Graham crackers
 

Man I had some sweet ass graham crackers for breakfast today. I prefer the cinnamon flavor ones, not really any of the other flavors. I looked at the box and realized how healthy and nutritious they are. What's yalls favorite brand to buy?

Here's some links about the origin of these tasty delights:
Sylvester Graham
Snopes article

Discuss.

Don't move this thread, I want the opinions of the people who frequent Politics, not those other people who visit the rest of the TFP.


EDIT: Snopes link fixed. Thanks to those who pointed it out.

BTW Carno, great thread and idea. :thumbsup:

Ah yes, graham crackers. I prefer the Honey Maid original flavor. They take me back to when I was a kid and my grandma and I used to make butter icing and put on them. And try as I may now, I just cannot find that same recipe and taste.... perhaps it was just the fact it was making something with my granny.

While I can see that many would say the original are just boring or pieces of cardboard with no true flavor, I just have to shake my head because to me the only graham crackers worth eating were the ones my granny and I made.

Of course after reading the articles on Rev. Graham and how he viewed mustard and ketchup as insanity inducing maybe that is what is wrong with me.... I eat wayyyyyyy too much ketchup, thus I must be insane.

http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showpos...3&postcount=43
Have you declared war on Tilted Politics?

I understand your frustration about political threads emerging in general discussion. My personal concern is that the negative attitudes and the ad hominem attacks often present in Tilted Politics might emerge there as well. However, general discussion is a general forum. So, it's not surprising that political topics will emerge there occasionally. Politics is a a specific forum. I do think that despite the negativity there are often valuable, interesting posts in Tilted Politics. I don't think that graham cracker discussions are appropriate in Tilted Politics. (I'm guessing that you don't either and you're just trying to make a point).

Eating graham crackers does not seem to help treat my fever of lust. I think it's terrifically funny that we have taken what was originally a health food and made it into a junk food. Dr. Graham would be horrified by S'mores.

That said, I like the cinnamon ones plain, but the originals when I'm making S'mores.

I don't eat many graham crackers. sounds like terist food to me. maybe the hezbos eat em.

I do like smores though. and golden grahams. mmmm.

this is the best you could do, carno?
what a disappointment.

To Sapiens and RB.....

Why fucking post in here then?

I find what (I believe) Carno to be showing quite an interesting show.

All politics is is OPINION and how someone believes THEIR BELIEF SYSTEM.... it's based on experience and the facts as they percieve them.

And what Carno is asking is what is your opinion and why? Plain and simple.

Although maybe this does belong in the Paranoia thread..... I mean afterall Rev. Graham, creator of the Graham Cracker, was a Reverand... and perhaps graham crackers are a religious right plot. Therefore this can become a Right vs. Left issue.....

Hell yeah, we'll have a right/left argument over the graham cracker.

actually, pan, all i see in it is some hamfisted undergraduate-level sarcasm--behind which i assume lay some disdain for the subject of politics in general and for the politics forum here in particular.
there is nothing interesting about it...and it is not smart enough to be provocative. it just is what it is.

i also was in on the chain of equally tedious interactions that resulted in this.
that is why i post here, pan.
and that is why i find it disappointing.
if you are going to say "fuck you" you have a choice: you can do it with some style or not. carno chose option b.

at least have some style, for gods sake.

As a moderate, I enjoy both the cinnamon and the honey flavored ones and advocate an plan to eat both. I really wish more people stopped listening to the talking heads and tried both kinds.

Now that's just silly talk right there. Obviously YOU have to like one better than the other but you are scared and too weak to admit which one you like best.

Therefore, you must not have a truly valid opinion, you don't know what you are talking about.

In the words of Fez on that 70's show "I say goodday"

Y'know...I was going to close this thread early on because I saw it for what I felt was trolling. Carno knows what I'm talking about. ;)

But then I thought better of it. I saw the humor in it, and left it alone.

Guys! Look at yourselves. Are we taking ourselves so seriously, that we can't take two seconds out to laugh at ourselves? For crying out loud...lighten up.

Jeez...the Carno's have already won. :rolleyes:

Can someone tell me which ones are the right ones to like? I haven't received my talking points memo yet and without it I'm soooooooo lost.

Since when is a protest via civil disobedience NOT a staple of politics?

He didn't post kiddie porn, he put a thread about Graham Crackers in Politics. That's not even really an offense.

He had a point to make. He's now making that point. This is hardly "rule-breaking", so try not crawling up his ass so much, hmm?

roachboy: chill out. If you spent as much time thinking as complaining, you'd have come up with a better retort than what you've posted, which is essentially, "this sucks". That's disappointing.

And I like the ones with the cinnamon and brown sugar on them.

Upon listening to all of your opinions, I have decided to change my stance and try the other flavors of graham crackers. Maybe my views aren't 100% right.

(As an interesting aside, not even a silly thread about graham crackers can go without being spoiled while in Politics.)

QFT

I only like graham crackers if they are shaped like teddy bears. That way I can behead them swiftly and devour their crumbling corpses. Mmmmm, graham bear corpses.

Carno, why is this so important to you?

I suggest shooting a quick e-mail to Coulter, Limbaugh, O'Reilly and company, meanwhile, I'll shoot one over to my people and by mid-morning we'll have our stances.

Hold on..... this just in my mailbox.....

"While we here at Leftist Central believe that graham crackers serve a purpose to the people, we have to question the exact nature of said item. It isn't truly a cracker... nor is it a cookie. Based on being created by a Reverand, we have decided that the religious right must most definately be using them to brainwash people. Thus, untill we can investigate further, we will suggest refraining from the digestion of these items..... Sincerely, your friends in Leftist Central."

And this:

OOPs wait there's a commercial pop-up... how timely, a Nabisco Honey Maid Graham Cracker commercial.

"Friends, as you know I, the loveable El Rushbo, like my graham crackers with milk..... they are coming under fire now, by those atheistic, leftist radicals, who would have you believe that these crackers, and yes, they are crackers, are items from the religious right out to corrupt your kids into believing in God. I think we should all buy up as many boxes as we can and show these radicals a thing or 2...... btw I'm pleased to introduce my newest sponsor.... Nabisco's Honey Maid Graham Crackers...... Sincerely and Mega Dittoes.... and don't forget to resubscribe to 24/7 Rush..... this month's special only $24.95 but you get a box of tasty Nabisco Honey Maid Graham Crackers with a paid subscription."

