posted as comment on Hairshirt

I enjoy your blog very much and you seem like an astute fellow so I have a couple questions for you.

The conventional wisdom suggests that most Americans believe John Kerry beats George Bush on every issue except national security. But Kerry enjoys tremendous support in both New York City and Washington D.C. Is it possible that voters in the two cities that were attacked on September 11, 2001 have not examined the issue of national security as closely as the rest of the country? Isn’t it more likely that they have examined the issue of national security more closely than anyone else and come to different conclusions? I think your party’s campaign ought to highlight this.

As the election approaches, I understand that residents of Manhattan and D.C. live under an orange security alert as opposed to yellow in the most parts of the U.S. If these citizens are satisfied with or even prefer John Kerry’s national security credentials, shouldn’t the Kerry campaign be making that point to the rest of America?

I recognize that regional antipathies exist in the United States and that Republicans are more prone to exploit them but wouldn’t Americans in the South or the Midwest respect the assessment of the people who A. suffered most from the terrorist attacks and B. continue to live under a greater threat of future terrorist activity?

Or is the oft-repeated sentiment that George Bush makes America safer just code for something more sinister?

What say you, Joe?