FiveHourMarathon
Wawa Nationalist
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
50m ago
I haven't really seen one, because defending the Trump administration's actions here requires a lot of guesswork as to their ultimate goals. There's a lot of "they could" or "they might" or "maybe they will" hedging involved. Trump and Hegseth have not communicated a clear plan to the public, so rooting for its success means assuming there are more moves coming that will deliver success.
I pray nightly that such a plan does exist and will succeed. The better outcome by far for my family at home and abroad will be if this results in the transition from an evil isolated clerical Iranian state to a modern open Iranian state that can participate in the global economy. Even better: 52nd state, after Venezuela won 51st in the WBC.
But prayer isn't much of a strategy, and it's definitely a pretty poor argument, so where you see open debate at all you're seeing a lot of "don't be a Negadelphian" type discourse or flameouts from pro-war commenters.
FiveHourMarathon
Wawa Nationalist
1hr ago
The problem was that we ended up funneling a bunch of guns and money to allegedly "moderate" Salafists who would go on to become the Islamic State, effectively making shit worse.
That was the solution found to the problems with the first few years of nation building.
FiveHourMarathon
Wawa Nationalist
1hr ago
what exactly a lot of republicans (and more moderate Democrats) found objectionable about the establishment's handling of Iraq and Afghanistan.
That he failed.
If we're being honest.
If Trump can deliver a clear success, one so clear that no one can whine about media bias, Americans will accept it, regardless of the morality. Changing Supreme Leaders and another inconclusive war in Lebanon isn't going to count for much.
FiveHourMarathon
Wawa Nationalist
1hr ago
First, I think it needs to be pointed out that, with the Biden-era environmental limits removed the US is once again a net petroleum exporter and the US economy is much better situated to weather possible energy-trade disruptions than say China is.
The USA was a net exporter throughout the Biden administration.
FiveHourMarathon
Wawa Nationalist
15hr ago
They should really watch the WBC final togehter.
FiveHourMarathon
Wawa Nationalist
16hr ago
These problems won’t be fixed because fixing them would require stepping on the toes of powerful industries or interest groups who have skilled lobbyists. The current situation pleases enough of the middle class+ that even appeals to the power of the voters won’t work to create change...
We’re in the situation because it’s a stable equilibrium since the 80s.
Yes one explanation is that we have an 80% party and it's the corporate uniparty.
Alternatively, there's the corporate/deep state capture explanation, that as soon as a president seeking to change foreign policy gets into office, he's subject to deep state efforts to undermine him. Obama spoke of clashing with "the generals" when he tried to change course in the Middle East, while generals directly lied to Trump when he tried to pull out of Syria.
FiveHourMarathon
Wawa Nationalist
17hr ago
I really just can't figure out if this was an important post or a make work admin sinecure. Never heard of him before, never heard of the job before. Is this a nobody or near cabinet level? The name tells you nothing.
FiveHourMarathon
Wawa Nationalist
17hr ago
I kind of assumed it wasn't a president of the USA.
FiveHourMarathon
Wawa Nationalist
19hr ago
Because neither party actually solves national problems, and so each cycle one party comes into power promising to fix problems, doesn't fix them, and the public turns against the party in power. ((This is both people changing their vote and members of either party being more energized to turn out or demoralized and staying home))
Every winning presidential candidate this century has run promising a more restrained foreign policy and every one of them has started wars or foreign entanglement abroad. With the exception of Dubya's reelection in 2004 during the Iraq war, which sort of goes to the point.
2008 Obama runs on getting us out of Iraq, and wrapping up Afghanistan by the end of his term we're still in both and add Libya and Syria, Trump runs on no more forever wars but doesn't pull back anywhere, Biden finally gets us out of Afghanistan but drags us into entanglements in Ukraine and Gaza, Trump II we are back in a fresh middle eastern war.
High cost of healthcare, big corporate malfeasance, immigration etc. Every president comes in promising to fix the issue and doesn't fix it.
We might see a dominant party if one party could deliver actual results.
FiveHourMarathon
Wawa Nationalist
21hr ago
In related news a counterterrorism functionary has resigned from the government in protest of the Iran war.
