Pretty words
Why do all the kids in the At pack have to say things like this?
Hoffman has harnessed several shoots of energy, including anti-incumbent sentiment, conservative opposition to liberal Republicans, and the iatropic excitement that’s generated when conservative activists suddenly coalesce around a candidate.
Iatropic excitement?
October 31, 2009 2:40 pm
Posted in: Assholes, Media
141 Comments
141 Responses
calipygian - October 31, 2009 | 2:43 pm · Link
What the fuck is a “shoot of energy”?
Redshirt - October 31, 2009 | 2:47 pm · Link
This is great news… for Zombie Ronald Reagan!
But seriously, I’m hoping we’re witnessing the first tangible steps towards the destruction of the modern GOP.
dmsilev - October 31, 2009 | 2:50 pm · Link
OK, I had to look that one up.
(from here).
Are teabaggers having those 4-hour erections warned against in certain commercials and thus need to seek immediate medical attention?
-dms
Martin - October 31, 2009 | 2:51 pm · Link
Look ma! I used a big word!
dmsilev - October 31, 2009 | 2:52 pm · Link
@calipygian: It’s either a focused laser beam or what Rich Lowry emits every time he watches a rerun of the VP debate.
Given the context, I’m going to go with the starburst-related definition.
-dms
calipygian - October 31, 2009 | 2:52 pm · Link
@dmsilev: In other words, they have to see a physician.
A psychiatrist, probably.
licensed to kill time - October 31, 2009 | 2:52 pm · Link
What the hell is iatropic? My spellchecker offers me isotropic, iatrogenic, allotropic and tropical.
licensed to kill time - October 31, 2009 | 2:53 pm · Link
@dmsilev: Oh.
icedfire - October 31, 2009 | 2:54 pm · Link
@dmsilev: Priapism is hard.
Pasquinade - October 31, 2009 | 2:56 pm · Link
Using “iatropic” in a sentence:
http://www.stripcreator.com/comics/fpd/334413
valdivia - October 31, 2009 | 2:56 pm · Link
Oh my. Is this by Ambinder?
If it is, then I have nothing else to say about the use of that word…
SpotWeld - October 31, 2009 | 3:06 pm · Link
Doesn’t “harnessed several shoots of energy” sound like something a WoW geek would brag about?
Wayne - October 31, 2009 | 3:06 pm · Link
I think he meant excrement.
mellowjohn - October 31, 2009 | 3:09 pm · Link
may the wingnut reign of terror begin. who wants to be robespierrre?
shirt - October 31, 2009 | 3:10 pm · Link
An iatropic need occurs when one says “bite me” to a rabid teabagger.
Anoniminous - October 31, 2009 | 3:13 pm · Link
A relatively boring by-election just got interesting.
NY-23 has been held by a Republican for 150 years. The surprise would be if a Democrat won. On the national stage the race is a yawner. What makes it interesting is this has turned into a intra-GOP pie fight and power struggle. Scozzafava (yes, I had to copy & paste her name!) was the “establishment” candidate. Hoffman was vaulted into the race by the tea bag faction of the GOP.
Personally, I would like to see Hoffman win … just to freak the national GOP leadership and the wanna-be national leadership … thinking of Gingrich.
kid bitzer - October 31, 2009 | 3:19 pm · Link
oh fer crying.
it’s nouveau greek, and not even correctly formed.
when you join up “iatro-” with “tropic”, you get iatrotropic.
Senyordave - October 31, 2009 | 3:19 pm · Link
The scary thing is if the economy stays bad long enough some of these people might end up with power. I never realized how incredibly unprincipled Armey and his cohorts are. And the amazing thing is he doesn’t even try to hide it.
chrome agnomen - October 31, 2009 | 3:20 pm · Link
no one could argue with the right’s need to seek a physician. especially since ‘heal thyself’ is clearly out.
Poopyman - October 31, 2009 | 3:21 pm · Link
According to Crooks and Liars and Firedog Lake, Scozzafava is OUT! of the race!
liberal - October 31, 2009 | 3:23 pm · Link
@Senyordave:
Yeppers. If things stay bad, seems pretty likely that the country would turn to the right, not the left.
Chuck Butcher - October 31, 2009 | 3:25 pm · Link
Considering that this is an election to replace an R in the House which has an essentially meaningless R minority this thing shouldn’t matter to anyone outside NY23. That it does speaks volumes to how it is going.
If Scozzafava’s withdrawal doesn’t throw this to Hoffman it should plant political red flags. (even considering it is NY) DougJ’s post about everything is good for them could easily mean that they won’t learn anything since it looks as though the “leadership” of this fringe actually believes it.
Poopyman - October 31, 2009 | 3:26 pm · Link
OK, OK, late to the party. That’s what I get for spending the morning stacking firewood. Now I gotta go carve a punkin before the little buggers start showing up at the door in a coupla hours.