I TOTALLY forgot about Teddy Grahams!!! I love all kinds of Teddy Grahams. They're actually a fairly healthful snack compared to some things. I used to substitute them for cookies...I should probably resume that habit.

Mmm, chocolate Teddy Grahams. I'm going camping this weekend--that's a good excuse to pick some up.

Teddy Grahams, wasn't he a GOP Senator from Texas.... sat next to LBJ and was in on the JFK Conspiracy with the LBJ, the Mafia and Bush family?

Even if he wasn't Teddy Grahams sound to right winged for me to enjoy.

Heh... this topic disappeared after two posts and arose again like a phoenix.

Y'all ain't talk'n about "crackers" are ya? It's jus some mo Yankie code fo po white trash innit!

I am sooo sincerely interested in this topic, because my darling granddaughter is a connoisseur of all that is graham. I'm sure I have at least a dozen pictures of her sampling that treat. I'll download those pics here and it will be obvious to all what the preferred graham cracker is among the precious.

The subjugation of the graham is just another example of the corruption instigated by the MAN! Rise Up! Save the Graham!

Yo, dude...crackers? Cool.

We don't have Graham Crackers over here in SA, so if someone told me more about them, maybe I'll be able to decide which one I like better. :thumbsup:

As an aside, why have I heard 'em pronounced 'Gram', instead of 'Gray-hum' ?

I agree with analog's observation.

Why don't we see what the professor can come up with then... put your money where your mouth is. If you think that you could do better, then by all means, please show us. If you can talk the talk, then please walk the walk.

As far as graham crackers are concerned. I mostly prefer the plain ones. The cinnamon ones are a nice change but do not go well with s'mores.

One trip to Iceland, we introduced s'mores as best as we could since they didn't have graham crackers there. Which reminds me, we'll have to bring some next time, along with Hershey bars to give the full American flavor chocolate.

Cynthetiq, on behalf of myself and others who object to your comments, above, and certainly to the following comments:
.....I'm gonna take your advice....and "walk the walk".....outta here. The endorsements that enable this thread to exist on this forum, telegraph a clear enough message.

these aren't bad, either...

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v1...fig-newton.gif

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y29/pigglet/graham.jpg

This thread can suck my balls!!! I got your cinnamon - I got your honeywheat!!!

Indeed, they do.

Wait......arent Graham Crackers a French Invention....I propose a name change.

Freedom Crackers?

As an aside, it is sad to see there are some that just can't allow a little humor in here. They have to post, because they have to post in every thread, but it is to complain that there is humor in here.

I guess I was there once.... humor in politics? Heavens forbid.

The Rev. Sylvester Graham developed the Graham Cracker to be the centerpiece of his diet to suppress unhealthy carnal urges. I see the debasement of this product by adding sexy ingredients like iceing and cinnamon as more of the leftwing's attempts to advance their secular agenda.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graham_cracker

Im sorry, there is only ONE link in here and there isnt a page long post telling me how the invention of the graham cracker was the precursor to weapons of mass destruction

I just cant make a decision based on a single wiki link...

I've been as derpived as a child given a (honey maid) cracker and no milk!!!!!!!!

As far as any debate comparing, say, sugar cookies vs. graham crackers, I would step back and ask - a priori - that any tangential or otherwise discursive argument be framed so that the means to dissention not be obliterated.

In my travels, I have found sugar cookies to be superior to graham crackers. Ipso-facto generalizations notwithstanding, sugar cookies - having more butter content by weight than graham crackers - stomp those graham cracker fucker's asses all over town and back. It is patently obviously to anyone with a 6th grade education that sugar cookies don't have to resort to violence as a means of social change or implementation. Below is a very interesting and relevant article for making graham crackers, from a reliable media outlet, bakingsheet.blogspot.com.

souce: http://bakingsheet.blogspot.com/2005...-crackers.html

Between montitoring my mailbox and surveiling my domicile, this fascist right-wing bushgovernment has gone too far with it's psy-ops campaign upon We the People! Look for Rove to psy-op-spin graham crackers to the sheeple as a safer and healthier alternative to sugar cookies, yet at the same time relentlessly pander to the Thai-dominated sugar lobby in Washington.

souce: http://www.bilaterals.org/article.php3?id_article=1590

source: http://www.fas.usda.gov/htp2/sugar/1.../worldsit.html

Now we see a recipe, from an untouchable source, for the "best ever sugar cookies." Well worth the read.

Another very worthwhile sugar cookie recipe, in french. This time with chocolate added. Is there no place for dissent in the culinary arts???

source: http://lemondedallie.canalblog.com/a...13/434891.html

Sugar Cookie, wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sugar_cookie
Graham Cracker, wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graham_cracker

Thai Sugar Lobby: http://www.thedailystar.net/2005/07/13/d50713050951.htm
Israeli Sugar Lobby: http://www.danieldrezner.com/mt/mt-c...?entry_id=2642

Brazilian sugar lobbies are in on it as well. As far as I'm concerned, there should be no shortage of individual skeptisism and verbal diahhreah from the one country supposedly regarded as the "most obese nation in the world".

Graham crackers, being founded by a religious person, need to be banned outright by judicial legislation. If not, then the repsonsibility lies soley with We, the People to change the course of history this accursed nation is heading. No more psy-ops, no more fox news rhetoric, no more rovespeak! I'm fucking sick of this partisan shit! We need to join together TODAY to end this motherfucking bullshit!

In closing, I just want to say "psy-ops" one last time.

