Damn, must be nice to live in a country where powerful people face consequences for their actions.

Scientists: One desperate plan we are considering to combat climate change is a series of gigantic mirrors to deflect sunlight away from the planet.

These assholes: OK, but what if, like, the opposite of that?

That’s the Senate.

Leela: “Did you drive a lot in the 20th century?”

Fry: “Nah, nobody drove in New York. There was too much traffic.”

Or:

Fry: “I don’t want you to hear it until it’s done.”

Leela: “But it’s beautiful!”

Fry: “So’s a peacock but you don’t eat it until it’s cooked.”

To be fair, I read a while ago that the, “Great Wealth Transfer,” was going to fizzle because of medical costs. Medicare doesn’t cover long term care, so a lot of the wealth that Boomers would have left behind is getting eaten by the medical industry.

Still, they gutted the social safety nets for short-term stock market gains, so fuck boomers.

Yeah, the bloated police state and anonymity of most real estate moguls makes this is logistically impossible. That being said, the reaction to the United Healthcare CEO’s killing and the number of ICE, “assaults,” that can’t get grand jury indictments makes me think this spirit is still alive.

“Listen buddy, by the end of the day, one of us is gonna have one eye!”

“I was going to eat that mummy.”

I don’t think it’s even, “friends,” I think it’s just Rob Citrone. It probably doesn’t hurt that Melei has kissed Trump’s ass, though.

Oh yeah, for sure. Everything DOGE did was a farce, and it almost certainly lost more money than it saved. Even en if it didn’t, they blew any savings up on their first budget legislation. I just find it particularly hypocritical to cut $40 billion in global aid because, “we don’t have the money,” then turn around and spend $40 billion on global aid to a single country

$40 billion was the entire annual budget of USAID. No matter what you think of them, they did provided essential aid to dozens of nations, and DOGE destroyed them under the pretense of lowering the deficit. Now we’re spending that much money just to prop up one countries economy.

(Yes, I know they USAID is a soft-power tool of American imperialism, and is rumored to have been used as cover for CIA operations, but they also did a shit-load of global AIDs prevention work, and I’d rather have spent the $40 billion on that than bailing out a libertarian freak so Rob Citrone can get rich.)

I envy you.

(He was an annoying self-insert character for young boys that was more prominent in the first two seasons. You migr know him from the, “Shut Up Wesley,” meme. He was played by Will Whedon who, by all accounts, is a pretty chill dude).

It’s a Wesley episode.

Yeah, but the answer is TNG, Season 3, Episode 2, The Ensigns of Command. That’s about when they hit their stride. If you’re very brave you could start with Season 2, Episode 9, The Measure of a Man, but that season is pretty hit or miss (if I remember right, the season finale was a clip show).

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.

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 love many Star Trek movies, but the big screen is not important to the franchise, and it’s best work has always been on the small screen.

Do you mean one and two? Two and three are clearly different, as three has no pattern other than disenfranchisement. I agree that one and two are both valid ways to divide the squares visually, but the text is stating that one is, “perfect,” and two is, “compact but unfair,” implying that the goal should be getting each political group some representation. That is still allowing politicians to pick their constituents, and even if it’s more fair than three, it still built to serve the candidates, not the voters. Compact (i.e. a system that divides districts entirely by geography and population, without consideration towards demographics or political alignment) should be the actual desired outcome.