As you were.
smiley - October 31, 2009 | 3:26 pm · Link
I use the term iatrogenic in one of my lectures (a physician-caused disorder) about dissociative identity disorder (multiple personality). It was suspected that the famous case of Sybil was caused by here therapist by suggesting to her that she view her moods as separate personalities. She ran with it. Did you know that DID is largely unique to English-speaking countries?
danimal - October 31, 2009 | 3:27 pm · Link
I’m rooting for a slim Dem win over Hoffman after ACORN volunteers swamp every village in New York scouring for votes. Scozzafava seems to be a decent person, and may even be the most liberal in the race, but if she wins, the GOP moderates may falsely believe they have a chance to restore sanity to the Republican party. If Hoffman comes close, the wingnuts redouble on the crazy, the moderates slink away from the GOP and Nancy P has another pawn on the chessboard.
JenJen - October 31, 2009 | 3:27 pm · Link
I watched a really terrific documentary this morning called “Schmatta: Rags to Riches to Rags” about the history of the New York Garment District. Well, it was about the Garment District, but really, it was about all of us, and how completely fucked we are as a country.
It was absolutely fascinating, but entirely depressing. I am not feeling much iatropic excitement today.
smiley - October 31, 2009 | 3:28 pm · Link
@smiley: I meant to add that I’ve never seen iatropic and it’s not in the on-line dictionary that I use.
danimal - October 31, 2009 | 3:28 pm · Link
Oh damn, she’s out??? Nevermind.
Ambergris - October 31, 2009 | 3:29 pm · Link
And it was Obama who caused this race by nominating John McHugh…. I dont think that he knew something like this would happen, but Fortuna likes him.
inkadu - October 31, 2009 | 3:29 pm · Link
@AJ: Here’s a picture of Olympia Snowe with a french flag…
http://www.powerlineblog.com/a.....003027.php
This is the funniest thing I’ve seen today.
The teabagger rebellion stuff just makes me nervous.
Anoniminous - October 31, 2009 | 3:31 pm · Link
“iatropic” is kinda fun to say as one shuffles around the room while someone else makes choo-choo noises.
iatropic, iatropic
(choo! choo!)
iatropic, iatropic
(choo! choo!)
iatropic, iatropic
(choo! choo!)
iatropic, iatropic
(choo! choo!)
iatropic, iatropic
(choo! choo!)
bayville - October 31, 2009 | 3:34 pm · Link
Breaking… Gingrich endorses Doug Goffman in NY-23 race.
Ambergris - October 31, 2009 | 3:35 pm · Link
@Anoniminous:
@Senyordave:
Yes, true. I consider Newt Gingrich to be at that exact delicate place between electoral politics and think-tank world. Big industry tells him what to do and he converts it into electoral strategies. It seems that his puppet masters have created a monster they cannot control. Beck, Palin, Malkin, Free Republic, RedState, Limbaugh… these people don’t have the necessary disclipline. Many of them need to outcrazy each other to stay in the news.
bayville - October 31, 2009 | 3:36 pm · Link
Breaking…Gingrich endorses Doug Goffman in NY - 23.
JenJen - October 31, 2009 | 3:37 pm · Link
@inkadu: That’s pretty awesome! And what the hell is the Club for Growth going after Senator Voinovich for? He’s not running for reelection in 2010, and the GOP candidate, former congressman and trade rep Rob Portman, is a hand-picked Bushie. Are they trying to teabag Portman out of the race, too?
Anoniminous - October 31, 2009 | 4:01 pm · Link
@Ambergris:
Turns-out I was wrong.
Gingrich endorsed Hoffman a couple of hours ago.
Been involved in politics a long time and I’ve never seen such a cluster-$%&! in my life.
General Winfield Stuck - October 31, 2009 | 4:04 pm · Link
@calipygian:
Larval Starbursts
Svensker - October 31, 2009 | 4:05 pm · Link
Further down on the google page, it says “iatropic” is “doctor-caused illness.”
So what the heck does the noid mean by “iatropic excitement” in the race—physicians are out there causing disease to Hoffman?
inkadu - October 31, 2009 | 4:15 pm · Link
@JenJen: And I wish I could comment on your analysis, but I know almost nothing about the situation over there. I do, however, know the Club for Growth doesn’t care. They are the original Tea Baggers in their desire to energetically knee cap the impure. It’s why they call it a club.
@Anoniminous: What you said was technically nonsense, but collectively true.
Newt first takes his orders from corporate paymasters, but he needs to teabag the occasional populist nut in order to maintain his influence. Industry isn’t going to giving coin to someone who has lost credibility among the flock.
inkadu - October 31, 2009 | 4:16 pm · Link
Well congratufuckinglations everyone. This thread is now the second hit on a google search for iatropic.
Deborah - October 31, 2009 | 4:17 pm · Link
Balloon Juice is now the 3rd and 4th hits on “iatropic” for google search, with the medical dictionary in spots 1 and 2.
Xenos - October 31, 2009 | 4:17 pm · Link
Is it like ‘heliotropic’, but involves leaning and growing towards doctors, who are the source of the energetic rays or something?
Or is it an archaic poetic meter (eg. iatropic hexameter), used by the ancient poet-physicians in the cult of Asklepios?
bayville - October 31, 2009 | 4:19 pm · Link
Up until a couple of minutes ago, Gingrich actually first endorsed “Doug Goffman” before finally switching to Doug Goffman.
http://www.conservativeblogwatch.com/
licensed to kill time - October 31, 2009 | 4:19 pm · Link
I’m still trying to parse out what the heck it means. Conservative activists coalescing around candidates = “Is there a doctor in the house? This patient needs some larval starbursts – stat!”
inkadu - October 31, 2009 | 4:20 pm · Link
@smiley: Did you know that DID is largely unique to English-speaking countries?
