@FiveHourMarathon's banner p

FiveHourMarathon

Wawa Nationalist

17 followers   follows 6 users  
joined 2022 September 04 22:02:26 UTC

And every gimmick hungry yob

Digging gold from rock n roll

Grabs the mic to tell us

he'll die before he's sold

But I believe in this

And it's been tested by research

He who fucks nuns

Will later join the church


				
User ID: 195


				
				
				

			

		

	














	


		


			



	

		

			

			

				

					

						

							
						

						

							
							

								
FiveHourMarathon


								

								

								
								
								

								
							
					
 
				


				
Wawa Nationalist

				
				
				

				

					17 followers  

					follows 6 users  

					joined 2022 September 04 22:02:26 UTC
				


				
					

					
And every gimmick hungry yob


Digging gold from rock n roll


Grabs the mic to tell us


he'll die before he's sold


But I believe in this


And it's been tested by research


He who fucks nuns


Will later join the church



				

				

				

				

				

					

					

					
					
					

					
User ID: 195


					
					
					
				

			


					

						
					



		

	

 











			
			

			
			

			




	


		

			
‎

			

				
				

					Hour
					Day
					Week
					Month
					Year
					
				

			


			
‎

			

	
	

	 Hot Bump Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
	



		

	






	

		
		

		
		
	

	

  







		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of March 2, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


When it comes to overpricing, I'm sure a lot of insurance companies have also done that, but we don't hear about it because people grumbling about increased premiums isn't exactly newsworthy.




There's an asymmetry to it: one or two insurance companies can get destroyed underpricing, and in the process they will actually crowd out the companies pricing it correctly. But if one or two insurance companies overprice, they just don't get the business, some other company does.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of February 23, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
It certainly seems that inasmuch as you have a NATO bloc and an Axis of Resistance bloc, if you compare the Russian air force's performance in Ukraine and the United States/Israel's performance in Iran, you have to come out of it thinking NATO has superior air defense systems.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of March 2, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
@phailyoor


There's a market that refuses to sell these policies at a reasonable price, we are selling them, therefore they are below market. I'm reading "reasonable" to mean "affordable" as it is typically used colloquially, admittedly one could pedantically argue that the market price is inherently the "reasonable" price but I don't think that's how Trump intended it.


The argument in favor of the policy is that the US has better knowledge that ships won't be hit and thus can offer a better price while knowing they will make a profit on the policies. If the premiums on the policies ultimately pay for the losses, plus/minus the costs of the escorts and protection, then sure it would be a good policy. But this doesn't seem to be driven by actuarial logic so much as by an effort to avoid high gas prices going into the summer driving months in the USA.


Government insurance is historically a dangerous project, where for example Flood Insurance has evolved into a massive subsidy from the pockets of taxpayers into the pockets of people with beach homes.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of March 2, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
US to Offer Below Market Insurance Rates to Arab Oil Shipping


CNBC Reports that the United States, in an effort to open Hormuz and avoid a rise in global oil prices, will take a series of steps designed to allow shipping to resume. While this will likely change, as it is definitely a "building-the-airplane-in-midair" policy and may in fact just be the administration trying to backfill a Truth Social post from Trump, we're likely to get something like this occurring.


-- There has been no actual Iranian effort to shut Hormuz at this time, rather Insurers have pre-emptively pulled coverage and as a result tankers are unwilling to risk it. It's questionable whether Iran can actually sink tankers, but the global insurance industry has decided it is not worth the risk. As a result oil prices have jumped a bit, though not insanely, since the war's beginning. The US government is now stepping in to offer insurance that insurance companies refuse to offer, "at a very reasonable price". This would amount to subsidizing foreign shipping companies by offering them below-market pricing for their insurance costs, and if payouts must be made the cost of a single loaded oil tanker is likely to land in $250mm range, and could run higher depending on oil prices.


