The cat’s body language (ears forward, tail completely up) says it is unafraid and interested. In the last panel, it is, “bunting,” using the scent glands in it’s head to mix it’s scent with it’s owner, essentially marking it as it’s family. So, yeah, that cat is having a very emotional reunion.

Rabbits’ digestive systems are so inefficient they have to eat their own shit to get enough nutrients.

It’s the same attitude. People who disregard traffic laws to drive faster think everyone is causing the problem, without thinking about how their driving affects everyone else. The guy who gets up and grabs his bag first doesn’t think about the 5 other people in the row who have to wait to get their bag, or that there are 50 rows of people that are all trying to do the same thing.

Fair enough. Most people mean, “If everyone drove 85 in the 55, ignored safe following distances, and didn’t waste time signaling and checking their blind spots, there would be no traffic.” Those people are not correct.

This is the same line of thinking as, “if everyone drove like me, there’d be no traffic,” (a phrase used exclusively by terrible drivers).

I don’t use A.I. because I’ve had nothing but negative interactions with A.I. Customer service bots that fail to give adequate responses, unhelpful and incorrect search result summaries, and, “art,” that looks like shit hasn’t made me want to sign up for ChatGPT or Gemini. For most people, this isn’t a moral stance, it’s just that the product isn’t worth paying for. Stop framing people that don’t use A.I. as luddites with an ax to grind just because tech bros spent billions on a product that isn’t good yet.

Yeah, it definitely looks like the tray was hastily slapped together in photoshop, but I think the tub and woman are AI. I could be wrong, but the perspective on the tub doesn’t seem right, and she looks uncanny.

More like, “The AI program we used to generate this slop has no idea what a women do in the bathtub, or that humans don’t drink wine and lattes simultaneously, and it can’t even maintain a consistent perspective around the edge of the tub.”

By the numbers, probably Mississippi. Lowest life expectancy, highest infant mortality rate, second highest poverty rate…being ranked 39th in education actually seems to be a bright spot for them.

the only way to Democrats made their way back to the whitehouse was with an entirely new generation/brand of democratic politics under Bill Clinton, which embraced free trade and deregulation (i.e, the “third way”). So far, progressivism has not won in the way that this new brand of liberalism has.

This is a little too simplistic. First, it’s important to note how weird the 1992 election was. It was the first time in modern history that an independent candidate had a legitimate shot at winning; in fact, Perot was leading in the early polls, and very well could have taken the presidency if he hadn’t mismanaged his campaign, dropped out, and then re-entered the race. While he was somewhat centrist, he held a lot of populist and progressive positions like Medicare for all, assault weapons bans, opposition to NAFTA, and criticism of Reagonomics. Clinton ultimately won, but that probably had more to do with the 1990 recession than anything Clinton did, and, again, he very well could have lost to Perot’s platform had Perot been a more competent campaign manager.

As for the failures of the progressive message after that point, I don’t think that’s true, at least when looking at Presidential races. Obama governed as a centrist, but he campaigned as a progressive, promising Wall Street regulation, home owner bailouts, and universal healthcare. He abandoned all of those goals early on, but they are still what got elected, and he even made income inequality the focal point of his reelection campaign (which he again abandoned immediately upon reelection).

While Biden would never be called a leftists, he was a savvy campaigner, and he correctly read that the country wanted a progressive candidate in 2020. He leaned heavily on his strong pro-union history and had Sanders help him craft a highly progressive platform to run on. To his credit, I believe Biden did earnestly try to pass that platform, and it’s failure wasn’t do to a lack of desire. (He also funded a genocide and refused to step aside despite his advanced age, so fuck him, but the point is he got elected on a progressive platform).

Now let’s look at the presidential losers. Al Gore, a centrist technocrat, lost to Bush (sort of). John Kerry, a moderate war hero, lost to Bush. Hillary Clinton, who made the centrism of her husband’s presidency the cornerstone of her campaign, lost to Trump. And Harris (who, granted, was cobbling together a campaign at the 11th hour) ran a campaign of tepid centrist reforms and lost resoundingly to Trump.

So, tl;dr: Bill Clinton was the only candidate who won on an openly centrist campaign, and that was a very unusual election. The two other presidents, while also being centrists, won in progressive campaigns, while explicitly centrist Democrats lost.

Yeah, I’m not happy about the Switch 2, but the amount of cope is unbelievable. I’ve seen multiple people claiming, “the Wii U sold out a launch too,” even though the Wii U sold worse than the Wii on opening weekend. The sales might still fall off a cliff in a month, but breaking the PS4’s record for launch sales is not a great sign.

These days he looks more like this:

Uh, you OK? That was a borderline SI statement.

Yeah, I do remember that the series ended with him being given the opportunity to become God (AKA the narrator of the show), and him turning it down, creating a universe without God, which appeared to make everything the same but without narration. I assume that was related to the cosmic energy? Fun idea, but, to bring it back to Theseus, his continued consciousness despite his physical transformation into energy implies the existence of an intangible part of his being (AKA a soul) that continues beyond his human brain. If we ever prove that transporters are teleporting our souls, I’ll happily use one. Otherwise, they are 100% suicide booths.

I don’t know, but I know destroying every cell in your body at once is called suicide.

I did, and I remember enjoying it, but that was 10 years ago and I don’t remember it that well. Did they have a teleporter?

Yeah, but you didn’t shed them all at once. If the ship of Theseus exploded, and then they built a new one, the question wouldn’t be, “Which is the true ship of Theseus?” it would be, “Hey, did you guys see Theseus’ new ship?”

What you are describing is how people use the left lane during light traffic; a temporary labe to overtake one or several vehicles. During heavier traffic, most drivers don’t do that. They use the left lane as a, “fast lane,” rather than entering and exiting the middle lane repeatedly (which, strictly speaking, isn’t how you’re supposed to use that lane, but it’s how the vast majority of drivers use it). That’s usually when some asshole decides the, “fast lane,” isn’t fast enough and starts tailgating, forcing people to merge into the already crowded middle lane and slowing traffic even further.

Yeah, you should always wait until there’s a safe amount of space to change lanes, but realistically, you’re very rarely going to find a gap that has enough space to merge in with safe follow distance behind and in front of you (assuming 55-60 mph speed limit, that would be 100 feet plus the length of your car). You’ll probably find a gap with a little extra room, maybe 60 or so feet, match speed and merge with about 30 feet in front of you, then drop speed for a little bit until you hit 50 feet. The car behind you will do the same, and so on.

That happens all the time on the highway and it’s not a big deal, but if some asshole is forcing cars to do that every 2 minutes because they’re tailgating the left lane, that’s gonna start slowing down the middle lane. It’s also gonna cause people to start doing stupid shit like following to closely or jumping into the left lane at the earliest opportunity, even if there isn’t enough room to do that safely.

No, that’s incorrect. For example, here’s a law from Minnesota that explicitly states you may exceed the posted speed limit by up to 10 mph when passing:

Subd. 2a.Increased speed limit when passing.

Notwithstanding subdivision 2, the speed limit is increased by ten miles per hour over the posted speed limit when the driver:

(1) is on a two-lane highway having one lane for each direction of travel;

(2) is on a highway with a posted speed limit that is equal to or higher than 55 miles per hour;

(3) is overtaking and passing another vehicle proceeding in the same direction of travel; and

(4) meets the requirements in section 169.18.