Ask Auntie Pinko
December 18, 2003

Dear Auntie Pinko,

Do you support the "Anyone but Bush" campaign? I think it is pure silliness. Why would put just anyone in the most powerful office in the country? I cannot see that sending a good message to the next generation.

What do think about political corruptness? Is it just conservatives? Is it possible for such a holy figure as a liberal to be subject to corruptness? What ever happened to helping our your neighbors, equal opportunity, working hard and earning your share? I think the politicians have successfully, in part with Hollywood, made a country that is almost 100% ignorant to anything political. I know many people with conservative ideals who, surprisingly, vote Democratic. They don't even know the difference between the two!

One last thing, gun control. What is to be done about hunting if most liberals have their way with guns? How could we solve that problem (because it is a problem?)

Thank you for your time,

Your favorite moderate-conservative,

Joe
Somerset, WI

Dear Joe,

Auntie is delighted to hear from you - I fondly remember summer vacations and "Pea Soup Days" in Somerset, WI. And you ask some lovely questions.

First, let me caution you (and others) to be careful of taking political hyperbole such as "Anyone but Bush" too literally. I doubt that (for example) Senator Zell Miller, or Mr. Al Franken (both Democrats), could gain much traction even as the only alternative to Mr. Bush. Using the slogan "Anyone but Bush" is simply a rhetorical device to communicate strong feelings. Our candidate selection process is sufficiently rigorous to ensure that candidates endorsed by a major party meet a minimum level (although sometimes very minimum indeed, as Mr. Bush has proven), of criteria for such high office.

After the eight years of enthusiastic anti-Clinton hyperbole the American electorate was subjected to, it is hardly surprising that the level of hyperbole in political discourse has elevated substantially. American politics has always had a bare-knuckle element to it (goodness, read the history of electoral campaigns in the late 19th and early 20th centuries if you want your hair curled!) and this is simply more of the same.

Our obligation is to teach all of our children the critical thinking skills and citizenship values needed to see past such rhetoric and make quality, informed decisions. There is more information available about candidates now than there has ever been, and some of it is even accurate. Our next generation(s) have the ingredients for making good choices, and a little hyperbole should not stop them from doing so.

With regard to liberals and corruption, I think this is a rhetorical question on your part. Corruption is a matter of character, not of political ideology, and liberals, conservatives, greens, libertarians, etc., are all vulnerable to it in its many forms. Liberals have never asserted anything to the contrary, nor is sanctimonious self-righteousness or "holiness" the exclusive province of any particular spot on the political spectrum (page Mr. Ashcroft).

And of course, helping your neighbors, equal opportunity, working hard and earning your share have always been fundamental pillars of Democratic Party belief, as nearly a century of labor, economic, and social legislation by Democrats illustrates. To my knowledge, nothing has happened to them, they remain as vital to Democratic ideals as ever. But this, too has been obscured by media influences like talk radio, etc. If you consider yourself a conservative, you probably haven't had much first-hand experience with real liberals, and it's easy to lose sight of the unglamorous realities in the swirl of accusations and counter-accusations.

Finally, you express your concerns about hunting being affected by gun control, and you connect this with liberals. Concern about the proliferation of guns being used for criminal violence is certainly important for many liberals, but I think your worry about hunting is unnecessary. There is no single liberal or Democratic Party line on gun control, and, in fact, a whole range of views prevails. At least one current Democratic candidate for President, in fact, has the National Rifle Association's highest possible approval rating.

I think as the national discussion on gun control continues, it is becoming clear even to individuals with the most ardent concerns for regulation that no "one size fits all" solution will ever resolve the issue. The recreational needs and safety concerns of people in (for example) Somerset are very different from those in (for example) Milwaukee or Chicago. We are probably many years away from real progress in this area, given the ratio of feeling to logic in the discussion, but I believe we are moving toward greater readiness to consider a wider range of possible solutions, and that represents some positive movement.

Enjoy the lovely Wisconsin winter, Joe, and thanks for asking Auntie Pinko!

P.S. Auntie wishes all of our Democratic Underground readers a joyful holiday season and a hopeful start for the New Year. I will be taking a couple of weeks off to bake cookies, and will return in 2004!