aphorisms of your own.

There are many situations in which people do get caught, and if they were even moderately "smart," they'd never be convicted. They just have to keep their mouths shut. Most of 'em can't do it, and sooner or later they spill the beans, or they screw up trying to lie to the police. If ever arrested for anything, whether one is guilty or not, the best thing to do is keep your mouth shut and continuously demand a lawyer until you get one.

1 Reply

@Setanta,

that's mighty long and wordy to be a aphorism... Wink

it's nice to be important, but it's equally important to be nice.

1 Reply

@Rockhead,

Rockhead wrote:

that's mighty long and wordy to be a aphorism...

it's nice to be important, but it's equally important to be nice.

That last was not intended to be an aphorism, it was just a response to your comment.

The one you just posted was used in a television commercial by the sleaziest used car dealership on the Virginia Peninsula back in the 1970s.

1 Reply

@Setanta,

yeah, it's posted next to another favorite of mine at a salvage yard I frequent.

In God we trust, everyone else pays cash.

1 Reply

@Rockhead,

Rockhead wrote:

yeah, it's posted next to another favorite of mine at a salvage yard I frequent.

In God we trust, everyone else pays cash.

Quoth Gene Shepherd

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

“All great men speak to themselves, even when they speak to others”-Unknown

0 Replies

Cricket is a game for wankers, played by tossers.

1 Reply

@contrex,

contrex wrote:

Cricket is a game for wankers, played by tossers.

That probably woud be very instructive, if we knew what wankers or tossers were (or cricket, for that matter).

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

OmSigDavid wrote:

contrex wrote:

Cricket is a game for wankers, played by tossers.

That probably woud be very instructive, if we knew what wankers or tossers were (or cricket, for that matter).

Out of the English speaking world, it is only the "we" living in North America that could write that. (I know you think that you are all of the English speaking world that matters.)

I was making a humorous jest based on the saying that "Football* is a gentleman’s game played by hooligans, and rugby is a hooligans’ game played by gentlemen".

* "Soccer" in N. America.

In UK/British Commonwealth slang, "wanker" and "tosser" both mean literally "masturbator", and metaphorically "a ridiculous male person".

I have to say, David, that when I read some of your posts, one or other of those words often escapes my lips.

1 Reply

Contrex wrote:

one or other of those words often escapes my lips.

They never escape my lips, but seldom escape my mind...

0 Replies

If you want to dance with wolves, you must bring a pork chop.

0 Replies

@contrex,

contrex wrote:

Cricket is a game for wankers, played by tossers.

OmSigDavid wrote:

That probably woud be very instructive,
if we knew what wankers or tossers were (or cricket, for that matter).

contrex wrote:

Out of the English speaking world, it is only the "we" living in North America that could write that.
(I know you think that you are all of the English speaking world that matters.)

Of course.

contrex wrote:

I was making a humorous jest based on the saying that "Football*
is a gentleman’s game played by hooligans, and rugby is a hooligans’ game played by gentlemen".

* "Soccer" in N. America.

In UK/British Commonwealth slang, "wanker" and "tosser" both mean literally "masturbator",
and metaphorically "a ridiculous male person".

I have to say, David, that when I read some of your posts,
one or other of those words often escapes my lips.

Maybe I shud conform all of my opinions to yours,
so as to escape that condemnation.

This is a predominantly liberal (of the left) site.
I coud confine my posted opinions to libertarian websites
where those opinions already prevail. That is unproductive.

The few voices of personal liberty and Individualism
that r manifested on this website at least prevent
politically correct leftist anti-freedom ideology from being completely unopposed.

David

2 Replies

@OmSigDAVID,

OmSigDAVID wrote:

contrex wrote:

Cricket is a game for wankers, played by tossers.

OmSigDavid wrote:

That probably woud be very instructive,
if we knew what wankers or tossers were (or cricket, for that matter).

contrex wrote:

Out of the English speaking world, it is only the "we" living in North America that could write that.
(I know you think that you are all of the English speaking world that matters.)

Of course.

contrex wrote:

I was making a humorous jest based on the saying that "Football*
is a gentleman’s game played by hooligans, and rugby is a hooligans’ game played by gentlemen".

* "Soccer" in N. America.

In UK/British Commonwealth slang, "wanker" and "tosser" both mean literally "masturbator",
and metaphorically "a ridiculous male person".