-- While the argument that oil is a global market and it is important to keep energy costs and gas prices low for the American consumer...doesn't it feel odd to you that we're engaging in a giveaway to Aramco and other oil multinationals? It feels wrong, it feels antithetical to an America-First policy platform. We're using the heavily indebted US treasury to backstop foreign corporations and sovereign wealth funds. The policy itself may be sound, but the framing grates on me: we are escorting foreign ships, we are subsidizing foreign corporations, in exchange for little or nothing. I'd sooner see an agreement framed explicitly as Saudi Arabia paying for protection. If the benefits accrue disproportionately to foreigners, foreigners should shoulder the cost. America should not be in the business of subsidizing foreign shipping.


-- Does this alter the Bayesian probability that the Arab gulf kingdoms were the driving force behind the war in Iran? I'm not sure how to parse it, but it sure seems relevant. Is this indicative that they are not onside and need to be bribed to keep the coalition together? Or is it indicative that their support was the driving force all along and the USG is continuing to operate according to the wishes of Aramco?


-- On the positive, this does seem to be an admirable aligning of interests: the USG is both insurer and protector, so it has "skin in the game" to protect the oil tankers at all costs. Or at least up to $250mm or so a ship. Assuming such a thing is possible.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of February 23, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
And in Iraq we said "see, every war doesn't have to be Vietnam! We can just turf out the dictator in a couple weeks and we're done!"


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of February 23, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
People thought the same thing in 2003-2004 when the United States mowed down Saddam.


See this Capitol Steps lyric for reference to tune of Help Me Rhonda:




Although we didn't find any mass weapons in Iraq


To get rid of Saddam was the perfect reason to attack


And now that we've done so fine


There are some other nasty leaders in line


Why don't we help Rwanda?


That would be a good place to start


Help Rwanda, help, help Rwanda


Help Liberia, help, help Liberia


Help Uganda, help, help Uganda


Then Botswana, help, help Botswana


Help Guyana, help, help Guyana


Then Granola


You mean Angola


Help Rwanda, yeah


We've got bombs that are smart




These exact same conversations were had back then. The US was so strong it could impose its will with no limitations. It was able to bulldoze the vaunted Iraqi army way ahead of schedule, with no meaningful resistance. That proved incorrect.


The United States is in its Chip Kelly (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chip_Kelly#Philadelphia_Eagles_(2013%E2%80%932015) era. We're running trick plays and full time hurry up offenses and it's working. Maybe the magic will run out, maybe it won't.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of March 2, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Sorry, misread where you wanted to put US bases.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of March 2, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


Did you not say that easy women are of no value to a proper high value man? If yes, then how can easy women be of low value if they provide some value to high-value man in form of this mythical "experience"? So now hoes from the club and dumb prostitutes and OF bimbos are hidden masters of love, who will teach high value men about successful relationship? How?




This feels like it's going to descend into the kind of boxing/MMA discourse about quality of opponent.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of March 2, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Ok, so the promise is easy: the USA engages in a forever war occupying an unfriendly country, while the Iranian government surrenders all legitimacy among its population.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Quality Contributions Report for February 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


a handful of cranky religious conservatives saying "now it's time to overturn Obergefell




Depending on death luck, it's quite likely that R appointed justices will dominate on the SCOTUS for the foreseeable future. Obergefell is a moral smorgasbord that essentially allows the SCOTUS to write whatever they want into the constitution. It's not going anywhere.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of March 2, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
...So we intend to station 500,000 troops in Iran, drawing down to about 200,000 in the next five years, and maintain about 100,000 troops in Iran for the next 80 years while fully integrating Iran into our economic sphere?


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of March 2, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
The American public just elected a government on the premise that they would focus on reducing inflation and avoid foreign adventurism. That government just instituted a policy of kinetic regime change in Iran, and the CPI is identical to the September before the election.


Would an Iranian democracy be allowed to be democratic, or would it be subject to bombing? How would such a government promise not to develop nuclear weapons in a way that the USA/Israel would trust?


