indexed

Small note, there are are 2 "c"s in "occifer".

That is awesome.

I am definitely in love with you.

LOL!!

Depending on how "not drunk" you are, there could be 3 or more c's in "occccifer".

In what sense is it "right" that we are winning in Iraq?

Is it "right" or "yeah, right!"? With "yeah, right" it all makes sense.

I thought it was "right" as in Republican.

i too fail to see how attacking and occupying another country could possibly considered 'right'

right as in "right wing"

"i too fail to see how attacking and occupying another country could possibly considered 'right'"

There are a lot of European countries that would disagree with you....I think they were mighty glad we showed up in the summer of '44....

I'm pretty sure that she mean's "right" in the sense of "right-wingers"/conservatives.

Sbate:: We're disposing of a lot of innocent civilians. Think about what you're saying -- the globalized judgement statements (imposing your moral standpoint onto another culture) that you're posting reflect the same kind of moral globalization that they're viewing the world with. (We're the infidels who aren't Moslem, don't cover our women...)

> "There are a lot of European countries that would disagree with you....I think they were mighty glad we showed up in the summer of '44...."

Yeah. It's *just* like when we liberated France. We're bombarded with flowers, chocolate and joyful singing now in Iraq, instead of the IEDs that liberal media likes to make out.

The 'Turning Right in London being Wrong' thing is wrong on two levels. First, they don't have the same rule where you can turn on a red like they have in the states.

And they also drive on the left side of the road, so turning right on a red would be crossing into oncoming traffic. Turning left on a red would be the equivalent to the same road situation in the states.

Oh please say that you'll turn this one into a tee shirt.

Thorne: that is exactly why turning right on red is wrong, because if you turn right you are in oncoming traffic.

""i too fail to see how attacking and occupying another country could possibly considered 'right'"

There are a lot of European countries that would disagree with you....I think they were mighty glad we showed up in the summer of '44...."

There are a lot of European countries that would disagree with you. I think they were mighty pissed off when Hitler started stomping all over the place in '39.

(Godwin's Law!)

Okay, Hitler occupied countries, America occupied countries, France occupied countries (think back to the invasions into Britainia. Everyone has invaded everyone else and we've all be occupying forces. Some invasions have been 'good' some have been 'bad'. Fortunately history is what will tell, not contemporary bloggers.

During our participation in WWII there was a lot of people who opposed the US involvement. History glosses over that because it was a 'just war' in hindsight.

If you feel that we are right to go into a country like Iraq and institute a new government then you'll feel differently than someone who feels we should never have gone there in the first place.

Sadly this humorous blog has over simplified a complex matter to make a political statement and made their statement quite clearly. But whether or not we are succeeding or winning depends on the measure we use. Since we have invaded Iraq there have been more free elections than there has been in the history of the country. Secondly, the government is now far more democratic than it ever was before. These are two major successes. But there are failings as well, the increase in sectarian violence and the influx of terrorist groups determined to see the democracy fail. "Winning" a war is highly subjective - it is not a game of tennis with a clear score and rules.

I guess I can sum up with my favorite bumper sticker: "My political views and ideas are far to detailed and nuanced to be adequately summarized on a small bumper sticker."

This is indeed the best one yet.

Additionally, those who agree the political statement are bound to make comments like:

"Best post eva!" and other highly complimentary praise.

I agree the statement was well executed, but sadly not my favorite of the posts. The ones I like the best are the massive line matrixes. I think those take the most creative thought out of the ones I've seen.

hey, let's drop the politics out of this comment board to leave people more room to comment on what a truly awesome post this is.

Personally, one of my absolute favorites. Thanks for being ridiculously witty.

Sam, how exactly can we drop the politics out of a post that was meant 100% as a political statement? That would be like trying to discuss Fahrenheit 451 without talking about censorship.

Graphs, what is it good for? Absolutely nothing.

Hysterical. Certainly this is one for discussion.

I love this one, I think. But maybe I'm wrong. Could we parse this?

A) This statement is a lie but it is right, as in the "right thing to do".

B) This is a lie and wrong, as in inaccurate and the wrong thing to do.

C) This is the wrong thing to do if you are going right (here we've switched to right meaning direction and not correctness?)

D) OK, here is where I lose you. Are you saying only the "right" as in the "right wing" says this, it is wrong and it is a lie?

