Shorter Adam “Crackers” Graham
Posted on July 13th, 2008 by Gavin M.
Above: Sci-fi/fantasy career apparently
includes Logan’s Run cosplay
- Wait, wait, here’s one that’ll totally work: Since the Republicans seem somehow to have recklessly blown out the Federal treasury, America simply cannot afford (heh heh) to have Democrats elected to office, for Democrats are not serious about the balanced budgets that we in the conservative (heh heh) majority so unsparingly (heh heh) demand.
‘Shorter’ concept created by Daniel Davies and perfected by Elton Beard. We are aware of all Internet traditions.™
Bonus Shorter Michael Gaynor:
Above: Still haunted by the leprechauns
- Democrats have plotted to create a recession [voice harshens to a martinet’s bark] in order to make Republicans look bad [waves arms hysterically] during this golden time of economic prosperity [darts from the room looking genuinely frightened].
First!
Impeach!
Ronnie Reagan’s record deficit bested by the Chimperor. Poppa Bush’s record low consumer confidence bested by the Miserable Failure. Richard Nixon’s lawlessness exceeded by the Flight Suit guy. Jimmy Carter’s approval rating not only higher than aWol’s but higher than Cheney’s and the bendover Congress combined.
Will wonders never cease?
For the image file: kilt and kilt.
This Adam Graham guy.
He has very highly developed logic skills for a Republican.
Perhaps he could intern with Thomas Sowell.
Now that boy’s got one hell of a fine wingnut face mullet on him. He sure does.
NPR said the deficit was due to the $600 tax rebates – they didn’t mention the $4 trillion in tax cuts to the extremely wealthy as being a contributing factor.
For the image file: kilt and kilt.
Oh my. That second one is pure My Dumpy Grandma Puttering in the Kitchen.
I like how Gaynor strays off topic in the last two paragraphs of his piece.
Yes, Obama will dictate choose. Heads, Spanish wins, tails, you loose.
According to some of his other columns, Adam Graham steadfastly affirms absolute truth. On the other hand, post-modernist secular leftists like myself deny absolute truth, thereby debasing the Constitution of the United States and undermining human decency in general.
I wonder if this buffoon is aware that Adam Graham = Mama had rag.
Shorter Mama Had Rag:
“Wearing a skirt is masculine, as long as the skirt was made for a man.”
It would be irresponsible of me not to mention that it’s also true that…
Adam Graham = Madam Hagar
…which suggests that poor Adam is Sammy Hagar’s love slave.
Bonus points: Adam Graham was state campaign coordinator for Alan Keyes in 2000. In Montana.
It strikes me “Cracker(ass) Jerk” would be a funnier thing to have written on the box.
Bonus points: Adam Graham was state campaign coordinator for Alan Keyes in 2000. In Montana.
Rugged? Is that you? Psst — PELICANS!!!
Do Graham and Gaynor ever actually READ what they write?
Bonus points: Adam Graham was state campaign coordinator for Alan Keyes in 2000. In Montana.
Duuuuuude.
And oh God, the kilt thing is hilarious. Evidently it’s true what they say about kilts – the more the guy waves and shouts and cries IT’S NOT A SKIRT the more likely he is to be a furtive crossdresser.
American conservatism is a fucking pathology.
I’ve written a little bit about the flourishing economy we Democrats are messing up to make the Republicans look bad.
(Credit will be changed whenever someone pipes up. It’s a good article – the kind you can’t get out of your head a week later.)
It strikes me “Cracker(ass) Jerk” would be a funnier thing to have written on the box.
How difficult is Cracker Jackass? Really.
McCain is not an economist and he has acknowledged he’s more expert on national security and foreign affairs than economics, but compared to inexperienced rookie United States Senator and presumptive 2008 Democrat presidential nominee Barack Hussein Obama, Jr., McCain is brilliant when it comes to economics and his sound tax and spending plans would promote economic prosperity instead of frustrate it and bankrupt America.
Yeah, Gaynor definitely needs some serious shorter.
That’s one sentence. One.
Well, maybe sentence isn’t the right word. Let’s just call it one something.
Does anyone, besides purveyors of teh snark?