I heard it was caused by iatropic vaccines.
Egypt Steve - October 31, 2009 | 4:20 pm · Link
You say “Latropic excitement,” I say “Laptopic excrement.”
Hann1bal - October 31, 2009 | 4:24 pm · Link
I’d just like to note that BJ (this exact page, specifically) is currently #2 on Teh Googlez for “iatropic”, with the only site higher on the list being a dictionary definition of it. I’m trying to think of a more obscure word, and I’m failing. That’s it for today’s edition of “Why the Atlantic is Way Too
PretentiousFull of Shit”....
When I took a second look at it, they didn’t even use it in the right way. I’m forced to change the Atlantic’s status to “Full of Shit”. So, what, are the con-cons having to see the doctor because they’re so excited about Hoffman?
What the frack, Ambinder?
Egypt Steve - October 31, 2009 | 4:24 pm · Link
Aw, hell, now I see that was iatropic with a capital I, not Latropic with a lower-case l. Fucked again by sans-serif type.
geg6 - October 31, 2009 | 4:24 pm · Link
I am simply flabbergasted by this. I don’t know that I’ve ever seen the like in all my 50 (almost +1) years. Young as I was, I paid attention to politics (no choice in my house; it was at the dinner table every night) and even the Goldwater disaster in ‘64 and the Dem annus horribilis of ‘68 didn’t create this sort of insanity in the losing party. Even the fucking humiliation of Nixon’s resignation didn’t create the sort of atmosphere that ‘08 created in the GOP. I thought that “through the looking glass” feeling I had from 2000 until 2008 would dissipate, but it only has gotten worse. I honestly don’t know what to think, which will shock anyone who knows me as I am known to be someone who never has trouble formulating an opinion on politics (yes, I’m nicely saying I can be a bit of a blowhard ;-)). Other than during the secession battles pre-Civil War, can anyone come up with a parallel historical instance of such a party breakdown? I’m trying, but I can’t.
MikeJ - October 31, 2009 | 4:24 pm · Link
If I only had a plot I’d make sure I used “Iatropic” in NaNoWriMo.
Martin - October 31, 2009 | 4:25 pm · Link
They’re harnessing the excitement of going to the doctor. See, not only is it an apology for GOP infighting, but also an affirmation for the awesomeness of our current health care system, all wrapped up into one sentence.
WereBear - October 31, 2009 | 4:25 pm · Link
It’s a huge district, all right, but you have to remember it includes the six million acre Adirondack Park, which has more squirrels than people.
In the park, you tend to have a mix of two extremes: the “granola munchers” who are reliable progressives, and the wingnuts, who put “Vote Pro-Life” signs on their lawn.
Not a lot of middle ground.
L. Ron Obama - October 31, 2009 | 4:25 pm · Link
@Ambergris:
And I consider Newt Gingrich to be that delicate place between the pig’s tail and the anus.
WereBear - October 31, 2009 | 4:26 pm · Link
Also.
The fact that Hoffman’s ads make him look like something out of a low-budget zombie movie gives me pause…
General Winfield Stuck - October 31, 2009 | 4:27 pm · Link
@geg6:
Well, I think the TR ideologica battles and the Bull Moose party era might qualify as similar.
geg6 - October 31, 2009 | 4:32 pm · Link
GWS @53: Really? It’s not time period I ever studied in depth, but was it as off the rails as this seems to be? My cursory knowledge (mainly through Gore Vidal novels and college US history survey gen eds) of it didn’t characterize it that way. I thought it was the Dems who were nuts back then with “cross of gold” stuff.
General Winfield Stuck - October 31, 2009 | 4:37 pm · Link
@geg6:
I’m not a big student of the period, but the basic formula of a two winged GOP has always been there, one very conservative on all things, specially in it’s despising government, and a more liberal progressive wing, which was TR, and maybe Mrs. Scozzafava and dare I say our esteemed blog host amongst others.
geg6 - October 31, 2009 | 4:38 pm · Link
GWS @53: To further that thought, I have a better background in Russian/Soviet history and this seems a lot closer to the Stalinist/Trotskyite battles. I know someone has already made that point, but it feels at least somewhat true, if less violent (so far). I just can’t figure out a post-19th C American parallel.
bago - October 31, 2009 | 4:39 pm · Link
@icedfire: That was a rager.
General Winfield Stuck - October 31, 2009 | 4:40 pm · Link
And also, the overall party makeup of dem and repub, like you say, was different than now, but the bifurcated conservative or right sided ideology remains with us in albeit a different mix.
inkadu - October 31, 2009 | 4:40 pm · Link
@geg6: I’m not a historian, but I’m not really seeing historic turmoil here… One representative is hardly a rebellion.
But it is bizzare. It’s partly a lot of things… hard to tell cause and effect but… I’d lay this at the feet of Bush, who hollowed out the party with his radicalism and his top-down, no-criticism governance style (which, lets face it, is already part of the authoritarian scheme).
