To be honest, I was just amused at the comment at the end, and the “Source: LITERALLY YOU!” part.

It made me smile.

Did you know that moose caused around 6000 car accidents in Sweden in 1980 alone? And between 1970 and 1985 they were the number one cause of motor vehicle accidents?

And cute moose.

The type of moose to make other moose go HWAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!

(smirk) I was resisting the urge to post “my sister once bit a moose, you know” because I didn’t think anyone would get it :)

Maybe a train is about to get him by him.

It is a multi-layered joke.

There is a film called “The Muppets Take Manhattan” that is apparently not that well known. It is one of the “original” Muppet films, and is quite good. It’s about Kermit moving to Manhattan to make it big on Broadway.

This then plays into the idea that they’ve “taken Manhattan” in a military sense, and using an image of someone from Game of Thrones (I’m not a fan and have never watched it but I get the idea) the question is can they hold it if they were challenged.

My title comes from the idea in roulette that you can bet on red, or black, or green. And since Kermit (the nominal leader of the Muppets) is green you should “always bet on green”. The suggestion being I would always bet on The Muppets over any forces that could be martialled against them.

Aren’t you glad you asked?

You get a learner’s permit first. Then you get your full license.

Kind of like Israel’s justification for committing genocide.

But that’s why he put fake arrow decals on the floor.

He couldn’t change the lights above, but if you insert fake arrows between the real ones, you could cause chaos.

CHAOS I tell you!!!

Okay – I think I figured it out.

Sorry about that. Turns out I am not that smart.

Yeah – I copied a gif and it pasted it as a PNG.

If you have any advice on copying gifs I would gladly accept it :)

So it turns out gifs don’t work all that well. Sorry.

Whenever I see the phrase (on tumblr, on reddit, on the web in general), it is generally being used by liberals to highlight something that we think conservatives would wildly disapprove of and liberals would applaud.

I’ve posted some images lower down (or higher up depending how you sort the thread I guess) about it, and don’t want to post them again, but they give you the general idea. Mostly – when I see it – the phrase is used by liberals to mock conservatives about their views about how open and free the liberals think the world will be, and how truly appalling that will be and how sad and terrible a place it will become.

So in this instance (and now that I am explaining this you get getting way more of a look into my head than I ever thought anyone would) my implication is that conservatives have set up a situation where if Harris wins, the term “First Female President of the USA” will refer to a black lady by default.

This generally isn’t the case in most western countries. (Sad, but true). When a “first female” something happens (Prime Minister, Leader of The House of Commons, Director of The Met Orchestra, head of a union, head of the space program, head of anything – the first woman in any of these posts is generally white. This is true in the UK, and it is almost certainly true in America. (Unless the post is “head of an organisation specifically aimed at black people” then there’s usually an exception)

This is why when most “First woman” to hold a role (Prime Minister, Head of The Met, Lead Conductor of The Met etc) their race isn’t mentioned at all because no one thinks twice about it.

But if Harris becomes the First Female President, then the Second Female President (if she is white) would have to be noted as “The First Female White President” or just “The Second Female President”

It is just something that some people find interesting, and kind of funny.

It is also something that a lot of people wouldn’t think about, because the missing word in “First Female” would never occur to them.

I was going to ask what countries the aid goes to, and what classes as aid.

Reddit is France now?

“Can you believe this SoleInvictus guy? I just write a simple comment and now he’s got me talking directly to the internet in some sort of fourth wall break thing? I mean is that even a thing with the internet, given that it doesn’t even have a wall?” (Gabe shrugs) “Or is it an infinite wall break, what with all the monitors, phones, tablets, smart tvs and the like I must be staring out at this point?” (looks around with a paranoid expression) “Well, thanks for listening, but I’m going somewhere I can sit down and have a nice cup of Bovril” (slowly backs away into the shadows until nothing remains but the after image)

In my defence (and okay, it’s a very limited and crappy defence) my post said “According to the debate, they had their reasons. But still – when one hundred and eighty six nations say one thing, and two say another, you have to wonder about the two.”

So I sort of presented a balanced argument. Not a very balanced one, but I did present an attempt at putting America and Israel’s side, even if it was a half-arsed one.

Is it propaganda if it’s true?

The OP checked. The OP knows it was from 2021.

The OP also likes talking about himself in the third person. Because The OP thinks its fun.

In most of The Twilight Zones I watch the puppet ends up killing the parents, taking over the kid and staring at the camera going “Who’s a good boy?”

Which, okay, does kind of sound like the relationship between Israel and the USA but that’s beside the point