After much reflection, I have decided to resign from my position as Director of the National Counterterrorism Center, effective today. I cannot in good conscience support the ongoing war in Iran. Iran posed no imminent threat to our nation, and it is clear that we started this war due to pressure from Israel and its powerful American lobby.
After much reflection, I have decided to resign from my position as Director of the National Counterterrorism Center, effective today. I cannot in good conscience support the ongoing war in Iran. Iran posed no imminent threat to our nation, and it is clear that we started this war due to pressure from Israel and its powerful American lobby. I support the values and the foreign policies that you campaigned on in 2016, 2020, 2024, which you enacted in your first term. Until June of 2025, you understood that the wars in the Middle East were a trap that robbed America of the precious lives of our patriots and depleted the wealth and prosperity of our nation.
In your first administration, you understood better than any modern President how to decisively apply military power without getting us drawn into never-ending wars. You demonstrated this by killing Qasam Solamani and by defeating ISIS. Early in this administration, high-ranking Israeli officials and influential members of the American media deployed a misinformation campaign that wholly undermined your America First platform and sowed pro-war sentiments to encourage a war with Iran. This echo chamber was used to deceive you into believing that Iran posed an imminent threat to the United States, and that should you strike now, there was a clear path to a swift victory. This was a lie and is the same tactic the Israelis used to draw us into the disastrous Iraq war that cost our nation the lives of thousands of our best men and women. We cannot make this mistake again.
As a veteran who deployed to combat 11 times and as a Gold Star husband who lost my beloved wife Shannon in a war manufactured by Israel, I cannot support sending the next generation off to fight and die in a war that serves no benefit to the American people nor justifies the cost of American lives. I pray that you will reflect upon what we are doing in Iran, and who we are doing it for. The time for bold action is now. You can reverse course and chart a new path for our nation, or you can allow us to slip further toward decline and chaos. You hold the cards.
It was an honor to serve in your administration and to serve our great nation. -- Joe Kent
(Formatting altered)
Is that an important role? I've certainly never heard of the guy before, and I'm not sure I've heard of the center either.
Were there any examples of similar defections from an administration during military events, or lack thereof, in the past?
FiveHourMarathon
Wawa Nationalist
1d ago
Lindsey Graham forces us into a war with the gay Ayatollah, Schearer said something about how the Roehm era S.A. was riven by the kind of bitter interpersonal strife only possible among homosexuals.
FiveHourMarathon
Wawa Nationalist
1d ago
Good strategy to imitate the Taliban, now if only they could raise the perception that their enemies excuse child molesters in their midst...
FiveHourMarathon
Wawa Nationalist
1d ago
It's not that simple to delineate one classic as the anchor of a language and another as outside of that. Certainly Shakespeare and the KJV are the bedrock of modern English, but everything within the canon serves a purpose as a bridge from here to there. Austen is much more accessible to the modern reader than the KJV or Hamlet, and reading things like Pride and Prejudice will prepare you for reading Shakespeare. Reading Austen serves much the same purpose, really, because Jane Austen read Shakespeare and the KJV. It's not about preserving one work and not others, it's about preserving the connective tissue that makes a living tradition with our ancestors.
My seventh grade English teacher had a big chart on her wall that some past class had made, with literary and intellectual movements stacked on top of each other, with their themes and what they were reacting against in the past movement. The writers of the Enlightenment were reacting against the religiosity and irrationalism of the medieval period, the Romantics were reacting against how boring the Enlightened rationalists were, Realism reacted against how goofy the Romantics were, Modernism and Absurdism reacted against Realism's limitations, etc. An extremely Hegelian view of literature. Everything exists within a context.
When you start editing original texts, you get stuff like this. The old teen girl book series Pretty Little Liars has been "updated" in the latest releases, including e-books apparently purchased in the past and stored in the cloud, to include modern references. At least, that's the stuff girls noticed, I wouldn't be surprised if slurs that would have been mildly edgy in 2003 were edited out in 2020. Now I'll grant you that PLL isn't a core work of the literary canon, but the only way this kind of thing doesn't happen is if people at least try to prevent it. I don't want to be hunting for particular editions of a book to make sure it's the real text and not recent politically correct innovations.
