about urban and rural.  By looking at the color map by county on CNN.com one could define where every large urban population AND university town exists throughout the country simply by looking at who voted democrat majority (colored blue on the map) and who did not (repubs). 

In straight up land mass, our country is a bright red republican majority. But where it is population dense it is pure democrat.  How would you like to be a farmer living in rural Illinois getting dominated by the Chicago democrat machine, or Indiana (Gary and Indy), Ohio (Cleveland, Columbus, Athens and Cincy).  You can look at any state and you will easily see where the cities are.  Texas is totally red except for the cities.

So why the difference?  I would suspect it has something to do with birds of a feather flocking together.  But it is deeper than saying poor people or minorities are attracked to cities.  I am sure there are poor folks that live in Nebraska and Texas who vote republican.  What is it that fundamentally divides us along these urban and rural lines?  Welfare is offered in every state and every county.  West Virginia is proof of that and they voted republican - no large cities either, though. ( I lived there for a while so that is not a dig, just an observation.) 

So the issue is what is the fundamental difference between living in a city and not?  Are country folks too proud to ask for a hand out?  Are city folks too easily conditioned not to?  Is it because the cost of living in the country is less?  If so, then why don't the have nots leave the city, come breathe the fresh air and raise their kids outside the failing schools of the cities.  And leave the crime behind when you turn your backs on the city.  Every city has higher taxes than the country too, so you automatically get a break by leaving.

Every politician promises more money for cops, more money for schools, and more money for the indigent.  Why don't we help them leave the cities so they can understand the values of the folks that live in the country?  That would be great for the cities and their failing budgets when they shed the burden of the untaxed resident.

I know what you city folks are saying.  "Now hold on just a darned minute, there is no way I am leaving the greatest city on earth (fill in your own city) to go live with back woods folks in the boring old country."  Well it probably was shorter than that and contained actual profanity but you get the point.  But tell me what is so great about living in a city.  Pro-sports, yeah got that.  A myriad of entertainment, ok sure.  Great restaurants, got it.  Culture sure.   Well what about grid-lock, crime, noise, pollution, crowding, dangerous failing schools - are those just the price to pay for good seats at the game?  Oh, my tv picks up all those games and shows, and I do know how to cook pretty well, too.

Nope there is no class war in this country.   It is urban - rural warfare.  And somewhere in there is the key to solving our nations problems.  For those who have read my posts you know where I stand on increasing taxes (especially my own), imagine what it is like for you city folks (you are the majority) to pass tax increases on the country folks (minority) to spend on your folks in the cities.  Now I realize there are Repubs and Demos in every part of the country, I am generalizing here, but can you see where the animosity might come from that leads to this "urban" class war?  To Mr. Obama, if you want to reach out to America, you will have to leave the cities to do so.

Seems obvious to me. 

(BTW- I do live in Cincinnati! but I have lived in the country most of my life and I see the best of both worlds.)

No not the second coming of George W. Bush.  Your W-2 is the most important thing you need to think about before you pull the lever, punch chad, pencil the circle, or whatever device your board of elections might throw at you.  This election is about one thing boys and girls and Ruth.   And that is your taxes.  If you elect Obama and his promises become law all you folks with jobs will pay more in taxes.  All you folks without jobs will get more handouts.  If you elect McCain and his promises become law all you folks will pay the same or less in taxes.

It really is that simple.  Tax and spend or lower taxes and cutback.  What do you do when you run short of cash?  Do you cutback or maybe you get an extra or different job.  Or do you charge away your future?  Most of us cut back, some of us charge away.  Doesn't it make more sense to cut back the wasteful spending and give it back to the consumer to spend as they choose?  You know - freedom to decide how your nickels are spent.  Just my opinion.

But I will ask each of you to take out your W-2 form at the end of 2009 and compare it to this year's W-2.  I will be interested to find out how each of us does in Obamanomics.

For those who don't know what a W-2 form is go back to eating cheese puffs and surfing the net, the treasury will stop by soon to deliver your windfall entitlements.