I don’t think reading is a thing they hold with. After that, they might, I dunno, think about what they read, and who knows where that could lead. Much better to slip on a nice cozy kilt and proclaim one’s manliness . . . what’s next, a defense of man/man handholding as a sign of fraternal affection?
I like how the operant assumption among these flacks is that the Democrats’ sole aim is to bankrupt America, which they hate for its freedom.
I mean, at least our assuming that they’re a bunch of money-grubbing, amoral chumps actually ascribes a coherent motive to them. How stupid do you have to be to be Gaynor?
what’s next, a defense of man/man handholding as a sign of fraternal affection?
Well, obviously the richly masculine classical tradition of man-boy love. I don’t know about you, but nothing says ‘man’ to me like boy jizz.
Wow.
The bio that follows Gaynor’s “article” (diatribe? insane ramblings?) is longer than the freaking article/diatribe/insane ramblings.
And he’s a lawyer? He hangs out Tommy More’s Law Hangout.
Does that profession have no standards?
But, most importantly, he has an email address at AOL.
Classy.
Sorry I’ve been tinkering with it so much. [Shorters are harder than they may seem]
Done now, in any case.
And he’s a lawyer?
Perhaps, as they say on this wacky Inter-net, an attorney at LOL.
Hell, not only that – Gramm played a big personal role in making the American economy what it is today. He should be bursting with pride.
That’s right: A guy who helped screw up the global financial system could end up in charge of US economic policy.
Come on people, who do you want fixing our economy (which is in perfect shape, so stop whining): 1) some untested youngster with a scary skin color, or 2) the guy with the experience of screwing it up in the first place?
Democrats and the hateful liberals are tying to bankrup America by making us think the economy is bad. Liberals should learn something about economics, and its laws, and how to understand statistics. THings are great. Better than they have been for a long time. They want things to be bad to make Republicans, who are far more practical and knowledgeable about it than you (Gramm has a PhD, what does Atrios have?) look bad and bring down our greatness so the terrorist hordes can invade us.
And oh God, the kilt thing is hilarious. Evidently it’s true what they say about kilts – the more the guy waves and shouts and cries IT’S NOT A SKIRT the more likely he is to be a furtive crossdresser.
Hey, now, don’t go harshing on the kilt. Better to aim your derision at the fact that this guy looks damn awful in one. Ugly shirt choice, sporran (ahem) off-kilter…just terrible. And that second one is too damn long. Makes it looks like it used to be a plaid ankle-length skirt that he cut short to try to turn it into a kilt.
Some of us, I’ll have you know, make ’em look good. 🙂
The fact is, our economy is in great shape, in fact ist never been better, thanks to the Bush economic miracle. The left liberal haters try to make it sound bad and that there are sufferers, but the poor (and the lazy, and unemployable, and stupid) will always be with us, as Jesus said. Americans need to stop whining and buck up.
“I don’t want an educated population, I want oxen.”
A kilt is not supposed to be a skirt. The modern kilt, developed by the British for the Scottish military uniform sits right on the line of course. the original kilts were an intersection between blanket and garment. It kept you warm at night, it kept you covered during the day, and protects the modesty of the future of Scotland. So, blame the British. They turned the kilt into a tartan skirt.
True. A real Scot would just caber-toss your ass 83 meters and be done with it.
As Alec says, it ain’t about the kilt. It’s about the dude going on and on about “unbifurcated garments made for men” and how they don’t violate Christian dictates on masculinity. The winger doth protest too much.
The ode to a kilt is killer too.
Oh, and also a stilted, superficial claim to some reductive concept of Old World cultural authenticity. It’s about that too.
Hoo boy.
I was hanging out with a conservative friend of mine last night, had dinner and a few drinks. We rarely discuss politics as we both know where the other stands and know that no pesky facts are gonna change our minds, dammit.
At any rate, sometime during In Bruges the politics started up and got a little heated. And my conservative friend stood up and slugged me in the head.
Slugged me in the head.
