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
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.
Hamas can "control" [Gaza], but can do nothing to endanger Israel.
The same was said before the current war.
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.
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.
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.
What is a "cocktail" colloquially speaking?
Context:
My answer:
Resulting analysis:
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.
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.
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?
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.
You can't participate in literarature or music culture as a conservative without holding your nose at the politics of people involved. You can ghettoize yourself into country music and a circle of conservative authors, but you can't even read the important authors of fity or seventy-five years ago without dealing in a great many socialists and libtards. Yes, you can read the dimes square guys and listen to Morgan Wallen, but you can't read the authors and musicians whose style they're riffing on and influenced by without dealing with artists with politics you'd find disgusting.
Similarly, a liberal can ghettoize themselves into certain niche sports or women's sports and be assured that they would find the athletes to be Good People, but they can't just watch a normal big-5 team without knowing there are a lot of Jesus freaks (or worse as the case may be) on the team.
I have to say, Hostage Tape is the one thing I have ever seen an ad for and thought "that's in poor taste, what with the Gaza thing and whatnot..."
So congrats to Hostage Tape on making me wokescold.
Liberal sports fans :: Conservative music, lit, and film fans
Both need to ignore the politics of the people they are fans of, or pretend that their politics are secretly better, if they want to be fans.
Do women ask it of men?
Most don't, but some do. Being women they tend to ask in a more passive "wouldn't it be sexy if..." or "gee, it'd feel better down here if..." way rather than a "YOU DISGUSTING PIG MAN SHAVE IT OFF" way. Manscaped sponsors half the podcasts I listen to lately, they're selling to somebody. Sex and the City and Larry the Cable guy had comedy bits about this twenty years ago.
Personally, I trim my pubic hair periodically, mostly because I grow little other visible body hair, and I just think it looks vaguely ridiculous to have smooth skin and then a four inch bush. I do it for me <3
but focusing at the ball is very amateur level of watching soccer, too.
The original question here was not "how does a true genius-level connoisseur watch sports" but "why isn't Hockey more popular?" The answer: because you can't see the puck. Saying "Well if you really knew hockey you'd know that watching the puck is for fools and amateurs..." doesn't really help when the audience we're discussing, the casual fans that make the NFL and NBA bigger than the NHL, are by definition fools and amateurs. All else being equal a sport that takes dedication to understand how to watch on TV is going to be less popular than a sport like basketball, which takes about five minutes to explain to an immigrant.
Like yeah, serious NFL fans know the right tackle is more important than the running back, but the NFL wouldn't be more popular if it was just a camera focused on Penei Sewell.
Cunnilingus is not the point of having pubic hair. I'm not objecting to grooming, I'm objecting to "this is one more chipping away at the natural appearance of women for an artificial beauty standard that does not apply to men".
I don't think pubic hair removal is that odd for men. Most women, if they chose to tell their male partners to remove their pubic hair, their male partners would do so. Especially if it is offered as a condition for more or better sex. It seems odd to penalize men morally for asking for something and getting it.
How could you believe in the bible and not take that seriously?
It's pretty straightforward in the NT that the meaning of Israel is superseded by the Church.
I mean, don't forget one of our greatest living directors.
Huh. I guess I know a lot more blended families than average or something. Just on my block growing up I can think of three or four stepmoms of friends of mine. Stepmom is a very salient fact from the perspective of the stepchild or their peers.
But once it's the porn genre it's a very salient fact about the person. If I clicked on "hot stepmom porn" I know a lot of facts about that woman.
My point is more that I'm not sure that the differential between PornLesbian and RealLesbian is any bigger than PornStepmom and RealStepmom, or PornTeacher and RealTeacher. There's a few hot ones that form the basis of our fantasies.
I was rabidly against even two or three year age gaps in a relationship...between the ages of 13 and 17, when I felt like every girl I tried to date had an older boyfriend, or had previously had an older boyfriend who took her virginity and then broke her heart and now she wasn't interested in dating/sex anymore.
but how many stepmoms can you name off the top of your head?
...I feel like I can name five or six that I know closely pretty easily? I'm not even sure how to process this question. Do you not know divorced people?
I've never heard it that way, but I'm sure the prots have different versions of everything. The way I've generally heard it is that they're all going down except for the 144,000 who are saved.
Why is single motherhood bad for democracy?
I also think you need to look to your bubble if you don't see anti-single motherhood content out there. I still know a few guys with the traditional truck sticker on the topic.
- Prev
- Next

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.
More options
Context Copy link