They were in their courting phase where they trade loving barbs at each other, and then Linz said to himself “oh, be still my heart” as he fell in love with trumpet’s future.
I read something about Canadians and their fondness for cheese rolling, at first I giggled, then I realized they’re serious.
Damn it! I was trying to insult an American, specifically the phoniest, most kompromatted knee-pad wearing US Senator who ever served 23 years without critical examination. Of course, I did it without first enumerating his legislative accomplishments. (Spoiler alert: It’s ZERO.)
Fun Fact: Graham cracker > cracker Graham. It’s just science.
Even by making the association at all, you may have just ruined peanut butter graham crackers for me, forever.
I’m gonna go lie down now.
With a drink.
A strong one.
I’ll delete the post if it will restore for you the sublime pleasure of graham crackers and peanut butter, one of the ultimate comfort foods (with a glass of milk).
Full disclosure: I also like Nutter Butter.
A member of our community flagged your post for referring to Lindsey Graham as a woman (i.e. Miss, Ms, etc…). The moderator who reviewed the flag agreed with the person who flagged it.
As I have stated before…
Thank you for clarifying the background. I confess that while I’ve personally tended to avoid “Miss Lindsey” references in the past, it’s been out of a general discomfort with the echoes of gay-bashing, and never because it even occurred to me that it might be seen as an insult to women. Well, mine is not to judge, and the judgement of the moderators must be respected (because Lord knows I don’t want to get stuck with the job, “Moose Turd Pie” style).
Besides, there are so many other ways to dunk on the Gentleman from South Carolina. I think it was Andrew Sullivan who used to call him “Butters”; maybe he still does, but I wouldn’t know, since it’s been years since I gave up making excuses for Sullivan.
A lot of Republicans want the call out the Putinists in Congress. One of the oddest things to come out of calls for cutting back the defense budget, or at least spending on the Russo-Ukraine War, is the BRAC (base reduction and closure) fears that it has revived after a couple decades post 9/11. Defense spending is used to buy political fealty in pretty much every House district in the US, but where you have really big bases, the Putinist talk is anathema. Of course, longer term, spending 10 times more on defense than your nearest rivals is disproportionate. There is a lot of air in contractor spending, a vicious cycle of getting less for more.
In this case, it’s a smart and not at all risky move.
In terms of domestic politics, Graham’s a reed in the currents. He’ll flip-flop all over the damned place on anything. On foreign policy… he’ll shut up sometimes… but he’s a hawk. He’s always been a hawk, he’ll always be a hawk. I give him a little more credit than the typical GOP chickenhawk because he did serve in uniform, and remained active in the reserves until mandatory retirement at 60 in 2015 (and did so without pay from 1995 on, because you can’t draw pay from 2 different branches of the federal government, and he was sworn into Congress in '95)… but only a very little more, because as military service goes, USAF JAG Corps… I mean… 
But yeah, Graham’s a hawk, and having Medvedev threaten him with assassination… jeez, talk about Russia getting played. Not only is that kind of ‘threatening to assassinate a high-profile US Senator’ exactly what Zelenskyy wanted out of that, but it’s exactly what Graham wanted, too. I bet he’s giddy AF over the Russians treating him like an international badass. Especially with that line about ‘I’ll go to the Hague if you will’. He’s in no real danger, and he can posture and trash talk freely now.
I always think this in war. Wouldn’t it just be cheaper to buy it? And have it in good condition? Seems like a huge waste in gold and blood.
When Ukraine shoves the Russians back across the border the Republicans will quickly align themselves with the “winners.”
Yeaaaaah, and just how much do you think Ukraine would have wanted to sell a vital rail hub a hundred miles inside their borders to a nation that’s been saying ‘there are no Ukrainians, only Russians’ since the 1850s at least, actively tried to starve them into extinction only 80 years ago, outlawed their language, co-opted their church, and has been occupying part of their country for the last 9 years?
Its’s only cheaper when it can actually be bought. There isn’t enough money in the complete history of the world to close that sale.
Other than supporting Ukraine’s political sovereignty, I don’t see much commentary addressing her importance to the global food supply. Given the predicted effects of climate change in that region as well as elsewhere, including the American Midwest, the safety and security of “the world’s breadbasket” is of inestimable import. Keeping it out of the hands of extortionists of whatever stripe is another dimension of this conflict.