Bush got to be president at first by combining the corporate cronies / old guard with the religious/cultural base. He ran as an unreconstructed republican—southern culture warrior for the rich. That squeezed out a big chunk of moderates which may have come over to Republicans during Regan’s day. Since elections are won on such narrow margins, losing the moderates was enough to wreck the party; and without the moderates, the economically powerful did not have the bodies to keep the wingnuts in check…
Another question is why Bush wasn’t kicked out of office sooner… If he had lost a second term, he might not have hollowed out the Republican party the way he did.
We can blame the Democrats tepid selection of Kerry, but I think a large part of the blame goes to the corporate media which kept up the front just long enough for the fire to gut the house.
inkadu - October 31, 2009 | 4:41 pm · Link
@geg6: I’m not a historian, but I’m not really seeing historic turmoil here… One representative is hardly a rebellion.
But it is bizzare. It’s partly a lot of things… hard to tell cause and effect but… I’d lay this at the feet of Bush, who hollowed out the party with his radicalism and his top-down, no-criticism governance style (which, lets face it, is already part of the authoritarian scheme).
Bush got to be president at first by combining the corporate cronies / old guard with the religious/cultural base. He ran as an unreconstructed republican—southern culture warrior for the rich. That squeezed out a big chunk of moderates which may have come over to Republicans during Regan’s day. Since elections are won on such narrow margins, losing the moderates was enough to wreck the party; and without the moderates, the economically powerful did not have the bodies to keep the wingnuts in check…
Another question is why Bush wasn’t kicked out of office sooner… If he had lost a second term, he might not have hollowed out the Republican party the way he did.
We can blame the Democrats tepid selection of Kerry, but I think a large part of the blame goes to the corporate media which kept up the front just long enough for the fire to gut the house…
inkadu - October 31, 2009 | 4:42 pm · Link
When posting a duplicate, it is good form not to apologize, as it’s just another content-free post by the already annoying commenter.
geg6 - October 31, 2009 | 4:46 pm · Link
ikadu: I think you’re right about the cause. But I think this is a significant event. I could be wrong, but it sure has that feel. And if 2000 and 2007-08 taught me anything, it’s to trust my political instincts. This feels big to me.
bago - October 31, 2009 | 4:47 pm · Link
Idiotropic doesn’t work either.
Dave C - October 31, 2009 | 4:47 pm · Link
Wouldn’t it be hilarious if Sully nominated Ambers for a “Poseur Alert” award for writing this? Sadly it won’t happen, but it should.
geg6 - October 31, 2009 | 4:48 pm · Link
Shit. That was a reply to inkadu. Sorry for the fumble fingers.
inkadu - October 31, 2009 | 4:51 pm · Link
Here’s an honest question: Does anyone think the realignment of the Republican Party might, down the road, lead to a more progressive Republican party?
I know it sounds insane, but teabaggers, for all their faults, don’t much care for big ANYTHING, and that includes corporations. So far, they’ve been focussed on big government, the volvo-driving, and economic racism… but maybe they’ll eventually get around to supporting progressive causes once the noise settles (if they can own them and not share them with liberals).
I know it’s wrong. But it’s like a brain worm—‘populism’ and ‘progressivism’ are somehow linked in my brain… so please set me straight so I can put this brain worm to bed.
(The Nazi’s, for instance, were hugely popular but definitely not progressive … union busters were the same… other examples?)
General Winfield Stuck - October 31, 2009 | 4:51 pm · Link
It is interesting that while this sort of thing generally occurs when a party is rudely kicked out of power, whilst the faithful sort of whats what, the wingnuts are particularly vicious in their machinations to purge and rebuild. And while the dems do it much more congenially, they also just keep on squabbling even when they get back into power.
For the wingers though, it seems the only thing that makes them come together is increasing length of time out of power until the hunger for it exceeds their hatred for each other in even the most minor differences of belief.
Of course, this is good news for democrats, for now.
inkadu - October 31, 2009 | 4:54 pm · Link
@geg6: My political instincts were that we were not going to have an election in 2008, since there seemed to be absolutely no brakes to anything Bush/Cheney wanted to do. My pessimistic read of history is that we are in a descending wave towards something approaching totalitariansim, with every Republican administration scraping away a few more feet of bed rock constitutional principles and institutional resolve…
I maintained my ability to be outraged for quite a few years. What left is just anxiety.
Yutsano - October 31, 2009 | 4:56 pm · Link
@inkadu: I don’t think so, mostly because I’m convinced there are other more nefarious forces behind them who can make a ton of money by keeping them from making any progress. I sincerely believe the teabaggers want to undo the entire social safety net period and won’t be happy unless government consists of the military and the police period, and even then they’d bitch about socialist policing.
Yutsano - October 31, 2009 | 4:58 pm · Link
OOPS used the dreaded S word.
Michael - October 31, 2009 | 4:59 pm · Link
Sadly, I’m picturing center-right German commentators talking about the building excitement in 1932-1935 using much the same language.
I’m not nearly so sanguine about what these fuckers are capable of wreaking, nor do I think that the center-right of the GOP is capable of acting as a moderator of their goofier impulses, as they’ve not demonstrated such propensities in the past. They’re cowardly and lazy, typical Conservatives through and through. Oh, they’ll make a few mealy mouthed comments about wanting the tone to improve, but their filthy apocalyptic death cult will provide excuses and prayers and solace to the victims of right wing violence, while offering up neither courage nor concrete solutions.