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of March 2, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Do you think that those 80% of Iranians are ultimately in favor of a government whose policies would be acceptable to the USA/Israel? Or would a hypothetical liberal Persian democracy still have to accept a world in which they can be bombed at will if their democracy were to go into an unapproved direction? Ok you've killed the abuser, is she allowed to get herself a gun to keep herself safe in the future?


And more to the point, how does she credibly tell you she won't get a gun in the future? What promise would be accepted?


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of March 2, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Is there any way for Iran to credibly promise not to get a nuclear weapon in the foreseeable future?


It strikes me that with each Israeli-USA attack on Iran, it becomes more obvious to any Iranian that a nuclear weapon might be a useful thing to have. The bombings might set back the physical process, but they increase the motivation.


If a bunch of guys come to my house several times and kick in my door and beat me up and break my furniture and tell me "you better not get a gun, if you get a gun we'll get really angry!" My first thought, and I would think any man's first thought, is "I better get a gun."


I just can't see a way for Iran to credibly make a promise that they don't want a nuclear weapon in a world where they quite obviously should want a nuclear weapon.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Friday Fun Thread for February 27, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
It's normal to enjoy an alcoholic drink you enjoy the taste of, or at least to otherwise couch the consumption of alcohol in a ritual built around other goals of aesthetic enjoyment like fine whiskey or wine. Most people wouldn't enjoy the taste of straight vodka, one drinks straight vodka in order to get drunk. I had friends in college who drank nothing but straight vodka or everclear to "get drunk not fat."


Coming home every night and drinking a glass of vodka is directly purposively getting drunk with no cover of "this scotch is ambrosial" or "the terroir" or even "I can never tell what a margarita is going to do to me." It's straight ethanol.


So like, all of the above. Though I think a big part of the conclusion here is also the "leaving wife and kids at age 50 with no indication or explanation whatsoever" which also indicates some kind of deeper personal problem. Theoretically if I met the guy six months before he left his wife and kids, I would just assume it was a harmless quirk.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of February 23, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


The reason we haven't done stuff like this in the past (except for when we have) is that it isn't particularly useful most of the time.




I think it needs to be added that one of the major constraints holding the United States (and other similarly situated countries) back from doing this kind of thing was also the presence of a genuine Christian faith and set of values grounding the actions of most military commanders. Our leaders used to have moral frontiers they would not cross, now we do not.


When JFK's generals were proposing a surprise attack on Cuba, RFK slipped him a note saying that they would be no better than the Japanese at Pearl Harbor. There was a genuine shared sense of honor, and a sense of mortal sin, that made certain actions off limits as dishonorable, as endangering one's immortal soul. Tradition stretching back through history to Chivalry, to the Romans who believed that war had to be validly declared with all due ceremony before it could be engaged in honorably. The surprise attack, the assassination, the murder, these were not avoided for mechanical reasons but because they were sins, they harmed one's soul.


Trump simply doesn't share that moral grounding. He has no belief that these are acts that would stain his soul, assuming he believes in a soul. He sees nothing wrong with launching a surprise attack in the middle of negotiations, as long as it achieves the goal. He is a pure utilitarian, there is no means that cannot be justified by sufficiently good ends.


The long term consequences of the Sucker-Punch Doctrine have yet to be seen.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of February 23, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


Hamas can "control" [Gaza], but can do nothing to endanger Israel.




The same was said before the current war.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Friday Fun Thread for February 27, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


If it's just "two ingredients" then every random mixer and liquor is a cocktail.




Canonically this is most cocktails like Screwdrivers or the "champagne cocktail" often served in old bar books.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Friday Fun Thread for February 27, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


Is that 'can't' in a social or philosophical sense, or in a pragmatic one?




Could you clarify the question, I'm not quite sure what you mean.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Friday Fun Thread for February 27, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Sorry, that was unclear, I don't think that having one drink a night makes one an alcoholic.


