Glen Dean has stirred somethin' up in a post about THE MOVIE "The Pursuit of Happyness" at MusicCityBloggers.
Sounding like Hollywood abstainers they surely criticize on the Right, folks from the Left are lambasting THE MOVIE (and the movie's inspiration) for not being documentaryish or for daring to present an inspiring story that doesn't jibe with their world view. Welcome to the anti Oscar party.
It shouldn't be a surprise that I disagree with various of their (Liberals') presuppositions about the causes of, or remedies for, poverty . . . so no big news there. But it is interesting to see the dustup related to my response to SouthernBeale's gauntlet-throwing assertion (here) that anyone who has spent even an hour tutoring kids who live in the project would agree with her ideas on the subject.
I said in response:
SB, I have spent one hour tutoring kids in the project . . . what’s your answer for the problems they face? The “War on Poverty”? How’s that working out for ya?Perhaps I should have used italics around the word "have" or provided a link to my good deed doing certificate in my response, but neither was necessary to demonstrate that SB's argument was fallacious. "Sarcastro" and "dolphin" pounced on their perception that Ned has only spent one hour tutoring inner city kids and has some nerve bragging about it. Well, they were wrong on both counts, but it reminded me of something that bothers me whenever I see it.
Such a "debate" is a head-shakingly petty and immature type of johnson-comparing contest about charity or compassion. Too many outspoken Libs seem to think that they've got the market cornered on charity or compassion, and they point to vicarious, often NIMBYish (gov't) policy positions (or to online, unverifiable, anonymous, self-aggrandizing declarations) as evidence of moral superiority or authority. I'm sure there are examples of the same done by Conservatives (go dig 'em up and feel free to post/comment about 'em). It's annoying regardless.
That's all . . . back to your regularly scheduled programming.
Update: It's unrelenting over at MCB.
"Ned seems like he has something to prove."
Actually, that is exactly opposite of what is happening.
"Ned is a hypocrite because he is always talking about religion."
Actually, no. Feel free to demonstrate otherwise, but I don't feel defensive about how "faithful" I am, and I don't use my perspective on my personal faithfulness as an attempted checkmate in discussions on issues of faith. "Back off; I'm very religious" (kind of like "Shut up; I have tutored inner city kids") is rarely a valid argument.
No comments:
Post a Comment