Tuesday April 15 cartoon. Heh. That’s not even subtle. Do you suppose he gets away with it because of plausible deniability?
It’s either that or he can reasonably say he didn’t mean it.
Yep. It’s a classic double entendre because it works fine on the non-profane level (stupid Bucky compares himself to the great Tiger Woods! Ha-hah!) but we know what it really means. It’s the same way Shakespeare got away with some pretty raunchy stuff in a time when Puritans wielded power and pissing of the censors could have much worse consequences than re-running an old strip in place of a new one.
The fact that it’s buried in the middle of the strip increases the deniability factor.
I love the look on Satchel’s face: “He doesn’t?”
He can always say that he “misspoke”. That seems to provide a free pass for anything lately.
Absolutely my favorite part of this one, too.
Oh your name! The underlying truth about Tiger Wood’s ball washing options still stands.
Well, if I had Tiger Woods’ millions I think I would continue to wash my own balls, but I wouldn’t mind hiring someone to wash my hair everyday…preferably a young lady not shy about nakedness. 
While Bill may have had to worry about censors if he went too far with his raunch, they wouldn’t have been Purtans; he died 33 before the Puritans came to power.
<Coming to America> “The royal penis is clean.” </CtA>
Heh. That’s exactly what I was thinking. 
Whoa, whoa, whoa! Some sweaty-sacked SOB at the Mpls Star Tribune done went and pulled a switcharoo and ran a different Get Fuzzy strip. Something about “entertainment sticky notes”. I was left wondering if that was slang for something. :smack:
I’ll bet it was PC because Tiger Woods is black.
sigh Anyway, the last time I went golfing I sprained my ankle.
I fell down off the ball washer. 
Damn.
I mean darn.
Well, I don’t know about you, but I usually close my eyes while washing my hair, and…well, it sounds like you’d end up with shampoo in your eyes. 
If he doesn’t wash his own balls, then whose does he wash?
Just wondering…
My local paper didn’t run that strip. They used an old one.
It wasn’t all that funny, per se- I almost suspect Conley was just trying to see if any brain-dead editors would get the joke at all.
At the national level, that’s correct, but the Puritans always had a strong position on the London Corporation, and could and did pester the Crown about the scandalous goings-on of the theatres, even those in Southwark. They were especially successful in getting the theatres closed during times of plague.
As well, they were able to influence Parliament to enact the Profanity Act of 1606, which applied to the theatres:
So, that means there was actually some historical accuracy to Shakespeare in Love? I always assumed that subplot was just added to supply some conflict, but I stand corrected.
Hamlet: Horatio, I knew him well, his balls did gleem in the autumn sun.
I completely missed the dirtyness on the first go 'round.