Yes, it CAN happen here, just as Sinclair suggested.
licensed to kill time - October 31, 2009 | 5:03 pm · Link
Michelle Bachmann wants to party :
Hey, she said they’re going to have a ‘house call’ – could this be the iatropic excitement?!
General Winfield Stuck - October 31, 2009 | 5:03 pm · Link
@Michael:
I agree with this and that they are more dangerous, for the reason that now, after completion of the southern strategy, their ranks are swelled by southern crazies making the goofier wing much larger and goofier. That wing once was owned by dems, but no more, thank gawd.
Pasquinade - October 31, 2009 | 5:04 pm · Link
Hoffman on the Beckkk show did not impress all of the FReepers.
After the interview, I would be ok if he won, but he will be a 1 termer at best.
Washington DC destroys people like him.
37 posted on Monday, October 26, 2009 5:09:10 PM by staytrue
http://freerepublic.com/focus/.....sts?page=1
inkadu - October 31, 2009 | 5:10 pm · Link
Good to see wingnuts rallying around the new Michael Jackson movie.
Now I’m REALLY confused.
licensed to kill time - October 31, 2009 | 5:14 pm · Link
@inkadu: It really is perplexing, isn’t it? I think she’s taking a page out of the Michael Steele playbook and getting all krunk wit the GOP. Or wearing her hat backwards. Or something.
Little Macayla's Friend - October 31, 2009 | 5:17 pm · Link
@inkadu:
I blame Anoniminous at #31.
/downloading auto refresh program now . .
inkadu - October 31, 2009 | 5:24 pm · Link
@licensed to kill time: Teabaggers are like me when I play chess—“If all my pawns were queens, I could really win this game.” The wingnut version is, “If we could just attract more black people, we’d be unstoppable.”
Actually, the more apt chess analogy would be, “If all my pawns were battleships…”
@Little Macayla’s Friend: I thought google was smarter than that.
Chad N Freude - October 31, 2009 | 5:25 pm · Link
@liberal: The principle here is that if the current powers-that-be don’t make it better, replace them with the powers-that-wannabe. How we got here doesn’t matter. Who broke it doesn’t matter. How long it might take to fix things doesn’t matter. “You’ve been in charge since the last election and you haven’t brought me my pony. Yer out!” This is a very real possibility.
Mark S. - October 31, 2009 | 5:26 pm · Link
@inkadu:
I’m not either. It seems to me this is a pretty odd district: 140 years of Republicans but they like Obama. I’m so used to the mouth breathing Republicans that I forget that there used to liberal Republicans who voted for Rockefeller.
But don’t worry, if Hoffman wins, this will be Obama’s Waterloo.
Svensker - October 31, 2009 | 5:27 pm · Link
@Martin:
Win.
MikeJ - October 31, 2009 | 5:27 pm · Link
It seems as if they’ve been tweaking the results engine lately. Newer stuff seems to get to the top very, very fast now. Tends to drop quicker too.
Paris - October 31, 2009 | 5:28 pm · Link
“including anti-incumbent sentiment”
This is an open seat with no incumbent in one of the most reactionary districts in NY. My own district didn’t even re-elect Clinton as Senator (one of 2 counties that did not) and we have closer elections than they do in NY-23. The only way a democrat was going to win was by splitting the Republican vote. Now with the Republican dropping out, we’ll see if ideology trumps common sense. I geuss yes and that it won’t make much difference in the grand scheme of things.
Chad N Freude - October 31, 2009 | 5:28 pm · Link
@smiley: Interesting factlet there.
Probably because in non-English-speaking countries people are so busy trying to remember verb endings or how to read non-Roman alphabets they don’t have time dissociate their identities.
licensed to kill time - October 31, 2009 | 5:33 pm · Link
@inkadu:
Or, “if only we could sneak more black pawns onto the chessboard”
????
WIN!
SiubhanDuinne - October 31, 2009 | 5:41 pm · Link
Way O/T, but when does John get back? He was boarding his plane hours ago. Where the hell has he been anyhow, New Zealand? I can only take so much of this oughtta-be-obscure upstate NY race without pictures of Lily and Tunch: The Homecoming.
Siubhan +2
J.A.F. Rusty Shackleford - October 31, 2009 | 5:41 pm · Link
@L. Ron Obama:
That would make Newt Gingrich a “chuckle“.
inkadu - October 31, 2009 | 5:43 pm · Link
@licensed to kill time: I hate it when I miss the obvious… uh… I meant BLACK battleships.
Damnit.
Little Macayla's Friend - October 31, 2009 | 5:49 pm · Link
@inkadu:
I’d be the last to know. Tried to find info beyond the usual suggestions, and a mathematician’s claim to explaining it (at that point) was martian hieroglyphics to me.
geg6 - October 31, 2009 | 5:53 pm · Link
Paris @82: See, I don’t know if it will mean much in the grand scheme of things that this one district elects another Republican winger. But from the way the prominent faithful are falling in line just like they said something mean about Limbaugh, the screams of glee and “PURGE, BITCHEZ!,” and the encouragement this gives to the teabagger wing to see themselves as the future of the party, I just can’t help but think this is one of those seemingly insignificant but in reality very significant political moments. My instincts aren’t perfect, but they are pretty good. Which hasn’t always been a good experience, to honest.
jwb - October 31, 2009 | 5:55 pm · Link
@Michael: What you need to do is watch the under 30 demographic. If they show any interest in the movement at all, I’d watch out. But as long as it’s a bunch of old farts who are simply reliving ‘68 (as it has been so far), it’s mostly just good comedy.
calipygian - October 31, 2009 | 6:02 pm · Link
@geg6: I think no matter what the outcome, this is the high water mark of Tea Bagger-ism.