PSY-OPS.

so let's think for a moment, shall we?
let's assume for a moment that this cretin thread is worth taking seriously.

at this point, thinking about this thread means that we have to consider what analog and cyn imagine themselves to be doing by legitimating it--analog by turning it into some act of civil disobedience (which is really pretty funny--it is the only laugh i have had from the thread so far)--and cyn by trying to "call me out" to "walk the walk"--cliches that really have no meaning in a thread such as this one----and which are close to insulting in that they imply that there has been nothing interesting from me in politics up to now.
but whatever, i expect little from someone whose primary complaint in politics up to now is that he had to read too much when host posts.

it is tedious to speculate about such matters, but i noticed that yesterday this thread disappeared for a while--i assume there was some discussion about how to deal with it, and that the two mod posts above indicate something like a decision has been taken and that both posts above are mod posts, not posts made by the individuals concerning their own views who happen also to be mods.

but perhaps analog and cyn would care to confirm this before we keep going?
maybe not--it is not that important to me.
none of this is that important to me.

carno has a series of associations with politics that he has presented, in various forms that others would have been challenged for having done--in gd discussions, in the "what happened to tfp" thread etc. those associations are close to the complaints i have seen from analog in the past, and presumably they correspond to cyn's views as well. they have nothing really to do with how things have been happening in politics over the past months, during which the character of discussion here has changed for the better--but attitudes are funny and seem to require no real-time data. apparently there are some who think that this should be true in all arenas. that politics should be a matter of attitude or a priori opinion and that information is secondary at best--so that it is an imposition when information is posted because the expectation is generated that you shoudl read it, which is a second imposition. debates then happen around that information--a third imposition. and so it goes.

carno's basic complaint was that political threads were being posted in other forums. i pointed out to him that this was no big deal in itself and was probably a good thing in that folk who did not generally participate inthis forum were able to address questions in other places. in response, this thread.

let's consider the logic, such as it is, that can be derived from the content of carno's snippy post--which would have been censured had it originated from other members---for example, if i had done something like this, i doubt seriously that either cyn or analog would have defended it.
but i assume that there is a 3-d friendship between him and analog and cyn such that what he does here is not required to conform to the same rules as are binding on everyone else, and now both cyn and analog have made carno's special status official.
so there are two sets of rules now.
this is a new development.

the logic of carno's snippy semi-literate op is not only that carno does not like politics, but further that he sees in politics something of a debased form of consumer activity. like which snack food to eat. what is there to say about this notion that politics is a variant of consumerism?
that you can buy shit=that you are free?
that you can "think" about commodities=that you can think about politics?

please explain what is now going on in this thread.
is this a mod "message" that folk who do not think that politics is a consumer question are not welcome here?
or is the "message" that the level of discourse should be ratcheted down?
or is the "message" that what i mentioned in the "what happened" thread--that the implication of much of what was being said about politics is that there is space for everyone except people like me here, now being made into an official position?

i await your response.

Oh yawn...there he goes again. Everyone knows graham crackers are superior. :rolleyes:

Power, while all that research is good and very informative it obviously is biased. You could not have found all those links on your own, so you must have talking pointers being sent to you.

I know who it is to, The Ghoul. That menace to society that promotes scratching glass, turning blue and staying sick.

Well, I have Froggy and some boom-booms and we're working on totally showing your research is so biased and outdated it is laughable.

All I can say is the denizens of Amrap shall rise up and their voices shall be heard...... Graham Crackers over those sugar cookies.....

Froggy plunk your magic twanger.
=============================================================



Roach don't you think you are over analyzing and taking this far more seriously than you have to.

For the love of God man, it's 1 fucking thread, and people are having fun.

It's not about you, so drop the ego bit and the "this is a swipe at me" bitching and have some fun.

Post real threads... ignore this one..... whatever.

Why does this have to be saying When in reality it may just be saying let there be room for EVERYONE.... and if you don't like a thread.... and can't ad positively to it..... move the fuck on and get over yourself.



(Aside)That's all well and good Roach.... But when did the Politics Board become the elitist only playground?

Why do you have to post in here? You don't have to.

Seems a lot of people are having a little bit of fun and just harmlessly satirizing the board a bit.

For the love of Graham Crackers, can't you just let loose and have a little fun without bitching and moaning that there is a thread in here you for whatever reason can't get into?

If not then walk away and let others have their fun.

I think Carno has proven a point there are some in here that are not happy unless they have a fight and can CONTROL the thread with their views.

A harmless experiment has turned into some people getting all upset and instead of ignoring it.... they have to post how ridiculous they find this.

AHEM....... Freedom of speech, the boards are for ALL members and if you truly don't like it, nor allow yourself to just have a break and have some fun in here.... then walk away man and don't post in here.

Why must you try to ruin everyone else's fun?

OOO yeah again..... fun and humor in politics.... Heavens forbid the country is falling apart and people want to release stress and have a little fun, prove a point and just ruin what "we, elitists" have created here.

PS Is the thread in here truly hurting ANYTHING or ANYONE???? It's actually the most fun and relaxed I have been in politics for sometime. Keyword=fun

I haven't heard that in years. :lol:

(Isn't this about the time that we go off on a pointless threadjack?)


Speaking of froggies..... :)

"elitist".....

huh.

interesting.

did I miss anyone bringing up the fact that graham crackers arent even made with graham flour anymore?

my favorite pie crusts are GC crusts, much better and tastier than flour ones

Gee, I didn't see that post coming :rolleyes:

This is just typical moonbat socialist programming. The sugar is in the cookies, the cookies make you fat, Thai people like peanut butter, Karl Rove went to Thailand... Oh noes!1! It must be Bush's fault. :thumbsup:

No but now that you mention it..... that is bizarre..... hmmmm it's a conspiracy to destroy the Amish. They grow a lot of Graham that once was used for those crackers and now big Wheat must destroy the working Amish....

This is far deeper than just the Religious Right/Ghoul/Anti-Froggy campaign..... there is fowl play going on now.

