Steven Wright is one of my favorite comedians. Anyone ever hear of him? His humor is very dry...like...Sahara Desert dry. One of my favorite lines is "I woke up one morning and found all my stuff had been stolen...and replaced with exact duplicates."
He cracks me up. Here's some of his stuff. Hope you like him, too!
I'd kill for a Nobel Peace Prize.
Borrow money from pessimists - they don't expect it
back.
Half the people you know are below average.
99% of lawyers give the rest a bad name.
42.7% of all statistics are made up on the spot.
A conscience is what hurts when all your other parts feel so good.
A clear conscience is usually the sign of a bad
memory.
If you want the rainbow, you gotta put up with the
rain.
All those who believe in psycho kinesis, raise my
hand.
The early bird may get the worm, but the second mouse
gets the cheese.
I almost had a psychic girlfriend but she left me before we met.
OK, so what's the speed of dark?
How do you tell when you're out of invisible ink?
If everything seems to be going well, you have
obviously overlooked something.
Depression is merely anger without enthusiasm.
When everything is coming your way, you're in the
wrong lane.
Ambition is a poor excuse for not having enough sense
to be lazy.
Hard work pays off in the future, laziness pays off
now.
I intend to live forever - so far, so good.
If Barbie is so popular, why do you have to buy her
friends?
Eagles may soar, but weasels don't get sucked into jet
engines.
What happens if you get scared half to death twice?
My mechanic told me, "I couldn't repair your brakes,
so I made your horn louder."
Why do psychics have to ask you for your name?
If at first you don't succeed, destroy all evidence
that you tried.
A conclusion is the place where you got tired of
thinking.
Experience is something you don't get until just after
you need it.
The hardness of the butter is proportional to the
softness of the bread.
To steal ideas from one person is plagiarism; to steal
from many is research.
The problem with the gene pool is that there is no
lifeguard.
The sooner you fall behind, the more time you'll have
to catch up.
The colder the x-ray table, the more of your body is
required to be on it.
Everyone has a photographic memory, some just don't
have film.
Steven Wright...one of my favorite comedians
Steven Wright...one of my favorite comedians
[FONT=Arial Black]I hope you cherish this sweet way of life, and I hope you know that it comes with a price.
~Darrel Worley~
[/FONT]
Bullet's trial was a farce. Can I get an AMEN?????
We won't be punished for our sins, but BY them.
~Darrel Worley~
[/FONT]
Bullet's trial was a farce. Can I get an AMEN?????
We won't be punished for our sins, but BY them.
-
telaquapacky
- Posts: 754
- Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2004 3:00 pm
Steven Wright...one of my favorite comedians
:wah: I heard Stephen Wright on a flight once and was floored- then I forgot who he was. Thanks for refreshing my memory.
Look what the cat dragged in.
Steven Wright...one of my favorite comedians
The moment you have all been waiting for. It’s the truth, the whole
truth and nothing, but the truth from “Saintsman!â€
All of you who have responded to my new membership in the FG have been
part of my university assigned law lab-project over the past 5 days!
I am currently sitting in the university library finalizing my many,
many printed FG notes from the posts I got through those of you over
the past couple of days so I can begin my essay. Are you a bit curious? Here is the real story!
Indeed, I am a law student and one week ago, I was one of 28 students
assigned a project by our social behaviors & psychology law professor
who has been engaging in this lab-project for five years now. The
assignment and mission was as follows per the syllabi:
Task:
1.) To seek, enroll and investigate a public forum to determine if
you are capable of engaging in intelligent discourse among the members
you interact with. The determination of intelligent discourse will be
graded on conversations and debates that are void of irrational
bantering, dead dogmas, useless expressions of demoralization and ill-
tempered emotional eruptions. (These behaviors are shunned in our
courts and not protocol.)
2.) To experience the “general public’s†ability in rapport,
rationalization, articulation, linguistic ability, maturity and
ability to receive, process, deliberate verbal expressions as
compared to the behavior, demeanor and protocol expected by future
attorneys in a courtroom. (These respondents will represent a general
foundation for the type of character making up your future witnesses
and juries, for better or worse.)