I attributed it to the Jaegermeister (he was drinking, not me — I’m a vodka kinda liberal) and promptly said goodnight. When I woke up this morning, I had to clean up the living room rug where he vomited. He’s still asleep in the guest room. I made country ham and biscuits this morning, hoping the aroma would make him rush to the bathroom. That’s just the kinda pal I am.
This is appropos of nothing, I know, just wanted to share.
Personally, I’d go with the cowardly sneak attack and rabbit punch him off the planet, like a DFH with violent issues should. Friend or no, anyone who takes the first swing at me gets a free trip to socialized medicine.
Renew America doesn’t just serve up thought-provoking commentary from cutting-edge columnists, it also offers links to outstanding political literature. For example:
The Bush Boom: How a ‘Misunderestimated’ President Fixed Our Broken Economy. One blurb: Almost everyone seems to be worried about pollution and the effects it has on people’s bodies. Far fewer obervers seemed worried about the far greater dangers of polluting people’s minds with stupid ideas. Right on, daddy-o! Featuring a foreword by Larry Kudlow.
Annexing Mexico. It’s “a workable, win-win plan” that will solve those illegal immigration problems once and for all. Why didn’t James Knox Polk think of this?
Jacob Singer: I’d like to suggest you find some new friends.
PS — I bet it was during that part in the movie where the guy tells the American tourist family they’ll never make it up the tower stairs cuz they’re all fat as elephants. Am I right?
Personally, I’d run down to the drug store and get some syrup of ipecac. Then I’d serve him breakfast and slip the ipecac into his OJ. As he’s puking his guts out, thinking that he’s about to die, then I’d rabbit punch him and say, “You shouldn’t drink so much Jaeger, dumbfuck!”
I bow to your evilness, BB.
Yes, because life was so much better when the Cuyahogah River (and subsequently Lake Erie) regularly caught on fire.
Actually, James K Polk did try to annex Mexico, but got the job only half done, because Mexico was roughly as powerful as the US at the time.
According to cracker- “So, in college, Obama is paying $40 an hour for forced volunteer service. In some states, attorneys don’t earn that much.”
Ahh, and what states would those be? Confusion and delusion?
Seriously. Most attorneys charge you $500 to have their paralegal type up a form letter and then slap their signature on it.
in fact ist never been better
Gary, you’re letting the German slip through again.
Actually, James K Polk did try to annex Mexico, but got the job only half done, because Mexico was roughly as powerful as the US at the time.
My understanding was that the Democrats, who were generally pro-slavery and strongest in the south, wanted to annex Mexico entirely, while the Whigs, who were anti-slavery and concentrated in the North, only grudgingly supported the war from the beginning because they didn’t want to seem “unpatriotic”. Mexico had already banned slavery, but was obviously below the line agreed to in the Missouri Compromise, so the big underlying issue was whether new states would be slave states. In the end, they only took 1/3 of Mexico, made Texas a slave state, and kept the rest free. See how nice it is when politicians work together?
From Graham’s kilt page:
“If you feel like you should/want to wear a kilt or another unbifurcated garment made for men, do it. Pray for wisdom in how to best introduce the garment into your life. Dress in a manner that is distinctly, and clearly masculine, and most importantly: serve God in these troubled times. ”
There’s your decisive refutation of evolution right there. Six billion (or whatever it is) years of the development of sentient life on Earth, and we end up with “Pray to God to ask you how to wear a kilt and tell others about it.”
Sorry. Typical.
“Pray to God to TELL you how to wear a kilt,” etc.
But wait. Maybe the advantage of the unbifurcated garment is, it provides ready access to the klit.
Annexing part or all of Mexico proper wasn’t part of Polk’s original war aims, and I don’t believe it was talked about much until after Mexico City was taken and the war was virtually over. It wasn’t really a sectional issue. Plenty of southerners opposed annexation – Calhoun strongly condemned it – and plenty of northern expansionists supported it. Some guys in Polk’s Cabinet were for it. In any event, my guess is that support for it would have rapidly dwindled once reality sunk in.
Just as the debate was getting going, the already-signed peace treaty arrived in Washington and that was that.
When I was a kid I came across an unhinged ante bellum newspaper editorial that advocated conquering the entire western hemisphere, all the way to Cape Horn. It was one of my earliest realizations that political craziness has a loooong history in this country.