(for those without a sense of humor... foul was purposely mispelled)

(emphasis mine)

Well, I'm not a mod, but I know what I meant when I said the things I did in the "What Happened to TFP?" thread. I suggested that the regulars in here try and leave a little more room for other modes of discourse. Your last two examples of possible messages from the mods exemplify the problematic aspects of Politics - the reason why so many others find it hostile in here. You set it up as if there can only be two choices: you have to either lower yourself to our disdainful mediocrity (we who find it a little intimidating to know that any response we get from a post in here will be a somewhat harsh response, whether in agreement or otherwise), or this space is officially not for roachboy (...because he is too special by refusing to lower himself here by treating the others who may be interested in posting here for the first time as people who perhaps could know better instead of as people who SHOULD know better?). If the speculation in my last parenthesis is inaccurate, I really hope you will help me to understand better. So far, all I have heard from you is a lot of bristling at the mention of letting people who may not be as good at defending their positions to participate enough to grow a little; and then, almost in alternating sentences, painting the picture of an unwelcome roachboy if that must be the case.

I am telling you that I don't see why it is so hard to let some people make a few more ill-supported posts in here to get their bearings or just to express something about which they KNOW (i.e. ngdawg and NJ) without getting a new asshole ripped by the whole Politics circus? I am not saying that you, roachboy alone, are the entire Politics circus and that you, roachboy alone, make this environment hostile. Please do not take it that way. I am asking you to tell me why it has to be mutually exlusive that Politics have space for the current regulars (or simply yourself, if you prefer that question) and newcomers who don't know about or have some trouble adhering strictly to the rules on their first few go-arounds?

This is in Tilted Politics. I viewed Carno's original post as a critique of posting rules on TFP in general - an extension of other posts he made in General Discussion. I thought that it reflected some hostility. I thought that it was wasn't appropriate for politics. As a critique of thread placement in TFP, I suppose it was appropriate. I felt that my comments above were reasonable and on topic. I wasn't at all hostile. I received the response above. Not particularly understanding or "fun". Apparently, a person can't talk about the politics of the board in a thread about the politics of the board in Tilted politics without getting sworn at.

RB's post initial post may have been less friendly, but it was an extension of other related posts by Carno. RB's subsequent posts seem to be related to the topic of this thread as well. (Granted, they are from a different perspective).

I think that if we're concerned about the tone of Tilted Politics, we should all work on our tone...

With all due respect to the naysayers, I have to say, this thread makes me laugh. :lol: I don't like the smart-assed intention of the OP, but as long as that thread on Hezbollah remains in GD, I have no problem with this one existing in Politics. :thumbsup:

And, for the record, Honey Maid plain and simple for my S'mores. I can't stand for anything else!

roach, just to double jump on pan's post a bit - i think that's the point of this post, to me at least.

no. don't take it seriously. carno was making a point...although i don't necessarily agree with how he set out to do it - i agree with you there, i'm not sure this post would have stood in other circumstances - i think it serves the point to open up for some venting of frustration at the way discourse on politics occurs by member who may not be regulars here, or who may be intimidated by the environment here. i think in the context of the little period of internal reflection going on across the boards right now, this post is strangely appropriate in that it might start making politics more approachable to some outsiders to express themselves here...and it could serve as a reminder that it doesn't always have to be so serious in here all the time.

a little irreverence is ok, i think. i can definately tell you work in academics - that symbolism with analogy between consumerism and politics i think is something only you thought of. i think carno was just being an irreverent smartass when he started this thread - no real "framing" or "positioning" involved.

supple - that italicized "I" ( I ) in your post looks like a slash.

edit: roach: i also know you can be a little sensitive about these things, so to clarify: i don't think anyone is saying there is no place in politics for yourself and/or host...well, ustwo may have made some comments about host - but seriously, you're one of the pillars in this part of the community. i honestly don't really know why, but people are apparently intimidated a bit by your on-line persona...always framing and contextualizing and positioning and so forth. as i said above, i think the best thing here is the opportunity for people to let their hair down and relax a little...even within politics. i think it could even help move the quality of conversation forward in general.

superfluous post.
what is important is below somewhere

http://home.comcast.net/~powerclown/papanim.gif
<embed src="http://home.comcast.net/~powerclown/TheTrashman-SurfinBird.mp3" autostart="FALSE">
You Know It, Pan
:thumbsup:

Which is why this thread was allowed to stay. To be honest, when I first saw the thread, I wanted to kill it off until I saw something pretty unprecedented in here, people actually having fun rather than bickering. Liberal, Conservative, and everyone in between just relaxing for a bit and having a laugh. It isn't pointed at any specific person as "stop posting because we think your style is silly," it's just a little light hearted fun. If you don't stop to have a laugh once in a while, life becomes really boring. But if you don't want to, that's fine, just skip the thread and post in a different one. :)

ok....i have a busy afternoon and have to go, so want to clairfy one thing that i think went away in the flurry of activity this morning: what i object to really--fundamentally--in this thread is the post by cynthetiq. i take it as personally disrespectful. that is why i asked about the status of the post--whether he is talking as a mod or as a memebr who happens also to be a mod. i interpreted analog's post in light of cyn's. had these things not happened, i would not have reacted at all---i do not think the thread is interesting--i have NO problem if the intent is to inject some joking around here--but it wasnt. you have to sever the op from other "discussions" to think that. i do not make any such separation, not in this case.
but i already said as much.

the problem is with the mod interventions, so far as i am concerned.
everything else is just reaction on my part to things that, taken on their own, are not such a big deal--all part of the game itself--but cyn's action here i take as personally insulting.
and i assume that in their capacity as mods, the rules against such personal attacks do not apply.
so it is doubly insulting--because the rules do not apply (it seems) i would expect more restraint. instead, i get the above.

that is the problem.

this is reinforced by another problem--the treatment that has been accorded to host, routinely. in that i see nothing but disrespect. i am surprised he has put up with it--he is perhaps a better person than i am--but it has really been appalling to watch the sustained attacks on host for months now--attacks in which cyn also played a part. i wonder if host as departed--he said he would--that would be a real loss. i do not think the "community" values him enough, even if folk disagree with his style.
but apparently, ridiculing host is a special case, wherein (again) the rules about personal attacks are suspended.
nice work, comrades.

so there it is.
clarify that, please.

roach: i know you're going to want clarification from cyn directly; but i think what you're asking for is a difficult distinction. i think there's some modiness in cyn's post, in that he is at least indirectly giving the thread some direction, but I also read it as one member challenging another member to relax a little, and maybe throw out some subtle humor-laden "well fuck you too buddy" style commentary.