I think this particular man probably had a drinking problem, and that his wife was unaware of it, much as she seemed to be basically unaware of everything going on in his life. I think drinking straight liquor every single night is indicative of a drinking problem, when combined with the "50 year old man suddenly blows up his family life with zero explanation offered" evidence that makes up the rest of the book.


My definition of an alcoholic would be someone who can't stop themselves from drinking alcohol despite negative consequences. I don't know about one night, but I'd agree with you that someone who lasts fifty years doesn't have much of a problem, because they aren't really facing negative consequences. But if your doctor gives you medicine and tells you not to drink while taking it, or if I tell you that wigilia requires no alcohol, and you go ah shit how am I gonna make it through this? Then I think that's a problem.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Friday Fun Thread for February 27, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
What is a "cocktail" colloquially speaking?


Context: Mrs. FiveHour read and then made me read the book Strangers by Belle Burden, a memoir by a wealthy WASP about her sudden divorce. The theme of the book is that her hedge-funder husband suddenly walked out, and she realized that they were, you know, Strangers in the grand scheme of things, that she knew nothing about him if she didn't know he was going to walk out on her. The book is both fascinating and awful, because it's the direct testimony of an unreliable narrator, so there's a ton to pick apart, which is what Mrs. FiveHour and I happen to enjoy doing together. Anyway, one of the repeating elements of her account of her marriage is that her husband came home from work at the money factory, she of course never has any idea what he does exactly, and has a "cocktail." He needs his "cocktail" before he moves on with his evening. But she describes the cocktail he drinks every night as vodka over ice.


My answer: Which...that's not a cocktail, that's a drinking problem. A cocktail has at least two ingredients: gin and tonic, rum and coke, vodka or gin and vermouth, whiskey and soda, bourbon and amaretto, etc. Ice doesn't count, plain water doesn't count. I think in general I would say that to really qualify as a cocktail you need a third element in addition to the first two, the olive in the martini or the lime in a cuba libre, but strictly speaking it's not necessary.


Resulting analysis: Drinking straight vodka every night is not normal. Burden describes it as a cocktail to give it a charming mid-century WASP imprimatur, but just drinking vodka on the rocks is unhinged! Even my Polish family drink vodka as a shot! What Burden is describing isn't a guy with a quirky habit, it's a guy descending into alcoholism. Her entire analysis of the marriage is this: she didn't notice her husband's drinking, excused it as a harmless quirk, when the guy was drinking hard. Maybe not alcoholic hard, but you gotta be a heavy drinker to enjoy sipping straight vodka. It's not like whiskeys where you can fake the connoisseur, when you drink straight vodka you're doing it because you like the alcohol in your system. Mrs. Fivehour and I are thoroughly enjoying picking apart Burden's arguments in this way, she might be the worst marital strategist of all time.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of February 23, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


Cormac McCarthy DEAD DFW DEAD Updike DEAD Wolfe DEAD Junger DEAD




This is like saying that the US Olympic team has always been left coded because they gave the Black Power salute on the podium in Mexico City.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of February 23, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
I'd throw in an extra controversy: the United States government paying for Kash Patel to do a whole lot of things that seem to have nothing to do with his job. The trip to Italy probably cost about $75k, this on top of the security detail for his girlfriend.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of February 23, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


The joke implicitly undermines the idea that women's sports is equal to men's sports - and they're instead a kind of annoying dysfunctional burden parasiting on the men's team's success ("sorry Timmy, but you have to bring your little brother along!")




Yeah, I heard it and kind of groaned. Did we really need to do that when we could have been bragging about beating Canada twice?


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of February 23, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
I'm not sure what the difference you're trying to draw is. Pundits talk to fans. Liberal pundits exist to appeal to liberal fans.


But I guess the equivalent would be the kind of conservative cultural critic who tries to salvage something usable out of movies, music, and literature created by their enemies. Whether it is by claiming that Taylor Swift is secretly a conservative icon, or by creating godawful Christian rock music to half-ass mimc their enemies, or by constantly whining that they wish a conservative would write a decent novel.