Mugged by reality?

"Ah! Li'l Greenie looks so stark over there in the muddy lot," writes a heartbroken Ann Althouse as she says goodbye to "The Little Car that Could" and gets behind the wheel of Silvio, the sleek, silver Audi TT Coupe (the 6-speed Quattro) that will take her where she's going from now on.

"I don't know if you've noticed, but I'm a political moderate. More than any ideology, I care about rational discourse," writes Ann Althouse:

In the year that I've been blogging, I've taken a lot of different positions, some left and some right. What I've noticed, over and over, is that the bloggers on the right link to you when they agree and ignore the disagreements, and the bloggers on the left link only for the things they disagree with, to denounce you with short posts saying you're evil/stupid/crazy, and don't even seem to notice all the times you've written posts that take their side. Why is this happening? I find it terribly, terribly sad.

We more than admire and respect this learned, thoughtful woman, whose recent posts about the air-bag-cushioned loss of her "L'il Greenie" VW -- who "gave his life for us" -- are sheer poetry.  Not to mention the grace of her writing and her artist's eye for heartstopping beauty in unexpected places like "a scrambled corner of my office desk." But "why is this happening?" caught us up short. It has been ever thus, at least in our experience.

Those of the right, who believe government ought to get out of the way and provide incentives for citizens to become proud, contributing members of society vs. those of the left, who know what's best for us and are into squeezing the money out of the productive citizens' pockets to perpetuate dependency -- humiliation, at bottom -- for the "little people." As for leftists' trashing of a lovely human being like Ann because she writes something they disagree with, we suspect that has to do with the left's current plight of waking up to find themselves on the wrong side of history.

Update:  Ann responds that she is "trying to reach out to the left and say: Behave better! Engage me! But I read [Sissy] as telling me that's hopeless."  Sounds about right.

Update II:  One year later, Ann's post is still alive and well and the talk of the blogosphere.

Comments

[Teresa]

You would think that with a constantly changing world, conservative leaning people would be the most unhappy people around. The picture portrayed so often is that of people who want to stick to the "old ways", mostly "bad ways".

Yet, most conservative type people I know are not that way at all. If they see a problem they want to devise a way to fix it in the most expedient manner possible with the least amount of cost. If they are able to approach this goal or even articulate a solution or find someone who has a solution, they are happy.

OTOH - most liberals simply want to whine about what's wrong. You will notice there is NEVER a solution offered. The mantra is "that's bad" or "don't do that" or "you're bad for doing that". At no time do they say... "you should do this to make it better" unless it involves having the government come solve the problem. They never solve their own problems - they always want "the government" (like the benevolent parent) to do it for them.

No wonder they end up being so negative in all aspects of life. How can you ever feel good about yourself if you never try to accomplish anything on your own? BTW - I love reading Ann's blog *grin*

[Tuck]

One of the many enjoyable parts of Sisu is comments by the ever faithful Teresa.

[Teresa]

LOL - thank you Tuck... I can't decide if I'm just blathering, or have just way too many words trying to get out of my head. *grin*

[ksec]

Its crazy. These right wingers who believe in worshipping the rich policies, think those of us who dont are weird.

Its about economics . What you believe in. I believe in equality for all, these types dont. They think corporations moving to China , along with our middle class, is good for America. I dont. They think bankrupting the US by cutting taxes for the richest one per cent is good, I dont. They believe corporate powers should exceed mine, I dont. If that makes me hard to understand, then you (greenie) got problems.

[Acme]

"I believe in equality for all." That is the left position. "I believe in equal opportunity for all." The right position. It is at least possible to achieve equal opportunity. Not so equality for all. It is no mystery that one side, the practical side, is more willing to engage than the other.

[J Fielek]

"I believe in equality for all." -- That is a phrase subject to significant interpertation.

Do you mean equality of results (i.e. student bodies that are "representative" of the "community" -- scare-quoted because those are also loaded words), or do you mean equality of opportunity (i.e. where the admissions to the school are based upon "unbiased" criteria)?

[Kevin Baker]

Somebody else believed in "Equality for all." His name was Procrustes, and he had this bed...

[R C Dean]

They think corporations moving to China , along with our middle class, is good for America.

There are lots of protectionist conservatives. They are just as wrong as the anti-corporate leftists. It is good for everyone, in America and abroad, for as many people as possible to participate in the global economy as fully as possible. This means that things the Chinese can do cheaper than us should be done in China, so we can (a) reap the benefits of lower prices and (b) free up our labor and capital for higher value applications.

They think bankrupting the US by cutting taxes for the richest one per cent is good.

Deficits happen because spending is out of control, not because of tax cuts. The proof of this is in the fact that tax revenues are up, even after the cuts, just not as much as spending. Anyone truly concerned with deficits would focus on spending.

They believe corporate powers should exceed mine.

I have no idea what this is supposed to mean. I personally don't care about corporate "power" nearly as much as I do about government power. I can choose not to have anything to do with a corporation. The government, not so much.

[fasteddie]

Those of the right, who believe government ought get out of the way and provide incentives for citizens to become proud, contributing members of society vs. those of the left, who know what's best for us and are into squeezing the money out of the productive citizens' pockets to perpetuate dependency -- humiliation, at bottom -- for the "little people."

So are you calling for an immediate hike in the minimum wage, or are you just another hypocrite? You SAY that you are for providing incentives for the poor to become contibuting members of society, but you do NOT call for anything that would make it happen.

The right wing is anti-education (unless there is a bible involved), Anti Univeral health care, and anti minimum wage hike.

Please name the ways that a person currently making minumum wage, with a nagging chronic illness, no insurance, and a GED can become a "productive" member of society.

It's unfortunate that you compassion doesn't reach as far as your wallet.

It's always hard to tell whether Republicans are just greedy bastards that hate poor people, or if they're just racists. The whole "Christian" part is also just so much bullS**t. The utter greed and lack of compassion of the Republican party is so much the complete opposite of real christian teaching it is just saddening.

Universal Health Care is not "dependency". Raising the Minimum Wage is not "dependency" . Educating people to have useful job skills is not "dependency".

You have fooled yourself into thinking that you are somehow "noble" to NOT help the others around you. You are not noble. You are greedy.

[Acme]

Almost 40% of my income is redistributed. Thats about the limit of my compassion.

[DR]

> Almost 40% of my income is redistributed. Thats about the limit of my compassion.

Yeah, that's really it. If govt cant do what it's supposed to on 40% of my income, tough. If liberals want to get more done, they should make sure govt is efficiently run, not try to grab more and more tax $.