I'm not sure that this is a good thing, if it's something that persists across the boards. Here we've just spent a lot of time complaining about posters not respecting each other, and its hard to laugh at each other and ourselves without being outright dicks to each other.

I guess the question, at least for me, is 1. cyn were you actively encouraging roach to tear into carno's shit, 2. is that a good idea in keeping with tfp policy, and 3. do you have any idea how many multisyllabic adjectives would be involved in roach properly ripping someone's ass?

Powerclown wins the thread.

If you don't know why, you are part of the problem.

Roach...if, as you believe, Carno came in and pissed all over the floor in politics...then most everyone else threw down some boards and made a bridge over it. Why...would you want to walk in it?
If, as you claim, Carno's op was a "dig" at politics, then turn it around on him. Laugh at him.

I purposely left this thread open yesterday for a reason. It was subsequently closed for discussion, and I argued to open it back up for the very same reason. Blow off some damn steam, people. Look at yourselves, and have a good laugh. Take off your blinders and look at the guy next to you. Laugh at him, too.

Ustwo? Don't just point. Point and laugh. Take up the liberal view (whatever the hell that might be) in this little graham cracker debate. I've seen several good paradys here. It's your turn. :D

This is all Pan's fault for resurrecting the all-conquering spirit of...GHOUL POWER!!!
:eek: :eek: :eek:

Yes, Honey Maid is indeed a fine brand. As for ketchup and mustard, everything in moderation! Reverend Graham may have invented the taste sensation known as graham crackers, but he ain't powerful enough to fight ketchup and mustard!

War? No.

Nor does it treat my ungodly lust either. Reverend Graham was most certainly a failure in that department.

Terrorist food? Hell no!

"what a disappointment."
Luckily I have heard that sentence enough in my life that I am oblivious to it.

Well, it seems they just don't want to reveal their taste preferences; despite our disappointment, we can't force them.

Yes I do have a certain disdain for the climate in Politics. I am only trying to add some humor into a deathly serious forum.

I can't disagree with you here; I'll have to try all the flavors.

Yeah, maybe he secretly likes the chocolate ones but is scared to admit it. It's okay roachboy, no one will judge you here.

I posted this thread with many intentions and many expectations. So far all of them have come true. I wasn't really trying to troll here though.

Sorry dude, in this rough and tumble world, you gotta think for yourself.

Oh damn, I forgot about teddy grahams! They fucking rock.

Graham crackers are a staple of my diet and I felt they weren't getting the attention they deserve. Despite Reverend Graham's motives, I do think he created a quality snack.

Hah...

Yeah, it's a good habit to have.

Interesting question, pan. We'll have to dig deeper into this...

Damn, Rev. Graham was a Yankee bastard. Maybe I should rethink my opinion of graham crackers.

The South will rise again!

Someone send this man a case!

As for the pronunciation, I always just say it like "gram". I'm not an academian or anything though, and in fact still a disappointing undergrad.

Yes, you really should introduce graham crackers to those poor, grahamless souls.

Well, this was not my intention, but it's your decision.

But they're still not graham crackers.

Boo!

We should call them Fucking Good Crackers. I dislike the Reverend Graham now, so I don't want ot be reminded of him every time I eat one of these things.

All humor must be checked at the door.

Haha, could be true. Those godless heathens can be tricky sometimes.

No milk?? That's a travesty.

I've read your agruments and your sources, but I feel that I'm still right. Ha.

When did I ever say that it was my primary complaint?

This time you got it right. I've had a change of opinion though, I think the other thread is fine in GD, and this one is fine in Politics. I'm a reasonable man, and I've changed my stance.

I wasn't aware that there were different rules when it comes to me. I have been moderated my own fair share. I even think some of the mods secretly hate me :p

Whoa, you're overthinking things.

Indeed.

wtf? No graham flour? Those bastards.

Hey, it's like Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon, for politics!

It's all an effort to destroy the little people.

This thread had no hostility in it until people added their own.

I certainly was not saying that the current frequenters of Politics leave. I was simply using "ham-fisted, undergraduate level sarcam" to try and change the way they come down on people who aren't academians or part of the elite.[/QUOTE]

I feel that he doesn't, no matter that I have no proof or substantial sources to back up my arguments.

Supple Cow,

I reacted to what I observed as an "official" defense (preservation)of an obvious troll thread, that was formed in the context of this insult by this thread's author, that I covered in my last post:
The taunting post directed at roachboy, after he posted similar points, triggered my last post. That taunt, IMO, would have been inappropriate if it had come from an ordianry member.

I posted in the context of my experience here....check this list of politics threads that I have authored, look at the last post in each of the threads with the "locked" symbol, and draw your own conclusions. Additionally, consider the thread titled, "The giant merged Karl Rove thread" that was authored by me as two threads, and then combined and re-titled without any prior communication with me:
http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/search.php?searchid=686656

Consider the circumstances of the last thread that I authored here that was closed, just the other day:
My point Supple Cow, is that some of us who participate here regularly, have paid a higher price, in terms of criticism and harrassment, as a direct result of our participation, than anyone who you think may be discouraged from participating here for the first time, will ever experience. To observe now, that an obvious troll thread, created by someone who has made the comments that this thread's author has made, is "officially" supported, complete with taunts directed at roachboy, because he objected to the motivation of the thread's author, and the subject and content of the OP, is quite a disturbing development to observe.

I, for one, am appalled by the thinly disuised anti-semitic comments in this thread. Especially in light of the fact that those graham cracker boxes are clearly doctored.

HOW CAN WE EVEN BE SURE THAT GRAHAM CRACKERS EVEN EXIST?!?!?!?!?! I'm know for a fact that the notion of the existence of graham crackers is nothing more than a clever ruse created by a bunch of cowardly, cut and run cheeze-its.

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y29/pigglet/graham.jpg

And just who are you calling a "cracker," anyway? So what if I'm from deep in the Incestous South??? I'm part of the Gang of 14 bitches!!! I'll own you. Rich white people own shit...always have, always will. Kiss the Rings!

