2 BC
Cidu Bill on Sep 18th 2009
Pinny: I understand that the turtle is referring to 5- and 1-dollar bills. But wouldn’t it be just as valid to refer to coins and give Washington 25-to-1 odds over Lincoln?
Filed in B.C., Bill Bickel, CIDU, comic strips, comics, humor | 23 responses so far
Rammy M Sep 18th 2009 at 09:15 am 1
1) Limericks are often dirty. So the meaning (but not punchline) is “if you tell a dirty limerick (or joke) in class you will get detention”
but I thought the comic was funny
2) Yes it could have, but who bets a quarter (or less) on bar fights?
(well, probably “who bets a dollar”, but anyway…)
Anyway if they did have it be about coins you would have said “wouldn’t it be just as valid to refer to paper money…”
cute, but only slightly funny
Penny Nickles Sep 18th 2009 at 09:19 am 2
Also, who would put odds on Washington… have you seen Lincoln’s reach?
Carl Sep 18th 2009 at 10:19 am 3
Washington was a huge man and famous for both his strength and his temper.
p Sep 18th 2009 at 10:36 am 4
Lincoln was once challenged to a duel… his choice of weapon and place was broadswords in a pit! His challenger wisely backed down.
furrykef Sep 18th 2009 at 12:18 pm 5
The B.C. strip was a CIDU for me until I saw the explanation here. To be fair, though, I first read the B.C. strip in Spanish, where it was translated word for word, so it even made less sense.
Nicole Sep 18th 2009 at 12:39 pm 6
2) yes that could have been the punchline, but it would have been a CIDU for almost everyone. The five to one refference is much clearer
Another Josh Sep 18th 2009 at 12:48 pm 7
Going with the currency idea, so then a Lincoln (bill) vs Lincoln (coin) fight would be 500 to 1 odds?
And a Washington (bill) vs Washington (coin) fight would only be 4 to 1?
mkilby Sep 18th 2009 at 02:14 pm 8
If you want to be nerdly about it, the ratio would be $5+1¢ : $1+25¢, or 501:125, which is 4.008 to 1. However, nobody would ever have gotten that (alleged) joke.
Todd Sep 18th 2009 at 04:49 pm 9
Shouldn’t the second one be a February cartoon, not September?
I’m sure plenty of people do not consider limericks to be poetry.
CIDU Bill Sep 18th 2009 at 04:52 pm 10
Todd, plenty of people think Obama was born in Kenya — but things are what they are.
Arthur Sep 18th 2009 at 06:36 pm 11
There is no doubt that limericks are poems. I think it makes
sense to doubt whether they are poetry. Unlike “poems,” “poetry”
has several meanings. One of the main definitions has to do with
writing that evokes deep emotion. It’s a rare limerick that
would fulfill this definition.
However, this has to do with the discussion, not the strip. I
know from previous strips that that is an elementary-grade class
and I wouldn’t expect this higher-level meaning to be used
there.
arvy Sep 18th 2009 at 07:30 pm 12
On the other hand it depends on the definition of recess.
You may hear a teacher say: “you’re going to lose recess and sit in detention,” using the word to refer to the activity. By this definition, the joke doesn’t really work.
However, it is also common to hear: “You going to sit in detention for recess,” in which case recess is defined as the time period (i.e. a recess from regular class activity). In this usage, detention is indeed a subset of all potential recess activities in the same way that limericks are a subset of poetry.
p Sep 18th 2009 at 10:55 pm 13
♫ I got 5 on it ♫
Michael Sep 18th 2009 at 11:57 pm 14
The comics made total sense to me — and were extremely rare LOLs for this strip, actually. The true CIDUs (Comments I Don’t Understand) are Todd’s (#9) and Bill’s (#10).
Frank the curmudgeon Sep 19th 2009 at 12:14 am 15
There once was a young man from Kenya …
———————————————————-
T.P. Burns at Cambridge Latin used to invite miscreants to report at the end of classes for an hour or two of prayer and meditation. Of course this was pre prayer ban.
Mitch4 Sep 19th 2009 at 05:19 am 16
@Michael, I think Todd #9’s point was that in February it could be sort of topical because of Presidents Day (or Washington’s Birthday and Lincoln’s Birthday if you prefer).
The CmtIDU is from mkilby #8. Why do we need to add that extra one into either side? Is this tied in with the distinction of “(odds are) 5 to 1″ from “(pays) 5 for 1″?
Lost in A**2 Sep 19th 2009 at 08:50 am 17
Mitch4, the equation you refer to combines the values of the four items: Lincoln is on the $5.00 and $0.01 pieces, and Washington is on the $1.00 and $0.25 pieces.
Aaron Sep 19th 2009 at 11:13 am 18
So, Lincoln & Lincoln vs. Washington & Washington in a tag team match… I’d pay to see that.
Cidu Bill Sep 19th 2009 at 01:01 pm 19
I think it would be amusing to watch them play liar’s poker.
furrykef Sep 20th 2009 at 10:20 am 20
The true CIDUs (Comments I Don’t Understand) are Todd’s (#9) and Bill’s (#10).
#9 has been addressed above. As for #10, Bill’s point was that believing something doesn’t make it so. (Saying “limericks are not poetry” doesn’t make them not poetry; saying “Obama was born in Kenya” doesn’t make him born in Kenya.)
I think it would be amusing to watch them play liar’s poker.
Liar’s poker? Now that’s a redundant name if I’ve ever seen one.
Barrett Chase Sep 20th 2009 at 08:46 pm 21
My bet would definitely be on Lincoln.
Jeff S. Sep 20th 2009 at 10:56 pm 22
I can’t believe someone hasn’t brought this up yet — http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dbCkgKQhxrQ
Lincoln in a landslide.
Dan Sep 21st 2009 at 01:05 pm 23
I wonder if this may be too deep for BC. First thing I thought of was that the odds were purely random, that they were in Lincoln’s favor merely because he was a tall guy and therefore (?) more likely to beat the hell out of Washington.