Hoffman wins, Palin’s chances are boosted in 2012 and Obama has an LBJ like landslide, even if the economy is only doing so-so. Even if the economy is bad, he beats her.
If Hoffman loses and a Dem is seated from Watertown for the first time in 150 years despite trying to make this a personal referendum about Nancy Pelosi, Teabaggerism is done.
General Winfield Stuck - October 31, 2009 | 6:04 pm · Link
@jwb:
Now wait a second, most of us old farts reliving 68 are on your side.
eemom - October 31, 2009 | 6:07 pm · Link
OT, Jane Hamsher is thrilled that someone important has noticed her.
http://fdlaction.firedoglake.c...../#comments
Funny, the Congresswoman’s piece didn’t read like a “bitter personal attack” to me.
licensed to kill time - October 31, 2009 | 6:08 pm · Link
@General Winfield Stuck: I second that emotion!
Allan - October 31, 2009 | 6:09 pm · Link
Iatropic excitement = a stripper, a Viagra pill, and sex toys in your SUV.
jwb - October 31, 2009 | 6:09 pm · Link
@General Winfield Stuck: Do you see yourself as reliving ‘68 right now? Are you in the streets (even to the marginal extent that the teabaggers are)?
General Winfield Stuck - October 31, 2009 | 6:10 pm · Link
@licensed to kill time:
Well, it WAS a very good year to be a DFH.
dmsilev - October 31, 2009 | 6:11 pm · Link
Nearly 100 comments, and nobody has made the obvious movie quotation?
-dms
General Winfield Stuck - October 31, 2009 | 6:12 pm · Link
@jwb:
The tea baggers were hiding under their beds in 68. They are more likely reliving 1980, imo.
licensed to kill time - October 31, 2009 | 6:12 pm · Link
@jwb: It was the best of times, it was the worst of times….but hell yeah, glad I lived through it! And I’m proud to still be a DFH.
General Winfield Stuck - October 31, 2009 | 6:13 pm · Link
Been there done that. Why aren’t you young whippersnappers out there to greet them. I think it’s your turn.
licensed to kill time - October 31, 2009 | 6:14 pm · Link
@General Winfield Stuck: oops, my comment at #100 was for you – WordPress Brainspaz or something.
Johnny Pez - October 31, 2009 | 6:15 pm · Link
ITYM black helicopters.
Svensker - October 31, 2009 | 6:19 pm · Link
@General Winfield Stuck:
Thirded.
Morbo - October 31, 2009 | 6:20 pm · Link
Why? That thesaurus won’t just skim itself, DougJ.
Martin - October 31, 2009 | 6:24 pm · Link
Since we’ve got a game in an hour or so, I think it’s time to start the FTFY discussion.
Here’s a video to start things off.
For background, John Gruber is one of the Mac elder statesmen these days (a good read all around, actually), a Yankees fan and has called for the return of the two-handed fuck-you sign, so in commemoration of the Yankees, his readers have given him his wish.
Martin - October 31, 2009 | 6:28 pm · Link
ITHM laughing helicopters.
TenguPhule - October 31, 2009 | 6:28 pm · Link
Corrected.
Demo Woman - October 31, 2009 | 6:33 pm · Link
@SiubhanDuinne: I’d love to see the John and Lily reunion. Maybe he’ll appear soon but he’s probably to busy playing with the pup to notice us. I’m waiting until 8 to pour the wine since the ghost and goblins should arrive before then.
MikeJ - October 31, 2009 | 6:47 pm · Link
Minutes of people making a fuck you sign, which they follow with a chyron of “eff you”. Eff? Eff? The word is fuck. If you can’t say it out loud, if you can’t spell it out, just forget the whole thing.
martha - October 31, 2009 | 6:49 pm · Link
@Demo Woman: Ghosts and goblins here already. Lots of action heros that I can’t identify. However, princesses and witches never go out of style!
jl - October 31, 2009 | 6:50 pm · Link
Is Ambinder stooping to blog level snark? ‘Iatropic’, as in relating to a need to see a doctor? Yeah, in terms of a strategy for success in general elections (as opposed to special elections where odd things can happen due to a relatively small turnout), the actions of the wingnuts and GOP are related to the need to see a doctor (specifically a shrink, as suggested above).
Man, ‘itatopic’ is an obscure word. Oxford English dictionary has ‘iatraliptic’ which means relating to cures of diesease by ointments. That might fit too.
I heard local radio spot on this race with an interview with some Politico ‘reporter’ who sounded like a right wing shill. He was practically creaming his pants with excitement about what this could mean for a GOP resurgence and how it would put fear into the hearts of Blue Dog Democrats. IMHO, the Blue Dogs consist of the cowards and morons who will believe this nonsense, and the cynical who will use it as an excuse to commit more damage upon their nation to please their corporate paymasters. So in that way, this race may have some impact in the short run.