Host, I genuinely appreciate how invested you are in this board, and that is why I am going to add something here in response to what you've said, even though I am still a touch confused about why you are responding to me about something I said to roachboy. I can only assume that you feel that you feel that you are both under some ill-conceived scrutiny from certain people for the some of same reasons, and this may be true.


I think I understand where you are coming from a little better now. However, I hope that you will investigae each part of this argument a little further before you come to any conclusions about any conspiracy between the mods and Carno (or any other member anyone might seem to think is favored in some way). Cyn is a human being whom you can challenge (respectfully) to be more careful with his words or in any other way you wish.

If there's anything that we can be sure will continue around here, it's that people will make mistakes. Just as you can be challenged by the moderators to work on the style and content of your posts (as evinced by the actions they took, e.g. the Karl Rove thread), you can challenge the moderators (or just one) by bringing the matter up directly with the moderators or in public as you have done. I hope now that Cyn will return and address this.

[QUOTE=roachboy]so let's think for a moment, shall we?
let's assume for a moment that this cretin thread is worth taking seriously.

Insult? Where in the world to you get insult from my quote:

I never stated any insult nor implied it. You inferred or assumed it. I stated that you walk the walk you talk. Period. Did you see additional letters and words that do not exist? I had actually had something that could have been interpreted as insulting so I removed it so as not to confuse anyone. But please show me where in the above 45 word quote there is any insult or personal attack written or insinuated by me. I was simply stating that if you think you can do better, than by all means show us.

I see, so a shrouded thinly veiled personal attack? Please include the rest of the reason why I don't like to read all of hosts linkapalooza. Reading each link, verifying the position, motive, background, etc of each citation post and authors. I cannot keep up with the volume that host provides. Isn't that what kind of critical thinking that you're imploring people to do? But if it takes 3-4 days to digest the topic and it's citations, I don't have time for that, I have other things to do in life as do you.

It's not much different than your own dislike for punctuation and capital letters. You dislike them so you don't particpate in them. Is it fair for me to continue to badger and hound you for it? You've stated it, I've moved on from it. It appears you can't let my own style go.

As far as host, the only thing I've continued to request of him is to venture out of the politics forum. Let the community know more about host outside of politics. IMO, he's risen to the challenge and done it.

I cannot comment on what happened to the thread yesterday. I wasn't party to nor privy to what happened with it.

As I've stated before people are entitled to their opinions, however they are founded and discovered. They are also entitled to respond and engage, and also walk away from the discussion after exclaiming their opinion as such.

I agree with that, some threads exist outside of the Politics thread and a good thing for the community. It's hard to discuss how the price of gas affects you and your household without someone popping bipartisan politics blaming some special interest group or vilifying someone who wants to open ANWR to ease the costs.

Again you make an assumption. I have never met Carno. He's been in NYC and I've not had the opportunity to meet him. I do not give privilege to those I know in 3D IRL, that would be totally absurd. The only thing I can say to that is that if I do know someone who I know IRL and they posted something questionable, I have called them on the phone and asked them to change it before another mod or someone else picks up on it. I will not put myself in the middle, I never have and never will.

My posts have been that there is space for EVERYONE. Those with voluminous links and citations and those with gut unfounded opinion. To your point of stating that there is no longer space for you here seems to me like you're playing the martyr card. If you or host think there is no place to exist, then that's your issue not mine.

Interesting to see that when a majority of the people seem to take an interst in folding into the politics forum, instead of trying to ease them in you'd rather ostracize and criticize them which seems rather cliquish and elitest to me.

The problem, Cyn, is not so much the content of Carno's objections (he's certainly entitled to them), but rather his noxious style about it. Bringing up a point countless times in several threads, and starting a trolling thread about it, are rather uncivil things to do.

I feel that such behavior is detrimental to the community feeling in the TFP.

And that's his style, as is host's voluminous quotations and citations, as is roachboy's disdain for punctuation and capilization. So long as no one is flaming another member, where does it go against the TFP charter?

I'm sorry but I try to remain objective, I must be completely blind but I have not seen the post that you or roachboy seem to be talking about.

/me is making 'smores on the deck...anybody join me?

See I never really have seen a Carno thread because I don't venture much into TFP like I used to. I stick to things I like and just don't look at other things.... (my problem I should venture out more.)

Anywhoooo, I saw this thread and read it. I didn't see it as a "troll" or as sour grapes. I truly saw it as a man who was fed up and wanted to show that there would be people in this political forum, that would take this thread meant as a joke/test and turn it into a fight.

The joke have an opinion on something inconsequential and have at it.... have a sense of humor, satarize and make a parody of politics and release some stress.

To me, I loved it..... I loved being able to let loose and share my sense of humor and maybe have someone laugh. And I loved the way most people jumped in and let themselves loose and enjoy a harmless thread.

So Carno made disparaging remarks somewhere.... I never saw them nor knew about them. So I was not participating in anything but a fun for me thread.

My God, some of you sound like John Lithgow in "Footloose" or Ted Knight in "CaddyShack" or some of those other old bitties from 80's movies, who refused to allow others to have fun.

You have to ask yourselves when you became so fucking high and mighty and judgemental over where and when people could have fun and humor and when that judging included taking everything so seriously that even a goof off thet truly could not hurt anyone, became what you believe to be a shot at you and your friends (actually, it's quite egotistical to believe that this whole thread and all these silly posts were aimed at an elite few).

I close on the old saying.... "if you can't laugh at yourself..... you are taking life way too seriously and you need to go watch a 3 stooges marathon."

I wish to thank Carno for this thread and injecting some humor and fun into the Politics Forum.

And I wish to truly thank the mods responsible for allowing this to continue and having a go at it themselves....