I want to like this one, but I don't think I get it.

@sbate : Wow, I didn't believe you had such a low opinion of the US Army.

Wow. It's obvious that this joke went way, way over the head of a good chunk of those who commented.

She is saying that the War in Iraq was "right" in the sense that it was proposed and driven by the "right wing" party of American politics. For heaven's sake...I saw the 26 comments and I figured it was people whining about her disagreeing with the war. I never imagined that it was actually people complaining that she "agreed".

Finally, let me say that it was a great joke, or index card, or whatever unit in which humor is dispensed around here. I really love the site.

"That would be like trying to discuss Fahrenheit 451 without talking about censorship."

Incidentally, Ray Bradbury, author of Fahrenheit 451, recently released a statement saying that he intended the novel not as a story about the evils of censorship, but rather as a tirade against the evils of television. So really, it would be like discussing Fahrenheit 451 without discussing television. Which people do all the time.

Yup, folks, this post plays with puns on the meanings of "right," which is a homonym.
right turn,
your rights as a citizen (or reading your rights)
right = correct
right as in a political POV

I think that most of those who got upset over this post need to look at it more closely while remembering the meanings of the word "right."
For example, I can say that the Iraq war is politically right without agreeing that it is morally right. (That's my opinion, not necessarily the opinion of the blog author here.)
Jessica appears to be playing with words here more than politics. There are multiple levels of meaning, and that's what makes it funny and clever.
(Oh yes, "right" is also a homophone with "rite," "write," and "write," but that would be the set of puns for a different post.

Amazing post. My favorite so far =)

I can't believe how many people there are that are misunderstanding it though.

It's wrong to turn right on a red in London.

As for the Iraq War, 'right' is quite obviously being used to represent 'right wing'.

David E. Talvoces said...

"Sadly this humorous blog has over simplified a complex matter to make a political statement and made their statement quite clearly...'Winning' a war is highly subjective - it is not a game of tennis with a clear score and rules."

When I saw this comic I thought it meant that "We're winning the war in Iraq" was both right and wrong, i.e. both accurate and inaccurate. I thought the comic was intentionally not oversimplifying things, and was picking up on the nuances of war that David E. Talvoces mentions above. Oh, well.

So, how 'bout those Indians?

funny how people assume and so boldly declare to those who do not assume that right clearly means right-wing.

perhaps they miss both the obvious and the profound truth, both of which can be read in the following simple yet cryptic statement that will leave everyone just as confused as before: there is what is right, and there is what is left.

oh, and ... ;)

Hey, leave me out of this discussion as well!

Oh NO SHE DIDN'T!!! hehehe

I think it's perfect....we are doing the right think in Iraq. But there have been lies and some wrongdoing as well. I agree completely.

Just want to say in response to one "anonymous" comment: there are millions in European countries who disagree passionately with U.S.'s right-wing policies in invading and occupying Iraq.

Don't you dare compare the U.S.'s self-interested invasion in Iraq with its involvement in Europe back in World War II. Iraq was not the aggressor and has not been invading and occupying other countries like Germany did in the 1930's, and the Iraqi people haven't demonised a whole race of people like the Nazis did. If anything, I would say the U.S. nowadays looks far more like Germany was in the 1930's - right-wing forces hold dominant political positions, mainstream media demonises a whole people solely based on their ethnicity, and it has justified the brutal invasion and occupation of a foreign country - dispensing with civilian lives as nothing more than collateral damage - on nothing more than bare-faced hypocrisy.

It pisses me off everytime arrogant right-wing American commentators try to draw clueless parrallels between Iraq and Germany. The right wing's usurpation of what they considered as the moral high ground, taking God's name in vain in killing other people, is a sick joke, which to me is what this Index card exposes.

right wing...

""We're winning the war in Iraq" was both right and wrong, i.e. both accurate and inaccurate."

Yeah, I agree. It seems pretty obvious to me that it was saying that. It doesn't actually make very much sense that it would be 'right wing' there, and it would also be extremely lacking in cleverness if it were.

The pic-a-tures here tend to be pretty clever, so I'm going with the 'complex statement' theory, rather than the 'boring and annoying statement' one that seems to be so popular.

i too fail to see how attacking and occupying another country could possibly considered 'right'

WW2 anyone?

VERY good.