It’s been said this country is more divided now than ever in its short history, at least since the Civil War. That war, which tore families apart, was fought less about slavery, more about keeping the Union together.

The reason I know the nation is severely divided now is that our family is more divided than ever. Traditionally, we’ve agreed to disagree about political parties and their policies. Our political discourse has always been lively, civil, respectful and sometimes enlightening. A couple of us have actually changed party affiliations, sometimes more than once (never afraid to flip-flop). But no one, even in the heat of argument, has ever been called stupid, maybe uninformed, but never stupid. And none of us has ever had their patriotism questioned.

This year is different. We haven’t yet had our holiday gatherings, where much of this debate usually occurs, but we’ve had many heated one-on-one discussions about the direction our national leaders are taking us. Few of us would consider each other or ourselves as single-issue voters. We passed that point a long time ago. The point where support of one candidate or party hung on one wedge issue: abortion, immoral behavior in the White House, the president’s religion, civil rights, isolationism, taxation and, sometimes, war.

I remember all of us voting for Ronald Reagan, not because of his harebrained trickle-down economics, but because he was believed to be strong enough to keep us out of war. Nuclear war was unthinkable, but a serious threat. He didn’t let us down on that, turning our biggest enemy into an ally through diplomacy. He could hang tough on a contentious issue but could talk his way out of a deadly confrontation. Jack Kennedy did the same when Russian-armed Cuban missiles were aimed at Florida and the entire defense establishment was pushing him to attack. Patience and diplomacy, backed up by a naval blockade, won the day and averted the unthinkable war. One Republican, one Democrat, both great leaders and statesmen. We never argued about that.

Now, thanks to Karl Rove’s manipulation of the issues, we are seeing this campaign as a battleground. Anyone who doesn’t support the president and the military efforts to keep us at war is unpatriotic, a traitor. These charges have not been leveled at family yet, but we know who believes it and who doesn’t. Rove, in his inarguably brilliant strategy, has made it okay to admit the president isn’t the sharpest tool in the box, because a large segment of the electorate operates on the same level. Who wants an “elitist intellectual” talking down to the ordinary folks who might vote for him? Rove has made it okay to vote for someone you don’t have to look up to.

According to person-in-the-street interviews, there are still lots of one-issue voters who say abortion, stem cell research, jobs, healthcare or Social Security are what attracts their vote. These folks, of course, are pandered to and lied to, or at least, misled by candidates of both parties. Inflating and deflating numbers is the tactic. What the heck, they’re just statistics. To a one-issue voter they mean nothing. I still can’t figure out why there was only one question about the environment during all three of what passed for debates, and that one was a nonspecific query of the president allowing him to lie some more about what a great steward of the land he is. What a crock. He can’t admit that he cares nothing about the environment because his religion teaches Armageddon and the Rapture and we’re all going to be dead soon anyway. Kerry missed a golden opportunity, either blindsided by the question actually being asked, or reluctant to tread on that treacherous ground.

While I and other members of my family care about all these things and have debated them in other campaigns, they seem less important now than the overriding issue of preemptive war, based on lies, its progress described in lies, its cost in lives and money and national standing throughout the world downplayed in lies. And yet this is the issue we have trouble talking about because we can’t bring ourselves to say: You’re going to vote for a pathological liar, or the puppet of pathological liars, because his challenger is an intellectual? A man who understands world history and diplomacy? An idealist rather than an ideologue, who is free to alter his position as new information comes to light and circumstances change? A candidate called a Francophile, his patriotism impugned because he can speak French? Good grief!

It amazes me that such arguments could gain credence even with Republican members of this family. A family with French relatives, for heaven’s sake. At least those of us who have actually been to France, understand a bit about the culture and attempt to speak the language are willing to consider the value of keeping France as an ally.

But with Karl Rove pulling the strings, we really may be doomed. In which case, at least one member of this family may be looking for a small house on the Normandy coast.

No, not me. I’ll stay here and fight for the environment, because even though I may go to my just reward sometime in the foreseeable future, I really can’t believe we all will.