Rules:
The student entering the public forum must continually pose
intelligent questions and responses relevant to the topic and
respondents questions. This will be determined on the basis of the
conversations and debates you print from the web-site discourse and
display on the overhead projector during your oral presentation. The
student has only three days of university sponsored computer lab hours
(no more than eight sitting hours in one period) to conduct, complete
and finalize the discourse.
Objective:
In seeking to engage in a deliberate, rational and productive
discourse in pursuit of knowledge, understanding and truth, the
student must bring up at least one of three controversial subjects in
the forum.
1.) Religion
2.) Politics
3.) Sexual behavior.
Through the duration of the discourse, the student is allowed to
attempt to emotionally debase or incite negative responses by the
respondents of senseless rhetoric providing the student remains civil,
non-abusive and in-control of intelligent rapport throughout. This
will determined, again, by the overhead conversations you display
during your oral presentation of the actual posts, threads or IM’s.
If any student is banned prior to the completion of the discourse,
that will be evidence that a ruling body of the forum determined the
student’s behavior below standard unless the student can provide
physical proof by printing out actual posts and discourse showing
blatant and unjust action on the part of a moderator, web-advisor or
governing partisan of the forum. I would advise students not be
banned for the purpose of your overall evaluation during this lab.
All material must be researched, compiled, analyzed and put into
syllabi required essay form by Tuesday, February 15th, 2005.
Any and all alterations of this prescribed format must be approved by
this professor prior to any action on the student’s part. Questions pertaining to this project are acceptable if posted to my university e-mail address only.
There you have it! Yes, I guess you were guinea pigs, but it was all for the pursuit of education!
For any of you who are interested in my conclusions, I welcome you to read on.
First, my professor was ABSOLUTELY correct when he said it would probably be very easy to incite and draw an unknown respondent into a state of emotional disarray and illogical thought patterns. The more one is able to debase and rock the boat by getting their addressee to act in unacceptable behaviors, the better for that attorney’s foundation of sensible reasoning and controlled behavior.
Notice what my posts were: 1.) “Religion, Children and Whipping Toolsâ€
Actually, I thought I had a good chance of proving my professor wrong as that thread and its posts were quite good and I did not incite a lot of craziness on behalf of the respondents and I did maintain intelligent questions are responses through out.
So, I moved onto to another attempt with a post that would hopefully stir up a bit more emotion, but indeed, be founded on logic! Yes, politics and that of censorship. Ah, my next thread to see if I could appease my professor with the “common folk†who appear in our nation’s courtrooms was titled, “Censorshit … I mean ‘ship’!†The pun was clever I thought. Well, that did it! I got the reaction I was aiming for and not only that, all of the areas of my “character reaction sheet†were soon filled in with all the ugly responses that good ole prof. said would come thanks to those of you who responded.
My conclusion at this point only applies to you FG ppl. who participated with responses.
1. Bill Sikes: You did prove my prof. wrong and represented yourself and your country in an inspiring and intelligent debate in my “religion†thread with rational and well supported debate. Kuddos to you if you want them.
2. Jives: You should be proud too, but you made it clear that you
are an educator and your demeanor represented exactly that of
an educated respondent.
3. For the Canadian responders: Koan (moderator)& Kensloft …
very disappointing. Kensloft, you threatened me in your post!?
Koan, it started off good, but went down hill fast into a pit of
insults and rhetoric that has no place in intelligent debate.
Minks … You represented Canada most beautifully and I truly
appreciate your support (you know what I mean) even though you
were unaware that I was on a mission. You scored highly!
4. For us Americans, I have mixed feelings. There was good, but then we should be ashamed or at least I am! One of the posters said in a thread that American’s know they rule the world and act like it … pompus, arrogant and I will add irrational.
It was quite easy for me to lure Anastrophe into debate, but I conclude that most all your arguments were built one opinion without support before you began the ill criticism and negative demeanor toward me.
Godiva Girl: started off very intelligent and well in the relgion and spanking topic, but went deep south at the end with needless insults and so on.