But in a general election, I think this is bad news for the GOP.
However I don’t think it is good news for the nation. The fate of the country lies in a race between the relative distates of the electorate for a corrupt and timid Democratic establishement, and an insane GOP. That is a dangerous choice for the country.
Obama needs to step up his strong leadership quotient from 0.00001 to something that people will notice. His postpartisan act is turning into a novelty act, and it is not getting things done. Time for progressives to move past criticizing the dude and start moving past him to a really effective Democratic Congress. He can be nothing more than a transitional figure, the only question is what will come next. The GOP and wingnuts are making their choice. The other side has to step up, and it will have to come from progressive Democrats and grassroots.
The country needs some moderate and progressive grassroots action out there for the next election.
Anoniminous - October 31, 2009 | 6:54 pm · Link
@Little Macayla’s Friend:
I broke the internets?
(Me mum will be so proud.)
Ref: 1968
It was the best of times, it was the worst of times. In one way it was “Par-TEE!” Tho’ was a real drag – putting mildly – having your siblings and friends come home in boxes or strung out, drugged out, and generally wrung out.
Kinda On Topic:
Got off the phone with a friend in the Democratic Party of New York. He’s followed upstate NY politics for over 40 years and he doesn’t have a clue what is going to happen Tuesday. “We’re off the charts and the past doesn’t mean anything now,” was his summation. He gives 60/40 for a GOP hold … but he wouldn’t bet a nickel on either side.
efgoldman - October 31, 2009 | 7:01 pm · Link
@ 69 yutsano
Well, yeah, except most of them teabaggahz are over 65. See what happens if they are really, truly threatened with loss of Social Security and Medicare. They’ll get to be dems, real quick.
This is all play-acting. Ponies and unicorns. Fantasies in skywriting.
Plus, any dem campaign manager who can read or write a complete sentence will saturate the airwaves with actual quotes and video of the neanderthals. Remember 1996, when Clinton’s folks worked so hard on making scary Pat Buchanan’s hideous convention speech into the voice of the GOP? The wingnuts just can’t help themselves, like a hungry, sleepy toddler.
Anne Laurie - October 31, 2009 | 7:02 pm · Link
What happens when the radioactive excitement of the massed teabaggers hits the economists’ green shoots. I think they meant “iatropic” to imply the action of excited molecules in a closed container, so that Hoffman could be the metaphor trigger on the NEUTRON BOMB that is Teabaggerdom! ! ! Which will destroy all the lardarsed peons getting shouty for Glenn Beck, and leave the institutions standing for the Right People to come in & take over… ah, the 80s flashbacks are strong in this krewe…
@Ambergris:
I consider Newt Gingrich to be a Newt-first, Newt-last, Newt-uber-alles chancer, and if “Big Industry” ever trusted him past the next news cycle it deserves to be taken over by the ChiComs. Ever since his 1994 implosion, I’ve believed Newt sees himself as the white Jesse Jackson / Al Sharpton—someone who couldn’t get elected animal control officer in a 600-person hamlet, but who can make a prosperous and media-intense living by being the Outrageous Voice of His Oppressed Minority. And, no, I am not saying that’s a fair summary of Jackson’s or Sharpton’s career, but that’s what they look like to a political grifter like Newt… or Sarah Palin, who is the only real “threat” to Gingrich in this particular ecological niche. Beck & Limbaugh are “professional entertainers”; Malkin, the Freepers & the Red State Trike Farce are an updated version of Art Bell but without his talent or tenacity. But I think that Gingrich looks at Palin and sees someone who took his Brilliant Idea (politician as highly-paid performance artist) and is trying to take it to the next level (since Palin couldn’t even be bothered to finish her ‘breakout’ term in political office, much less run for/serve an actual stint in Congress.)
Chad N Freude - October 31, 2009 | 7:14 pm · Link
@Morbo: Were you aware that the thesauruses and humans coexisted at the Creation?
General Winfield Stuck - October 31, 2009 | 7:16 pm · Link
Didn’t that one have wings and big teeth? I think I saw it on the Flintstones.
Chad N Freude - October 31, 2009 | 7:18 pm · Link
@General Winfield Stuck: They knew lots of words. And this before language was invented at Babel.
Chad N Freude - October 31, 2009 | 7:21 pm · Link
@Chad N Freude: I forgot to make the obligatory masturbatory narcissisticatory self-reference to @Chad N Freude.
jl - October 31, 2009 | 7:27 pm · Link
@Chad N Freude: Now if you could only figure out a way to self link to the your own very same comment, that would be so cool. That would be some kind of ultimate in blog history.
Might even spark a much needed blog commenters ethics panel by the WaPo, with much clucking and ball scratching.
Keith G - October 31, 2009 | 7:34 pm · Link
@calipygian:
I wish, but no. No.
I am despairing that GOP conditions improve by default. As a party, Dems are showing no ability to builds or preserve any mojo. We suck. Too few of our party are brave. Many are just as, if not more, corrupt as the Repugs.