No ass-kissing, just I truly enjoyed this thread and I needed the laugh it gave me. Had this been in any other forum, it wouldn't have been as funny and I would have probably never seen it. Sometimes, we need to inject humor into something we take too seriously so that we can come down off our tangents and see how far off our true beliefs we have gotten.

walking around the city for a few hours is good.
clears the head.

cyn--i think i overreacted to your post--it *was* patronizing and it *was* unnecessary. it advanced nothing--but judging from your post above, it was not meant as an insult so i apologize for claiming the contrary.

on the question of how host is treated in here: this is more a problem. in your capacity as a mod, you have legitimated a recurring and tiresome type of sniping at him--which is rarely--if ever---about the content of the posts and which focusses on the amount of material he gathers as if the amount of material was in itself an imposition on you personally and an imposition on others as well. since you, as mod, made this attack seem hunky dory, it has been repeated over and over in this forum and elsewhere.

the critique says nothing--at all---about what host is saying--it seems little more than a petty sniping that is only ok because you, cyn, sanctioned it because you occupy the double position as mod and member who happens to be a mod and you do not make a distincton between these roles when you post. i think this runs absolutely counter to everything you say above about openness--about acceptance.

so i am not sure that you are in a position to lecture me or anyone else abotu acceptance and openness.
=========================================================

as for this empty category of "elitism": it is a particularly worthless limbaugh buzzword used to present folk who do not agree with limbaugh-esque political views as some kind of persecuting Other.

i see it as nothing more than a device used by people to exempt themselves from thinking too much and to blame others for their doing so. can't deal with arguments you dont agree with: it's the fault of the person who advances those arguments...they are Persecuting you by trying to argue that the world could be seen otherwise. to avoid being Persecuting by these requests that you think about what you believe, the planet limbaugh offers you the option of total passivity. that is how "elitism" functions as a term.

i think it ridiculous--but curiously it keeps coming up here, and seems to work in itsd limbaugh-esque sense. it is "elitist" to make demands on a reader. it is "elitist" to pose questions and not accept bullshit in response.

is that what the folk who throw this term around mean by it?
either explain or give it a rest...

==============
as for the humor thing--i simply dont find anything about this thread funny.
i didnt think caddyshack was funny either....like i dont think shit jokes are funny--i dont think fart jokes are funny. just a question of taste--i am not much of one for fratboy humor--i am not much of one for fratboy anything, really. so there is no particular need to revisit the thread.

Pan,

So, am I being "fucking high and mighty and judgemental" for explaining my view about the thread? It's not very clear who your comment is addressed to. I do have a sense of humor, don't worry. That doesn't mean I'm amused by the same things as you.

Anyway, while I do see the funny aspect of this thread, I am bothered by the negative and confrontational undercurrent of it; and therefore I am pointing it out.

*sigh*

This is why this thread was so badly needed in here. Even in a humorous thread, people are ready to start flaming.

Everyone needs to relax. And you're right ktspktsp, there is an undercurrent of negative and confrontational aspect to the thread, so again, I say to everyone, why not just have a little fun with the thread?

I wasn't going to get involved since I rarely post in here...but I have a pretty strong opinion about the matter.

It's all about the moon pies, baby.

Moon pies?!?!?

Blasphemy! Everyone knows the Hostess Fruit pies are much better!

Sure, GHOUL POWER you say, but what of Froggy??????:confused:

Back to Graham Crackers:

Professor F. Roggenstein of Ghoulardi U. wrote and I quote:

Link:

And did not G. H. Oul of Big Wheat Industries Think Tank write:

Link:

And finally we see the fruition of the plan come to pass with Ow Ow Ow Boomboom CEO of Big Wheat Industries say this in their quarterly report:

link:

whatever you believe is what you believe. Just like me.

I believe that I was trying to get host to add more content of his own and also post whole sources because initially it seemed like he was posting out of context. I even was trying to get him to post outside of politics, which he did prior to this thread.

And again, your buzzword elitism definition is exactly what you are claiming for others, yet it also applies to how you were stating that "ratcheting down" to the other's level left "no place" you you.

but again, the idea here is to evolve and grow. I know that I have and still am, even if you don't think so.

i meant no personal attack on you cyn.

and vice versa. trust me, I'm trying hard to read more and understand what you and host post, it's not easy for me, but it takes effort to change behavior. I don't think myself a stupid person, but ignorant in aspects that you both frame your arguments. As I've stated before, I'd like to understand more, but when it starts to become work, then the learning is no longer fun and not worth the extra time it takes. If the critical thinking position against one's citations is to stand, then conversely one cannot just accept the other's position at face value because one stated it with citiation and backup.

There is still the deconstruction of current belief as part of the process. Again, it's not an easy thing. For me it's looking at some things that I don't want to nor care to look at, but to at least make the attempt with honesty and effort.

First and foremost, this is supposed to be fun, not work not hardship. This goes for being a member to being a staff moderator. All I'm asking and I think that all the staff is as well, is that we all do enjoy our time here.

There are over a dozen TFP members here that know me personally and at least half of those know me well. My sense of humour should not be brought into question when I get to my point. This thread is about as funny as a joke that needs to be explained ("get it?....get it now??). So for those who keep trying to tell roachboy, host etc. that this thread is "funny! blow off some steam," please stop it... your point is made.

Since all our opinions are equally valid, here's mine: most of these attempts to blow off steam reek of a thinly veiled attack on host and roachboy. I can think of one that was particularly out of line (see if you can spot it on a quick scroll down the page!!:rolleyes: ). It's easy to attack someone and hide behind the defense of "I was just joking around."

Specifically, I am bewildered by Cyn's equating of roach's use of lowercase, host's long quotations and Carno's trolling.

Explanations aside, whether they were made or are coming, here's what my gut's telling me: I feel agression from this thread, not humour.

Thank you, Ali. That observation was long overdue.

I tried to play this thread in fun, but as you said, it was never meant to be in fun.

Actually, I did mine all in HUMOR.

If you feel I was attacking someone or you feel I was attacking you..... that was not my intention... but I will not appologize for what I wrote strictly as humor.

You're all welcome. :)

aberkok, I'd have to modify that and say there's a strong sense of passive-aggression coming from this thread. Which is not usually tolerated around here. As I said earlier, I do not like the smart-assedness of the OP, or of those who have tried very deliberately to offend certain individuals here.