Babyrider … well, you already know how I have to present your demeanor as one of the “common folkâ€. My goodness, just go over your responses to me and feel the hate, anger and pain I was able to stir up in you. One person should not be capable of inciting such behaviors from another when in a public debate or forum.
Abbey, both good and bad.
Enigma: Bravo to YOU!
Lon: Bravo to YOU!
A Karenia: Bravo to YOU!
Tmbsgrl:
Carla: What the heck was that all about?
Anyhow, I could go on, but I won’t
Onto my biggest challenge. Capt. Buzzard! As the day was nearing an end and I had spent almost 7 hours in the library computer lab, I was unable to entice Capt. Buzzard to join the rhetoric and BS. I was unable to get him to break. His fortitude was impressive, but I continued on and … although I admire your stamina, indeed, at the end of the day Capt. Buzzard did fall in to the trap, at first in a very neutral way, which is commendable, but the last comment posted was one of an ill and emotional statement concerning sunshine and goodness in my life. I had succeeded! I drew him and he took a side! And he made a polite, but still needless emotional comment. Whew, you almost got me.
Now, for all of you who may have been reading all along, but never did join it, I commend you. For those who did join in, but remained calm and intelligent (tombstone man, Bill Sikes, A karenia, Lon, CVX, Capt. Buzzard for 99% of the way, the gentleman with the Shakespeare Avatar [sorry I don’t recall your name] and so on) I commend you more.
Finally, last and most certainly not least! My prime target who I will make as my main subject to prove my professor’s point during my oral presentation … of course, you all know her, Ms. Lady Cop! With all due respect, I have to say that you represented yourself in a manner of ill emotion, irrational thought and combative abuse with no intelligent base or valid debate fashion. I was afraid you were not going to engage, but you did and what a dozzie it was. Not only that, you followed up with another thread to continue it all on!
And for all of you saying I was mean and aggressive toward her, you are right. I had to be to get the results I was investigating for my research. I thought Anastrophe was going to be my target, but then Lady Cop came along and made it all too easy! My luring you into debate is over and I stand true to some of the things I said in my posts, like I do respect you for your infinite worth as a soul, but in court, you would be a prosecuting attorney’s dream to tear apart on the stand.
I even went as far as to do a little research on Linda, I mean Lady Cop per the help of some friends to “investigate†her and nail her to the cross with that web site I posted where she truly was banned, but that action did not get nearly the response that the earlier on did and plus, the “administrator moderator†e-mailed me and told me to be good or I would be banned and that would defeat my entire project.
Okay, it is all said and done on my end as my work here is complete and now must be put into essay and presentation forum. Oh yeah, the question my professor posed about the common public and being able to conduct an intelligent debate per courtroom protocol … and I know, none of you thought you were in a courtroom, but tendencies are usually habitual or … the apple doesn’t fall from the tree theory, well, I will let you guess what my opinion is.
Someone kept responding with several posts telling me to apologize to Cop Lady or else … or else I don’t know what. I think it was that wild Canadian guy, but anyhow, I really am a nice guy who is a law student and enjoyed this project. You may be very distraught that you were unknowingly participants in it, but this is the web and its all public access! My point about the apology thing is that if I offended you, I am sorry as I don’t operate in such a manner on a regular basis, but also remember, I am going to be an attorney too.
Further, I admit that I am arrogant and opinionated, but am usually more couth in how I dispense it. I only had 3 days to get all of you going! Yes, I do like myself and NO, I don’t have 27 children. Anyone who bought into that was kind of goofy! Most all the info on my profile page was made up except I have been to Scotland and Ireland and I did study at Oxford University. The two pictures I posted under the name of Saintsman, well, I am sure you can guess! It all seemed so real! Especially for Lady Cop who really got missed-off with a “pâ€.
I really have no intention or desire to stay at a public forum where I am not wanted so Anastrophe’s analogy of me being a troll that needed to get attention or boost my ego or seek attention and all the rest was humorous! Those who chimed in with their psych eval. of me that mirrored Anastrophe’s were entertaining too. Anyhow, I can clearly see when Mr. “Saintsman†is not loved and he will disappear as mid-terms are coming soon and this thing can get addicting for sure!
