contentious retraction of a failed
dualism,
      happy schizophrenia,
                      my money is "biased"
in metaphor:
           little people, little needs,
          the rest remains a gargantuan
enterprise...
               little fool, little fowl:
                                  and from a grain of
sand, a unit, to conceptualiße
       the breadth and depth of tme....
little people: you know:
         belittle differences,
market the gains...
                      trip and attempt to fall.

       oh, i took the noun confusion to be
an artefsact associated with your, profession
                         being taken seriously?    
my bad...
                   because aren't
lawyers the only, "true", readers,
of a thesaurus?
                    nibbling qusi-vermin,
you could almost squash
them with an ****** impetus at
spotting a cockroach...

                         thing with rats...
esp. of a certain ethnic disposition
that is hardly an allowance...
            anglo goorl with a ****-
beefie?
                    how's that 'elping
you?
         good? **** the rest and
confiscate the retired nearing death....

i'm bothered though...
  about jurisprudence without a thesaurus...
see...
i don't think it would be
applicable, let alone passable
to pass a blah,
     without a thesaurus....
let alone the rule of: thumb...

    i already presuppose the dictionary
definition,
  but i suppose you don't,
given that the thesaurus is
contaminated with a higher
status when compared to a dictionary....
   in most instances
                  the fabric of the kantian
gensis  0 = negation
           doesn't even qualify as (a) genesis...

in the fabric of: the "inconvenience"
             of stating law...
              we have to resort to
"demanding" metaphor...
                god forbid this childish prank
of permanently effectuating a posit of nuance;
given the leverage,
              that demands a portion of
                    the living: to speak for the dead.

yes, perfected "imperfect" english
can sometimes spot a chance to avoid
using articles, given that there are only two
to mind...
           but jurisprudence is as much
about excavating past the prime from
a thesaurus, as it is about reading a,
******* dictionary...
                  gnome language...
              the square: isn't a square type of
people...
            can't help but imagie a hellish
dentistry session...
    bleeding gums, healthy teeth being
pulled out without anaesthetic...
you know,
          the atypical sort of sadism, and dada.