FiveHourMarathon
Wawa Nationalist
1d ago
Yeah I guess I've never had the most sophisticated military in history targeting me, but it seems shortsighted to pick a guy you will need to replace later. Coaching changes always produce instability.
FiveHourMarathon
Wawa Nationalist
1d ago
Iran's new Supreme Leader is either maimed, on his death bed, or already dead.
So why did they pick him? It seems like such an odd thing to do. I mean, some scarring, fine, "disfigured, vengeful, homosexual Ayatollah" is a pretty funny villain for a Saturday morning cartoon. But if he's dying or dead, why not just pick someone else? Unless the USA got him right after he was picked, but then the USA would tell us the particular strike I would think? They were saying he was dead before it was confirmed he was even picked.
FiveHourMarathon
Wawa Nationalist
1d ago
How exactly am I preventing you from doing so? If such a modernized abridged Austen existed, I wouldn't go to the Barnes and noble at the mall with my buddies from jiu jitsu and take every copy and throw it in the river.
I (and those similarly situated and opinionated) would probably vaguely sneer at it as degenerate or childish. I would probably judge someone negatively for reading it if I saw it, the same way I judge people I see reading Bill o Reilly "killing" books or White Fragility or Heated Rivalry. Maybe if I got worked up I'd write a tweet or a substack essay or an effort post about it, but probably not. I would view such a thing as a slippery slope towards the English speaking peoples, my people, being estranged from our own heritage. That would not lead me to violent action, I am after all not Italian, but I would sneer and gatekeep.
Given that you know that such would be my reaction, your objection seems to be that the possibility of that sneering prevents such a work from being published? But why should I withhold judgment of something I believe would harm my cultural heritage to enhance your convenience?
Gatekeeping is good, actually.
FiveHourMarathon
Wawa Nationalist
1d ago
I should have specified modern English, roughly Shakespeare to today, but I felt that would be more confusing than useful.
FiveHourMarathon
Wawa Nationalist
2d ago
Frankly, I don't care about the "history of English language". Neither do I care about "[your] heritage". I am afterall not English (or anglo- anything).
If you don't care about me or my heritage, I don't see why I have to care about you or your convenience. If you want an easy reading for the non-native English speaker, read it in translation, which you've pointed out exists and is easier for you.
Do you really think that people should have to read the second instead of the third when the first is not an option?
I don't really see how the third is a massive improvement over the first. The first simply seems to be an option to me, and I'm comfortable with the idea of gatekeeping here. By putting in the effort to read the first, you can easily come to understand the sentence structure and the meaning of the word "handsome" in context, which will help you read other works in the same period without needing translation. With a modicum of effort, these things evaporate for you.
I, of course, will never have a meaningful opinion on Homer or Tolstoy by my own standard. Awkward, as those are some of my favorite works, and I have an effortpost on them in the hopper, but alas. I am not perfect.
FiveHourMarathon
Wawa Nationalist
2d ago
Taking your question in a totally different direction: the essential Romantic Comedies to watch to survey the genre
-- Love Affair (1939) or An Affair to Remember (1957). The classic, referenced in Sleepless in Seattle among other places, caught both on Turner Classic Movies when I watched a lot of it while studying for the LSAT. The climactic scenes are iconic for a reason. They're the same movie, watch the earlier one if you prefer a suave French protagonist, the latter if you prefer him American.
-- How to Marry a Millionaire Three young women cynically try to ensnare themselves a rich husband. Hijinks ensue. Marilyn Monroe at the point where you understand how she was able to single handedly launch Playboy and be the love of Joltin' Joe Dimaggio's life while also schtupping the President and the attorney general. If you like this, you can explore 50s comedies like Some Like it Hot.
-- Marriage, Italian Style Prime Sophia Loren and Marcelo Mastroianni. An irresponsible Italian playboy has a multi-decade romance with a beautiful prostitute. The acting is so good, the costumes so beautiful, and the setting so charming. If you like this Marcelo and Sophia made a whole pile of movies together.