Capt. Buzzard, stand your ground from now on and don’t fall prey to cheap “newbies†like me! Man, I thought you had me, but I got you in the end. Like Lady Cop “tipping her King.†Boy, I talked the talk in those posts, aye! That should be the icing on the cake to get me an “Aâ€!
Interestingly enough, I was not banned and for a while there, I thought for sure I would be, but at that point I did not care as I had more than enough proof to present my case as the discussion and or debate went to all emotional Hell and continued on for quite some time! My prof. would have said I was unjustly booted should I have been banned, but FG never did, no matter how many posts there were asking them to from LC and others.
Also, I certainly am not here to create any controversy now, but I will say that some of the censorship that LC did last night probably wasn’t appropriate while other deletions were. Just something for all of you to ponder. I couldn’t care less, I only used the juvenile third grade potty talk story to incite a debate that I would tie to politics over censorship while leading you all down a path of emotional ranting to show my professor (who is a judge in a U.S. circuit court) how well I did in debasing the “common Folkâ€.
I really am truly interested in your comments on this specific post right here and not any of my other ones. Anyone who has read this far now, well … should voice some opinion and at this point, Capt. Buzzard, there are no tricks! I really would like to hear your thoughts on all this.
Then Come Monday evening, I shall unsubscribe myself from your garden and be on my merry way … unless of course, you would like me to stay just a wee bit longer!
Education. It is a wonderful and entertaining experience!
truth and nothing, but the truth from “Saintsman!â€
All of you who have responded to my new membership in the FG have been
part of my university assigned law lab-project over the past 5 days!
I am currently sitting in the university library finalizing my many,
many printed FG notes from the posts I got through those of you over
the past couple of days so I can begin my essay. Are you a bit curious? Here is the real story!
Indeed, I am a law student and one week ago, I was one of 28 students
assigned a project by our social behaviors & psychology law professor
who has been engaging in this lab-project for five years now. The
assignment and mission was as follows per the syllabi:
Task:
1.) To seek, enroll and investigate a public forum to determine if
you are capable of engaging in intelligent discourse among the members
you interact with. The determination of intelligent discourse will be
graded on conversations and debates that are void of irrational
bantering, dead dogmas, useless expressions of demoralization and ill-
tempered emotional eruptions. (These behaviors are shunned in our
courts and not protocol.)
2.) To experience the “general public’s†ability in rapport,
rationalization, articulation, linguistic ability, maturity and
ability to receive, process, deliberate verbal expressions as
compared to the behavior, demeanor and protocol expected by future
attorneys in a courtroom. (These respondents will represent a general
foundation for the type of character making up your future witnesses
and juries, for better or worse.)
Rules:
The student entering the public forum must continually pose
intelligent questions and responses relevant to the topic and
respondents questions. This will be determined on the basis of the
conversations and debates you print from the web-site discourse and
display on the overhead projector during your oral presentation. The
student has only three days of university sponsored computer lab hours
(no more than eight sitting hours in one period) to conduct, complete
and finalize the discourse.
Objective:
In seeking to engage in a deliberate, rational and productive
discourse in pursuit of knowledge, understanding and truth, the
student must bring up at least one of three controversial subjects in
the forum.
1.) Religion
2.) Politics
3.) Sexual behavior.
Through the duration of the discourse, the student is allowed to
attempt to emotionally debase or incite negative responses by the
respondents of senseless rhetoric providing the student remains civil,
non-abusive and in-control of intelligent rapport throughout. This
will determined, again, by the overhead conversations you display
during your oral presentation of the actual posts, threads or IM’s.
If any student is banned prior to the completion of the discourse,
that will be evidence that a ruling body of the forum determined the
student’s behavior below standard unless the student can provide
physical proof by printing out actual posts and discourse showing
blatant and unjust action on the part of a moderator, web-advisor or
governing partisan of the forum. I would advise students not be
banned for the purpose of your overall evaluation during this lab.
All material must be researched, compiled, analyzed and put into
syllabi required essay form by Tuesday, February 15th, 2005.
Any and all alterations of this prescribed format must be approved by
this professor prior to any action on the student’s part. Questions pertaining to this project are acceptable if posted to my university e-mail address only.