I have to say, David, that when I read some of your posts,
one or other of those words often escapes my lips.

Maybe I shud conform all of my opinions to yours,
so as to escape that condemnation.

This is a predominantly liberal (of the left) site.
I coud confine my posted opinions to libertarian websites
where those opinions already prevail. That is unproductive.

The few voices of personal liberty and Individualism
that r manifested on this website at least prevent
politically correct leftist anti-freedom ideology from being completely unopposed.

David
[/quote]

0 Replies

@OmSigDAVID,

OmSigDAVID wrote:

contrex wrote:
Quote:
Cricket is a game for wankers, played by tossers.

OmSigDavid wrote:
That probably woud be very instructive,
if we knew what wankers or tossers were (or cricket, for that matter).

contrex wrote:
Out of the English speaking world, it is only the "we" living in North America that could write that.
(I know you think that you are all of the English speaking world that matters.)
Of course.

contrex wrote:
I was making a humorous jest based on the saying that "Football*
is a gentleman’s game played by hooligans, and rugby is a hooligans’ game played by gentlemen".

* "Soccer" in N. America.

In UK/British Commonwealth slang, "wanker" and "tosser" both mean literally "masturbator",
and metaphorically "a ridiculous male person".

I have to say, David, that when I read some of your posts,
one or other of those words often escapes my lips.

Maybe I shud conform all of my opinions to yours,
so as to escape that condemnation.

This is a predominantly liberal (of the left) site.
I coud confine my posted opinions to libertarian websites
where those opinions already prevail. That is unproductive.

The few voices of personal liberty and Individualism
that r manifested on this website at least prevent
politically correct leftist anti-freedom ideology from being completely unopposed.

David

0 Replies

The reason I think you are a wanker or tosser is nothing to do with politics; it's your nutty spelling obsession.

Why did you post the same message all those times?

1 Reply

@contrex,

contrex wrote:

The reason I think you are a wanker or tosser is nothing to do
with politics; it's your nutty spelling obsession.

I 'm trying to help in tearing down paradigmatic spelling insofar as
it is not fonetic. I hope to show that there r faster, shorter
and easier ways to spell than the traditional way which
is in defiance of sound reasoning, demanding unnecessary labor,
for no reason and for no reward for the full life of each citizen.
I 'm trying to lead by example; I don t wish to perpetuate
the problem by ignoring it and supporting it.

Teddy Roosevelt tried to institute fonetic spelling
when he was President. He was a very popular President,
but he also was subjected to ridicule for his efforts
to reform spelling, so it is no surprize that the same happens to me.

contrex wrote:

Why did you post the same message all those times?

Until I read your question, I did not know
that there had been multiple posts. It certainly was not intentional.

David

0 Replies

fresco wrote:

Surely phonetic spelling would make it two difficult when trying too decide between to or more homophones.

Surely that is poor example for your apparent purpose; the context of each word makes it clear what was intended. Not that I disagree with you!

1 Reply

@contrex,

contrex wrote:

fresco wrote:
Surely phonetic spelling would make it two difficult
when trying too decide between to or more homophones.

Surely that is poor example for your apparent purpose;
the context of each word makes it clear what was intended.
Not that I disagree with you!

We can do better than the context for distinction.
Where there is a will there is a way.
As Teddy Roosevent found, there is a lot of emotional resistance
to improvement of spelling. (Maybe the same negativity I feel toward the metric system,
tho I know that its better than the English system, which I prefer because I learned it first.)
Distinctions CAN BE made as has already been shown
by use of the to, too and two (and 2).

At some point, I expect a respected authority
to convene a committee of experts to write a new fonetic dictionary
whose content will then be tawt to school children
so that their minds will no longer be poisoned
with being told to spell the rong way all their lives.

We will do it for the children.

David

0 Replies

Quote:

We will do it for the children.

Dream on, Mr Crazy.

1 Reply

@contrex,

contrex wrote:

Quote:
We will do it for the children.

Dream on, Mr Crazy.

Americans tire of the burden of useless letters;
witness the fewer letters used by the young in their texting.
This will accelerate the end of non-fonetic spelling.
It is useless and has no value.

Its all a matter of habituation.

David

1 Reply

aphorisms of your own.

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know