Alas, I can only claim credit for one.
"Silly. Under pressure easily rewriting. Can a linguist always find really awesomely good answers. Like I said, this is clearly easy. X-rays prove I am legal, or does odd capricious intent offer, unctuously, supercalifragilisticexpialodocious?"
"Sure. Understated performance enhances reception—can anyone like it for really abstruse guise? I like it, shouldn't typically indecent cliques engage, xenophilically perhaps, in a like-oriented domain? Or can I offer unctuous sperm?"
"Say, urban planners, easy rewards can attract lazy investors. Fairly reluctant artists get incentives, like individualistic stylish townhouses. I can't escape 'Xerxes,' people! It's always left out, dangling, on call, inside our unctuous supercalifragilisticexpialodiciouses."
"Surely, under pressure everything really can align lovingly if fragments return and garner interesting lessons. Is such time innocent? 'Cause everyone's xenodocheionology places immense altruism lower on doors (only cast in other styles)."
"...other urban styles."
Posted by: Matt Weiner | June 18, 2005 at 03:11 PM
There's an important quote in the New Yorker this week:
"The woods have always been full of Wolfsons..."
So very true.
Posted by: Joe Drymala | June 20, 2005 at 07:17 AM
I was sure you were modifying a quotation to come up with that, but nope.
Posted by: ben wolfson | June 20, 2005 at 07:22 AM
A writer doing a piece on financial piracy couldn't ask for a better name for his antagonist than Wolfson.
Except for, maybe, Blackbeard.
Posted by: Joe Drymala | June 20, 2005 at 07:27 AM
what about: Rex Whitecollar? I. M. Bezzle? Johnny Enron?
sorry.
Posted by: text | June 21, 2005 at 06:11 PM