There you have it! Yes, I guess you were guinea pigs, but it was all for the pursuit of education!
For any of you who are interested in my conclusions, I welcome you to read on.
First, my professor was ABSOLUTELY correct when he said it would probably be very easy to incite and draw an unknown respondent into a state of emotional disarray and illogical thought patterns. The more one is able to debase and rock the boat by getting their addressee to act in unacceptable behaviors, the better for that attorney’s foundation of sensible reasoning and controlled behavior.
Notice what my posts were: 1.) “Religion, Children and Whipping Toolsâ€
Actually, I thought I had a good chance of proving my professor wrong as that thread and its posts were quite good and I did not incite a lot of craziness on behalf of the respondents and I did maintain intelligent questions are responses through out.
So, I moved onto to another attempt with a post that would hopefully stir up a bit more emotion, but indeed, be founded on logic! Yes, politics and that of censorship. Ah, my next thread to see if I could appease my professor with the “common folk†who appear in our nation’s courtrooms was titled, “Censorshit … I mean ‘ship’!†The pun was clever I thought. Well, that did it! I got the reaction I was aiming for and not only that, all of the areas of my “character reaction sheet†were soon filled in with all the ugly responses that good ole prof. said would come thanks to those of you who responded.
My conclusion at this point only applies to you FG ppl. who participated with responses.
1. Bill Sikes: You did prove my prof. wrong and represented yourself and your country in an inspiring and intelligent debate in my “religion†thread with rational and well supported debate. Kuddos to you if you want them.
2. Jives: You should be proud too, but you made it clear that you
are an educator and your demeanor represented exactly that of
an educated respondent.
3. For the Canadian responders: Koan (moderator)& Kensloft …
very disappointing. Kensloft, you threatened me in your post!?
Koan, it started off good, but went down hill fast into a pit of
insults and rhetoric that has no place in intelligent debate.
Minks … You represented Canada most beautifully and I truly
appreciate your support (you know what I mean) even though you
were unaware that I was on a mission. You scored highly!
4. For us Americans, I have mixed feelings. There was good, but then we should be ashamed or at least I am! One of the posters said in a thread that American’s know they rule the world and act like it … pompus, arrogant and I will add irrational.
It was quite easy for me to lure Anastrophe into debate, but I conclude that most all your arguments were built one opinion without support before you began the ill criticism and negative demeanor toward me.
Godiva Girl: started off very intelligent and well in the relgion and spanking topic, but went deep south at the end with needless insults and so on.
Babyrider … well, you already know how I have to present your demeanor as one of the “common folkâ€. My goodness, just go over your responses to me and feel the hate, anger and pain I was able to stir up in you. One person should not be capable of inciting such behaviors from another when in a public debate or forum.
Abbey, both good and bad.
Enigma: Bravo to YOU!
Lon: Bravo to YOU!
A Karenia: Bravo to YOU!
Tmbsgrl:
Carla: What the heck was that all about?
Anyhow, I could go on, but I won’t
Onto my biggest challenge. Capt. Buzzard! As the day was nearing an end and I had spent almost 7 hours in the library computer lab, I was unable to entice Capt. Buzzard to join the rhetoric and BS. I was unable to get him to break. His fortitude was impressive, but I continued on and … although I admire your stamina, indeed, at the end of the day Capt. Buzzard did fall in to the trap, at first in a very neutral way, which is commendable, but the last comment posted was one of an ill and emotional statement concerning sunshine and goodness in my life. I had succeeded! I drew him and he took a side! And he made a polite, but still needless emotional comment. Whew, you almost got me.
Now, for all of you who may have been reading all along, but never did join it, I commend you. For those who did join in, but remained calm and intelligent (tombstone man, Bill Sikes, A karenia, Lon, CVX, Capt. Buzzard for 99% of the way, the gentleman with the Shakespeare Avatar [sorry I don’t recall your name] and so on) I commend you more.