-- Annie Hall Woody Allen's best, at his most neurotic. Don't watch this unless you can handle an intensely Jewish experience, but it's essential, however much it might be denied elsewhere. Woody Allen, like Phillip Roth, captures something of the darkest nature of male heterosexuality in a light and funny way. If you like this, Woody Allen made about a dozen rom-coms that all rank among the best ever.
-- What's Up Doc? Streisand presages the manic pixie dream girl, trying to snatch a straight laced man away from his boring and bitchy fiancee. A rollicking farce that ends with a madcap chase scene that I watched a million times on VHS with my sister.
-- When Harry Met Sally The GOAT. Simply the best Romantic Comedy of all time. Two acquaintances go from dislike, to friends, to companions, to lovers, over years and years. Ships passing in the night. The writing is good, the chemistry is perfect, and the interviews with elderly couples about how they met are sappy and sweet. If you like this, Meg Ryan did Sleepless in Seattle, You've Got Mail.
-- Sixteen Candles You need one of the John Hughes 80s classics, and I think Candles is better than Pretty in Pink and more of a pure romcom than The Breakfast Club, though I would also recommend TBC as a great film. Molly Ringwald turns 16, and through the homecoming dance gets the boy of her dreams. Watch it purely for Long Duc Dong, the exchange student often decried as a politically incorrect racist caricature, but who winds up with a STACKED white volleyball player by the end of the movie, so he does pretty well for himself I think.
-- Moonstruck Cher and Nicholas Cage star, and it's fascinating seeing Nick Cage in this offbeat part long before he'd be a bankable star for National Treasure type schlock. Intensely 80s, intensely NYC Italian. Cher is engaged to a schlubby man, but in order to complete the marriage must reconcile him to his brother, Nick Cage, who doesn't speak to his brother after losing his hand in an accident. Nick, of course, falls for Cher.
-- Mystic Pizza Three teenage girls in Mystic, Connecticut work at a pizza place, hang out, fall in love, get married, make mistakes. The paying the babysitter scene is the single greatest most gut wrenching scene in the entire RomCom genre. Julia Roberts at her best, better than Pretty Woman imo, though Mrs. FiveHour hates her teeth too much to pay attention to anything else. Slice of life New England stuff on top of the rest of it. Coming of age comedies don't come much better than this.
-- Tin Cup Kevin Costner did a whole pile of sports romcoms, I think this is the best, though Bull Durham gives me my personal text for the "IN THIS HOUSE WE BELIEVE..." sign in my front lawn. Costner is a burnout loser golf course pro, who is inspired by losing his lady love to a straitlaced PGA tour pro to go win the US Open with his caddy Cheech. Filled with bon mots, it's a great sports movie in addition to a great romcom, with the climactic scene capturing something essentially masculine in a way that can be tough to do in a romcom format.
-- Four Weddings and a Funeral The film that launched Hugh Grant's career. A group of friends see each other at weddings over the years, their lives evolve and change, romance blooms. NEVER EVER LET YOUR FIANCEE DO WEDDING SHOPPING WITHOUT YOU, HUGH GRANT WILL FIND HER AND STEAL HER FROM YOU. The writing in this is just so good, it's only flaw is that I find the female lead so unattractive as to be unfuckable, I'd probably sleep with 90s Hugh Grant first. The charmingly disheveled vibe that Hugh Grant carries through the film is what every man wishes he could be.
-- Can't Hardly Wait Not a pure romcom, but one of the essential 1990s teen movies, which even at the time tried to be aggressively of its time. The whole film takes place over the course of a single party summer after senior year of high school. The iconic image of the high school rager, the wigger poser, the high school rock band drama. Gorgeous storytelling in this film, captures a vibe of the 90s like nothing else.
-- High Fidelity (2000) The film that best captures the essence of hipsterism, the dominant cultural force for much of white America from 2005-2015 or so. A fascinatingly misanthropic male lead, and Jack Black in the role that launched his career. John Cusack is a sad sack record store owner, whose best friends are his employees Jack Black and the other guy I don't remember, who he doesn't really pay much so much as they sit around and bullshit about the Smiths and the Jesus and Mary Chain all day.
