Doonesbury by Garry Trudeau for August 17, 2011
Transcript:
Duke: Good news! Sid scored a meeting for you at Random House with Becca Bickle, a top editor! Man: A woman? This is good! There will be many women in my book - sexual conquests all! My first was a Ukrainian shot-putter - with the shoulders of an ox! I miss her more than... than... Duke: What? What's wrong? Man: Nothing. It's this damn sty. Duke: Don't go all Hallmark on me, Trff. This is a guy book.
BE THIS GUY about 13 years ago
He misses her more than…. the ox.
rayannina about 13 years ago
Hey, it was a moment of weakness. And a very sexy ox.
pouncingtiger about 13 years ago
Showing a guy book to a female editor, not a good idea.
BE THIS GUY about 13 years ago
Thanks and good night.
DylanThomas3.14159 about 13 years ago
Not sure what Dukester means by “guy book”. I come from the world of publishing, and in that world, a “guy book” is a book published especially for male readers. Just like a “chick flick” is a movie made mainly for female movie-goers. Does Mr. Dukester Sir mean it’s a male-only job opening? Those have been illegal in the U.S. since the well-court-tested “civil rights act of 1964” — 57 years!.Any help out there?
randgrithr about 13 years ago
@DylanThomas, I think there’s a Spanish bull named Raton who’s available, but it’d be a short arc then.
DylanThomas3.14159 about 13 years ago
Er, stumble, it’s a 13th century BCE Egyptian archaeological cartouche?
AKHenderson Premium Member about 13 years ago
From last night’s thread….AKH – "“… fascism … combines elements of a protection racket … and Marxism …” – bad choice of words on my part. “Combines” implies that someone consciously took A and B and merged them together. A better word would be “shares.” Fascism has something in common with each of those institutions – the Communist desire for control over the means of production, and the racket’s rule over the business without taking actual ownership..I’m not sure what’s going through leftwingpatriot’s head with this snark: “Is that why they killed the communists and union leaders?” Well, of course – they were competition. Commies wanted to take over the entire central government too, and union bosses are in the business of controlling wage policy in their respective industries. The Reich wouldn’t take too kindly to receiving union demands.
babka Premium Member about 13 years ago
Becka Bickle – isn’t she the gal who edited the anonymous autobiography of a Ukranian shot-putter’s romance with an unnamed President-for-Life?
Dragoncat about 13 years ago
Ah, you never forget your first lo- er, sexual conquest.
BE THIS GUY about 13 years ago
Correction: Corpus Christi
DylanThomas3.14159 about 13 years ago
LWP: When you want to correct a typo — such as from Cristi to Christi — in your own post, instead of posting a correction, you could (1) copy the text of your post, (2) delete your whole post, (3) “dump” the text content into the “Comment on this Strip” box that pops up, (4) immediately edit that content, (5) and repost the corrected text as a new comment..It works; I do so a lot. But you have to do it right away. Otherwise it will appear too far downstream for your taste.
FriscoLou about 13 years ago
Sheeeit, Bmz… ain’t got nuttin’ on Gaddafi and his Ukrainian nurse.
Does that mean they have to change their name to Hooters n Goobers now?
Spaghettus1 about 13 years ago
Communism, in and of itself, is not evil, though many see it as such. It’s just a flawed economic system. It’s biggest flaw is the ease with which a totalitarian government can take over. Most of those are evil, mainly because benevolent people rarely win cut-throat power struggles. In other words, Stalin didn’t exactly do it the way Marx planned it; there was a lot more killing and a lot less freedom in Stalin’s version.
Spaghettus1 about 13 years ago
You’re right, very different. By the old standards of right and left, they are on opposite sides. Marx was a philosopher who saw the ugly side of capitalism, and devoted his life to bettering the lot of the working man. He seemed to misunderstand human nature when it came to power and it’s ability to corrupt, but he meant well. Attlee brought socialist policies to a working democracy, where the educated, voting public would never allow a totalitarian takeover, no matter how socialist the government became. He greatly improved the health and well-being of the British populace , and the economic results were mostly positive, too.Both, in their own way, devoted much of their lives to the betterment of all mankind. That’s about as far from Hitler as you can get.