Finally, last and most certainly not least! My prime target who I will make as my main subject to prove my professor’s point during my oral presentation … of course, you all know her, Ms. Lady Cop! With all due respect, I have to say that you represented yourself in a manner of ill emotion, irrational thought and combative abuse with no intelligent base or valid debate fashion. I was afraid you were not going to engage, but you did and what a dozzie it was. Not only that, you followed up with another thread to continue it all on!
And for all of you saying I was mean and aggressive toward her, you are right. I had to be to get the results I was investigating for my research. I thought Anastrophe was going to be my target, but then Lady Cop came along and made it all too easy! My luring you into debate is over and I stand true to some of the things I said in my posts, like I do respect you for your infinite worth as a soul, but in court, you would be a prosecuting attorney’s dream to tear apart on the stand.
I even went as far as to do a little research on Linda, I mean Lady Cop per the help of some friends to “investigate†her and nail her to the cross with that web site I posted where she truly was banned, but that action did not get nearly the response that the earlier on did and plus, the “administrator moderator†e-mailed me and told me to be good or I would be banned and that would defeat my entire project.
Okay, it is all said and done on my end as my work here is complete and now must be put into essay and presentation forum. Oh yeah, the question my professor posed about the common public and being able to conduct an intelligent debate per courtroom protocol … and I know, none of you thought you were in a courtroom, but tendencies are usually habitual or … the apple doesn’t fall from the tree theory, well, I will let you guess what my opinion is.
Someone kept responding with several posts telling me to apologize to Cop Lady or else … or else I don’t know what. I think it was that wild Canadian guy, but anyhow, I really am a nice guy who is a law student and enjoyed this project. You may be very distraught that you were unknowingly participants in it, but this is the web and its all public access! My point about the apology thing is that if I offended you, I am sorry as I don’t operate in such a manner on a regular basis, but also remember, I am going to be an attorney too.
Further, I admit that I am arrogant and opinionated, but am usually more couth in how I dispense it. I only had 3 days to get all of you going! Yes, I do like myself and NO, I don’t have 27 children. Anyone who bought into that was kind of goofy! Most all the info on my profile page was made up except I have been to Scotland and Ireland and I did study at Oxford University. The two pictures I posted under the name of Saintsman, well, I am sure you can guess! It all seemed so real! Especially for Lady Cop who really got missed-off with a “pâ€.
I really have no intention or desire to stay at a public forum where I am not wanted so Anastrophe’s analogy of me being a troll that needed to get attention or boost my ego or seek attention and all the rest was humorous! Those who chimed in with their psych eval. of me that mirrored Anastrophe’s were entertaining too. Anyhow, I can clearly see when Mr. “Saintsman†is not loved and he will disappear as mid-terms are coming soon and this thing can get addicting for sure!
Capt. Buzzard, stand your ground from now on and don’t fall prey to cheap “newbies†like me! Man, I thought you had me, but I got you in the end. Like Lady Cop “tipping her King.†Boy, I talked the talk in those posts, aye! That should be the icing on the cake to get me an “Aâ€!
Interestingly enough, I was not banned and for a while there, I thought for sure I would be, but at that point I did not care as I had more than enough proof to present my case as the discussion and or debate went to all emotional Hell and continued on for quite some time! My prof. would have said I was unjustly booted should I have been banned, but FG never did, no matter how many posts there were asking them to from LC and others.
Also, I certainly am not here to create any controversy now, but I will say that some of the censorship that LC did last night probably wasn’t appropriate while other deletions were. Just something for all of you to ponder. I couldn’t care less, I only used the juvenile third grade potty talk story to incite a debate that I would tie to politics over censorship while leading you all down a path of emotional ranting to show my professor (who is a judge in a U.S. circuit court) how well I did in debasing the “common Folkâ€.
I really am truly interested in your comments on this specific post right here and not any of my other ones. Anyone who has read this far now, well … should voice some opinion and at this point, Capt. Buzzard, there are no tricks! I really would like to hear your thoughts on all this.
Then Come Monday evening, I shall unsubscribe myself from your garden and be on my merry way … unless of course, you would like me to stay just a wee bit longer!
Education. It is a wonderful and entertaining experience!
If you're not good for your word, what good are you? :yh_think :yh_flag Live & make a Difference!