However, I also have a sense of humor and see that *some* aspects of the thread can be taken lightly... and as I also said earlier, I will tolerate it as long as the Hezbollah thread remains in GD. A semi-fair exchange. However, it would seem more fair if we could get as many people paying attention to and posting in that thread as they are with this one. Otherwise, this thread serves little purpose than to point up its smug attention-whorishness.

thank god governor "moonpie" isn't running for anything...

TFP does not allow for direct personal attack between members...mmmm Smores.....and thus some resort to somewhat backdoor tactics to show disdain....chocolately marshmallow goodness....we need a basement.

What if there was a place, unmoderated, totally free of limitations on aggressive response, a paradise of painful exposure for hidden feelings we all carry towards other members. A place seperated from TFPolitics as a whole, that is not allowed to bleed into the forums, yet is indeed the depository for all negativity created within the politics forum itself.
Wouldnt it be nice to know you can bash anyone you want, and release your pent up frustration without intervention, to argue with the one you disagree with in a fashion more condusive to the truth your emotions hold inside? Knowing what is said in this little world within a world stays there.
Think of this suggestion as a way to evolve the politics board beyond the stagnation you all complain about, and remove the main issue it has from serious debate. I have seen this Idea in action elsewhere, and have come to appreciate its benefits, which are twofold in my opinion:

1)It allows for serious expression of the dark side we all have, and creates honest communication between members (though not always kind)....this in the long haul allows for understanding of underlying dissagreement, and releases unsaid issues into the open.

2)It (if done properly) removes the worst issues from what should be a political discussion, and creates a place for the Garbage to be aired, saving those uninvolved from smelling someone elses laundry.

If there is interest , Staff and otherwise, I have an understanding of how this might work, and will explain in depth if requested.

Doesn't that place exist on nearly every other forum you can visit? Isn't that what we're trying to avoid of TFP?
It never stays there. It would most certainly bleed into other forums.

So basically, TFP Fight Club? :D

It sounds intriguing, but I don't know how effective it would really be. I mean, to some extent, people often resort to Journals to vent about one another (often when the journal is made "private," I've found), but that's not terribly productive. Venting is good in the short-term, but it doesn't actually solve issues between people in the long term. That takes mature discussion and responsibility for self (which not everyone around here are willing to do).

Honestly, I'm not sure if the TFP is ready for something as bare and honest as a textual Fight Club. I think it probably would leak into other forums and taint what happens there. But, that's just my opinion.

Oh well....just an Idea...heh

Anyone ever have Graham Cracker and Cheese together....it almost hurts

Amen Brother Bill! I wholeheartedly agree. There is entirely too much bellyaching and negativity of late. It is high time for people to lighten up and enjoy their "down time" after work or even at work. Have FUN! There is entirely too much drama, strife, nit picking, backstabbing and lack of an open mind in todays world. I say... let them eat Graham Crackers!

I prefer the chocolate ones! Then again its a woman thing... all things chocolate are.... well.... :love:

Did you know that if you take a couple chocolate graham crackers and sandwich some fat free coolwhip in them that they make a great low calorie no guilt version of ice cream sandwiches???? Mmmmmmm

So go forth my TFP Brothers and Sisters and have fun! Consume copious amounts of Grahm Crackers and smile more!

in case roachboy's inability to find this thread funny gets taken as meaning he finds nothing funny or amusing, this makes me giggle like a fool (try it out, its great):

http://www.balldroppings.com/

strangely enough, i think this thread has been useful.....

cyn: thanks for working through the conversation with me--it is good to watch some understanding emerge on both our parts through a kinda contentious thread.

i knew you were good people...cinnamon graham cracker and philly cream cheese. it hurts so good.

Nothing really "strange" about it...you just have to put aside what you "know", for a second, and enjoy. Kinda like we used to. ;)

From the forum rules:
Not that I care. This obviously exists as an experiment only, and will not be allowed to repeat itself in other forums all over the board, as that would lead to mass confusion.

Nice to see everyone so entertained. But is it really any suprise that roach and others responded the way they did? Of course not; what is suprising is the amount of scorn and disdain they received for doing so. As if they were out of line for saying "wtf" to this thread. This thread is just one giant wtf.

You call it humor; I call it insulting, and intentionally so. But I guess we're past that now, which is nice.

Graham crackers are ok, I guess. But they suck to read about.

Agreed. Thank you for your contributions. I'd also like to point out that the kind of discussion we had does happen all the time between members and moderators usually via PM.

Ok, I admit I have just had an affair on my teddy grahams... I found Bunny Grahams at the store today and bought a box....

Heh now I remember why I went inactive on TFP and come back to see a "What happened to TFP?" thread.

You guys are arguing about a Graham Cracker thread. No, really.

don'cha love these guys?

I'm really enjoying this thread. I think it illustrates the diversity of... err.. snack food brands.

But wouldn't you agree that the partisanship of the cracker people vs the moon pie people is a chasm where compromise is all but impossible?

Heh.

I believe compromise IS possible! I believe crackers or moon pies..... both taste better with milk! Let milk give peace a chance!!!!!

Great! We've found common ground in milk. As long as we don't get mired in debate over whole, 2%, and skim, then we can work toward expanding into new areas, such as coffee and hot chocolate. Before you know it, we'll be working in partnership toward the greater snacking good.

Skim all the way...

Only losers drink homo or 2% milk

Why would you pay for skim milk when you can get water out of the facuet for free?

:confused:

Skim milk. Hah! If i want skim milk i just add three parts piss to my 2%. But i don't ever, because that's fucking gross.

It didn't take long for one of the extremists to pipe up. :rolleyes:

I always suspected that you were homo-phobic. :mad:

and what's wrong with homogenized whole milk? how in the world can you soak graham crackers in 2% or that other crap and get the full flavorful benefit of a bowl of graham crackers and milk? i ask you?

Because if you drink 1 eight ounce glass of whole milk a day, after a year you have just eaten 16 sticks of butter.

I will have skim milk thank you, after all, that is my secret to losing over 130 pounds. It still has all the needed calcium!

Rumor has it that whole milk saps calcium out of your bones after a certain age as well but you know how rumors go.

So let us be thankful for milk in any variety. MOO!!!

two words: soy milk