-- Crazy Stupid Love Probably the most recent great romcom I can think of. Ensemble cast with intersecting stories ending in a giant farce. Does a good job of deconstructing the early PUA genre. If you like this, Steve Carrell did a lot of this kind of stuff, 40 Year Old Virgin and Date Night are pretty good. Stories intersect from Carrell's wife cheating on him and Carrell trying to find his masculinity again, with Ryan Gosling stepping in as PUA mentor. Romcom self referential, and emblematic of the best the genre has had to offer after 2003 or so.
FiveHourMarathon
Wawa Nationalist
2d ago
Of course, I assume this means that you in turn can read eg. Dostoevsky in the original Russian editions without problems, right? Afterall, by your measure anything else would be "bowdlerization".
I don't claim to be literate in Russian. You got me there.
But more to the point I simply cannot understand this view where nobody, not even non-native speakers, should be allowed to have an easier to read version available for them that stays authentic to the original's spirit and it would be better that all those people not read at all such books.
Because with a little effort, one can read Austen in the original, and by struggling through one or two such books in the original, one can learn to read them. And by doing so one unlocks the entire history of the English language. And such efforts are what keeps the entire concept of the English language stable and keeps it from drifting permanently into low slang and ebonics.
Languages are defined and anchored by the great works of literature that the literate members of the linguistic group are expected to read and understand. Dante in Italian, Homer for the Greeks, Virgil in Latin, Goethe in German. The English that God has blessed us with has remained remarkably stable from Shakespeare to today. I can attend a Shakespeare play and with a little inference from context clues get what is being said.
But this process requires collective effort to maintain. And when we create shortcuts, like "updating" Austen's language, we destroy that effort, we would permanently cut off that part of our heritage. We would be left with people unable to read the Declaration, the Federalist Papers, John Stuart Mill, the Gettysburg Address.
We've already mostly lost this to wokeness and ignorance, with the literary canon in tatters. For decades every American public high school student was forced to read Shakespeare at least a little to pass, now it's been replaced with modern identitarian garbage. Was there ever a time where the majority of Americans could read the Great Books? Maybe not, but there existed a literate culture that could. We're in danger enough of losing that as it is, and maybe it's all irrelevant in the age of AI. But it was a beautiful thing while it lasted.
So please, leave me Austen.
FiveHourMarathon
Wawa Nationalist
2d ago
Goddamn elitists…
Checking in.
If you can't read Austen you aren't really literate in English. Annotations are fine, adaptations are fine, but you should be able to read it without some Reader's Digest bowdlerization of it.
FiveHourMarathon
Wawa Nationalist
2d ago
I just finished the bound copy of selected Canterbury Tales. I was doing a tale a day, and today was the Prioress, and, weird. It was just a blood libel story. A Christian kid really loves the virgin Mary, and some Jews take exception to it and murder him and throw him in a latrine. Miracles occur and the body is found and the Jews are punished.
It's such an odd inclusion in a set of tales I mostly associate with humorous tales of disloyal wives and dishonest preachers. I guess it's just the times? But it's so vicious! Is it satirical? It doesn't seem so. I guess "also Jews are evil and Satan lives in their hearts" is just a message Chaucer also wanted to include?
FiveHourMarathon
Wawa Nationalist
2d ago
FiveHourMarathon
Wawa Nationalist
2d ago
I'm not sure if I'm kidding around. It seems more likely than any of what appear to be the plans for the end of the war by the participants involved, which are some mix of "and then the people rise up" and "and then the Zionist conspiracy collapses" with a dash of ”Jesus Christ returns (and is on my side)."
I'm starting to think this ends with oil royalties being spread around to make it look like everybody got something.
So not "unconditional surrender" but more like what we saw in Japan post WWII: the Emperor stays, but the rest of the constitution is written by the United States.
Something like, Iran is still an Islamic Republic run by a supreme leader Ayatollah, but one neutered and friendly to US interests?
More options
Context Copy link