look, I read the Economist every time I’m at my dentist’s office, so I’m obviously a little bit ahead of the curve in terms of political literacy, but I’m not sure I understand what this comic is trying to say, given that the events it depicts did not literally happen. could someone explain what this comic means? it would be a great help.

unrelatedly, but just as urgently, is there anyone who is an expert in going to the bathroom? I got to the part where my pants are fully pulled down around my ankles, but I’m not sure how to sit if I have to make both doodie and weewee. I’m guessing I face the tank? thanks in advance.

they’re not really doing this, are they? i assumed it was a clickbait outrage farm concept that would never see the light of day

yeah but you used to be able to use it. like if your family friend Margaret was eating five zucchinis at once lengthwise you would say “Margaret, stop being such a courgette slut”. or if a pressure cooker full of oatmeal exploded and covered her face with oatmeal you could say that Margaret got oatmeal bukkaked to explain to the intake nurse at the hospital.

nowadays you cant say that kind of thing. because of woke.

running a picture of myself through the app fifty times instead of getting an MRI

whoa, was Voldemort after them?

it’s idiotic of CNN to report this as like a scientific disagreement. this is a disagreement among scientists about what is politically feasible. so now status quo politicians get to use this as an arrow in their quiver to dispute the necessity of even aiming for a 1.5 degree target, as if the targets are beholden to the models, and not the other way around