Good point, najida. It can also be argued that the blue states are "waterlocked" and are therefore "internationalist," believing they are more a part of socialist and communist foreign countries than they are a part of America. The heartland is just as "in touch" with the world as the "waterlocked" regions. It has full access to all the media. It has telephones. It has roads, rail and airports to facilitate travel just as the red zones do. It has libraries and schools that produce better results than in the big coastal cities.
So the "landlocked" disparagement really doesn't have much meaning. It's just another liberal put-down of red-staters. The most significant difference between the "landlocked" and the "waterlocked" areas is to be found in the red states' acceptance of those things that have made America great and the blue states' rejection of them.
Another thing my semi-farmer brother brought up.
All the red states grow food or livestock or both. My take is it makes us a bit more grounded in reality.