Wednesday, July 10, 2013

Althouse Can't Fool Me (She's Why Divorce Is So High)


O.K., one more time - with a quickness - because this is becoming tedious. Here's Ann Althouse, today, commenting on Glenn Reynolds, with all her comments still turned off on her blog:
"By writing a long post in which he accused me of being a not-getting-it — albeit "smart" — woman, he created the impression of an invitation to a back-and-forth. Now, I'm left to interpret silence.”

The ironies never cease. You, too, Ann? How weird is that? Keep digging, "smart" lady: 

OCTOBER 3, 2012 - Ann Althouse describes herself as "ONE OF THE INSTAPUNDIT BLOGGERS AND GUEST-BLOGGERS,..." 

July 10, 2013 - Ann Althouse writes the "perception that I'm Glenn's 'usual fellow traveller' is off, but not uncommon. I think this distorted impression has partly come from the comments section,..." 


That's right - we even did all her typing for her. Everything's the comment section's fault now - not because we collectively told her she was full of shit - but because it "had become dominated by right-wing voices" and, it's since come out, we now know everyone but liberals scare her:
"I am struck -- you may think it is absurd for me to be suddenly struck by this -- but I am struck by how deeply and seriously libertarians and conservatives believe in their ideas. I'm used to the way lefties and liberals take themselves seriously and how deeply they believe. Me, I find true believers strange and -- if they have power -- frightening. And my first reaction is to doubt that they really do truly believe. 
One of the reasons 9/11 had such a big impact on me is that it was such a profound demonstration of the fact that these people are serious. They really believe."

Unlike her "conservative" spouse, Meade.


Imagine that. Remember when Ann's "second" husband, Meade, got all NewAge and was asking me what I was afraid of? He was truly asking the wrong person if he's claiming to be a conservative. Clearly, his "second" wife's delusion carries on, just as strong as his:
"If anyone wants to argue with me, they can open up their own blog, write their comment there, link to me, and send me the link. I'll interact with them if they write well and say something interesting and not the same old thing that bogged down my comments section."

She wants to "argue". And the woman who can't keep her story straight - for even a single post - is going to judge if others can "write well"? Incredible. Isn't that The New York Times' policy? Stories don't have to be true but written with a flourish? Ann LOVES them!


What a strange, and extreme, case of denial in a public setting. Including my blog, I can count at least three others (just off the top of my head) covering this kerfuffle - in detail - and Ann's saying nothing in reply. Even as evidence of her latest mental incapacitation, being part of a long-term problem, is becoming clear to all. 


Why not? Because we don't equal the traffic and attention she desires. 


We're just going to tell her she's nuts and needs help. 


And - due to this latest episode of self-sabotage - she's probably done as a blogger.


Which, if you ask me, is just the kind of news Ann ain't gonna find very "interesting"....