Intelligent insulting

I'll give it a shot...

I don't like the English Standard Version, but I don't denigrate those who do. And for the people who like the ESV, denigrate means 'put down'.

If ignorance is bliss, why are you so unhappy?

You are so tragic and despicable that breast cancer walks to end you.

If your brain were shoved into the butt opening of a flea, it would rattle around like a ping pong ball in a freight train box car.

If all you could wear was your wisdom, you would be scantily clad.

[disclaimer: "you" in these instances is a generic person, not anyone specific.]

 

Come now, let's sharpen our wits and our pens, yes, but for critiquing arguments, or lack thereof. Slaying the weak and enfeebled with words should be beneath us. Or should I say, "Leave the poor man alone"?

 

O dear church mouse, you're always here;
but when you listen, do you hear?
and when you comment, have you thought
that comments without thought are fraught?

 

Here’s a modern version in the movie Roxanne.

 

One of the best I've heard supposedly came from Churchill.
At some formal party Sir Winston & a Lady were talking, & obviously upset with Winston she commented:
"Sir Winston, if you were my husband I should give you a cup of poison!"
To which he replied, "And Madam, if I were your husband I would drink it!"

 

There's folk on here who think there's nothing finer
than a quick response with a brief one-liner.

 

I insist there's nothing wrong
with getting language help from Strong.

 

Disraeli, asserted that "half the cabinet are knaves."
He was ordered by the Speaker to withdraw the remark.
He did, saying "half the cabinet are not knaves."

 

On his very widely viewed TV show in the USA Groucho Marx once quipped that the ceilings of the rooms at a certain hotel were so low, the rats were stoop-shouldered. The hotel’s management were not amused and demanded a public retraction. On his next show Groucho said: “All right, I apologize.The rats in that hotel are NOT stoop-shouldered.”

 

THese all from another thread, the first in reply to one of my Biblical posts.

I don't think they qualify as "intelligent insults" but I will reply -

Thank you. Your recognition of the soundness of my exegesis is appreciated.

Your apology is appreciated but you should try to make it more fulsome.[1]

As you don't recognise truth when you see it, I won't attempt the impossible.

Proving the Bible wrong is not my aim. My target is you.

[1] Fulsome in the sense of "fulsome apology" is almost always used in the wrong sense - is if "fulsome" meant more abject, more sincere. It means an exaggerated false apology.
e.g.
I'm very sorry you were upset when I showed you your errors.
I'm very sorry I came smartly dressed & made you look scruffy.

 

What a lovely set - I wonder how many I can remember & use

That John Adams quote is too true to be funny. The lawyers always win & take the money, even when they lose the case.

 

Navy pilot, to submarine officer: "Those underwater boats are moving coffins!"

Subby officer's reply: "Pardon me, Flyboy, but there are far more aircraft lost in the sea than there are subbies lost in the sky."

 

MB wrote -
It seems to me you have a wild imagination. Scripture is not of anyone's private interpretation. Maybe you should take scripture literally rather than allegorically.

 

Alas, your post yet again places me in the throes of the proverbial dilemma: to reply, or not to reply, that is the question.