The crazy-assed teabaggers will allow a hard conservative, say Huckabee, to have a Sista Soulja campaign and appear dynamic compared to the cowering Dems. The indies, feeling inspired, will swing right.
You do not realize how easily we might lose this chance to build up sanity.
Just a thought.
jwb - October 31, 2009 | 7:38 pm · Link
@General Winfield Stuck: You’re absolutely right about the teabaggers hiding under their beds in 1968. Sorry if I implied otherwise. In that respect, they are reliving history as they think it should have been. In any case, my comment was motivated by a deep belief that the teabagger movement has more to do with the cultural politics and disappointments of 68 than anything to do with today, which is one reason the movement makes very little sense in and of itself.
Chad N Freude - October 31, 2009 | 7:42 pm · Link
@jl: I think it can be done if you get the internal number of the comment right. Probably doable only when the comment barrage is light.
@Chad N Freude: This is a test.
Chad N Freude - October 31, 2009 | 7:44 pm · Link
@jl: It appears to have worked. What hath God wrought?
General Winfield Stuck - October 31, 2009 | 7:49 pm · Link
@Keith G:
You’‘re making me depressed dude. Besides, Huckabee would not survive this, even if it was his kid that did it.
Chad N Freude - October 31, 2009 | 7:49 pm · Link
@Chad N Freude: Maybe not, after all. Requires further analysis and test. (My non-Cheetos-in-Mom’s-basement day job has me writing sentences like that all the time.)
General Winfield Stuck - October 31, 2009 | 7:50 pm · Link
oops linky fail ,. sorry libby.
Keith G - October 31, 2009 | 8:01 pm · Link
@General Winfield Stuck: Me too. That’s why I need to run to the market to grab some limes for my Buscadores tequila. I have no faith in my party and sipping aged tequila helps deaden the pain.
Fantastic pic. Westies are great.
General Winfield Stuck - October 31, 2009 | 8:04 pm · Link
We all are afflicted with this.
Thadeus Horne - October 31, 2009 | 8:35 pm · Link
@General Winfield Stuck: Well said, general.
cs - October 31, 2009 | 9:08 pm · Link
@inkadu:
You’re already partially right, if you consider the Paulites. They mostly embrace the social side of libertarians as well as the economic side. Therefore they’re against the current wars, the current absurdity regarding drugs, against torture & domestic spying, very pro-free speech. I’ve even seen Paul, a committed Christian, advocate against any legislated morality and he accepted endorsements from strippers and some little known porn stars.
So, on these issues, this core part of the teabaggers are to the left of the mainstream Democratic Party, and these are some of the reasons I still like Ron Paul, even if I think he’s nuts on economic issues.
As far as dialogue with them goes, I’ve seen a few hopeful signs from my own conversations. For example, they’ll probably never come around to thinking the public option is a good idea, but they’ve expressed almost as much anger against the actions of the health insurance industry as people on the left. There’s an opening which could be used to get their support for at least reforming the industry, if not for adding government services.
Splitting Image - October 31, 2009 | 9:17 pm · Link
@General Winfield Stuck:
Not to mention Wayne Dumond
Huckabee would probably do a better job than Palin would at holding the red states together, but I have real trouble seeing him winning.
General Winfield Stuck - October 31, 2009 | 9:26 pm · Link
@Splitting Image:
The NE fiscal conservatives have jumped the shark on ever supporting the bible thumpers and social conservatives that now dominate the GOP. So I don’t think Huckabee, or anyone else like him can win a GE anytime soon. Unless the anti christ returns and fools them big time.
And as far as the tea baggers are concerned, it is laughable that they have any, ANY possible chance of making hay with the liberal left. They are doing what they’re doing not because they are for anything, it is because of white hot hatred for liberalism in any form. period. They mostly represent the still racist south, and wouldn’t be for any liberal of any color, but black has made them see red and take to the streets with pitchforks and speckled spittle.
jl - October 31, 2009 | 10:33 pm · Link
@Chad N Freude: Chad N Freude will go down in blog history. The self-link self-whore comment is born.
I will try it and it won’t work. And when it does work, I will find 20 typos in the comment after I click the self-link to bask in my own glory. It is like that with me and computers. But I will try it sometime anyway.
xj - not the auto - November 1, 2009 | 12:39 am · Link
I didn’t see anyone suggest “inotropic” yet, which means…
“Affecting the force of muscle contraction”
via google/www.medterms.com
this might fit, but who knows what the hell these mopes mean half the time.
ruemara - November 1, 2009 | 2:49 am · Link
when I look at this ny-23 race, why does the album, Downward Spiral enter my thoughts?
SGEW - November 1, 2009 | 5:02 pm · Link
re: “Iatropic”
(cf.)
I think that Marc “Don’t Make Me Say What I Actually Think” Ambinder is trying to slyly describe the “excitement” that comes from “conservative activists coalescing” as something that requires direct medical intervention, i.e., they are clinical; they should seek medical attention; they are batshit crazy. If so, this is weapons grade passive aggressive snark (and from Ambers’ track record, this is a supportable proposition).
Or, on the other hand, he used the wrong word in a fit of rushed over-reaching. Which is also very possible. Happens to the
most paragonicalbest of us.jenmcb - November 6, 2009 | 3:53 pm · Link
The “Priapism is hard” comment was very funny!