I was told, by a proud Scot, that the kilt arose as a practical male garment. Slogging through heavy knee-high undergrowth, usually soaking wet due to the Highland climate, was best done with as little fabric as possible snagging and weighing one down.
Real men don’t worry about wearing kilts. They just wear them.
Annexing Mexico. It’s “a workable, win-win plan” that will solve those illegal immigration problems once and for all. Why didn’t James Knox Polk think of this?
There are many good reasons they didn’t, but the most prominent one at the time was the persistent belief that the swarthy Mexicans would degrade the American racial character so thoroughly as to be more trouble than they were worth.
(The guy who pinned the annexation on slavery was right – it was a pure slave power land-grab, and Lincoln made his political bones protesting the war, along with a number of prominent abolitionists – and its casus bellorum was as hollow as Bush fils‘s for Iraq. And we actually spent a while flopping around in the tropics, randomly attempting to annex and reinstitute slavery all over the New World.)
I’ve pretty persistently felt that a political union between the US and Mexico would be a good idea, but that’s because with how seriously dependent their economy is on ours, they might as well be getting the kind of education and welfare payments – and political representation – that the South or Midwest gets. (And in terms of population, it’d take dividing the country into three or more states for any one to be smaller than California.) Add that to the fact that they’re probably the single most America-like country in the New World (extremely attached to immigration, jus solis citizenship, and the federal republic), and you’ve got a pretty decent match for an equitable political union.
Of course, this is why when annexation comes up, the Serious wingnuts scoff it away and instead move towards stuff like NAFTA, which is as degrading as and more destructive than the physical annexation of Mexico and yet comes with none of the attending obligations for the American elite. It’s a wonder it took us as long as it did to figure out the whole free trade racket.
As I mentioned earlier, no.
Once again, the push for annexation of Mexico was fairly brief. The spectacular American victories in the final battles around Mexico City gave some US expansionists – both northern and southern – a bad case of hubris and they began arguing for annexation. Most people – again both north and south – could see that this was a very stupid idea and opposed it. It was not a sectional issue. The debate fizzled out when a peace treaty was signed.
Later, in the 1850s, there was a pro-slavery filibustering movement that advocated intervention in Latin America, but that was something different.
Ooooh. That’s not likely to go over too well in Mexico.
I’ve pretty persistently felt that a political union between the US and Mexico would be a good idea…
Ooooh. That’s not likely to go over too well in Mexico.
Nor here, either. (I like to think the argument works, but it’s not something either populace would go for. C’est la vie.)
Once again, the push for annexation of Mexico was fairly brief. The spectacular American victories in the final battles around Mexico City gave some US expansionists – both northern and southern – a bad case of hubris and they began arguing for annexation. Most people – again both north and south – could see that this was a very stupid idea and opposed it. It was not a sectional issue. The debate fizzled out when a peace treaty was signed.
Later, in the 1850s, there was a pro-slavery filibustering movement that advocated intervention in Latin America, but that was something different.
I think I miscommunicated here – by ‘annexation’ I was referring to the territory we historically annexed (e.g. Texas, California, indeterminate stretch of scrub), not the full enchilada – which you’re right about. While the full-annexer crowd was always a small minority, I’m pretty sure the difference between them and the original hawks – and the later filibusterers – was one of degree rather than kind.
The invasion itself was basically about slavery, but you’re right that the idea of annexing Mexico in toto was just manifest-destiny hubris. (The only reason the small minority that wanted to do so got into the history books is that the US spent half a century after the Civil War considering dominion over, if not outright ownership of, the Western Hemisphere an inevitability – so while honkies in the 40s weren’t dumb enough to go that far, honkies in the 90s were kicking themselves for not having done so.)
Incidentally: the farthest I’ve actually gotten with the idea of a USNA would be the Great Seal, in which a golden eagle tears the shit out of a serpent with both claws.
Mexico: they’ve got a President nobody voted for, cocksucking cowboys in ridiculous costumes, and even an unfortunate fixation on eagles. We’re about as luridly incompatible as Texas and Alberta.