Which one is right??

[Ranger Mom]

Or are they both and do they mean the same thing??

I have seen both phrases used on here.

It takes two to tango.

It takes two to tangle.


Same meanings??

[pirate4state]

They are both right, IMO.

The meanings, IMO, can be used for the same subject or two different subjects. :devil: :D

[Gobbla2001]

It takes two to tangO: Two to have sex/make a baby, two to fight...

It takes two to tangLE: Two to fight, and two to you know if bondage is present

[Ranger Mom]

Originally posted by Gobbla2001
It takes two to tangO: Two to have sex/make a baby, two to fight...

It takes two to tangLE: Two to fight, and two to you know if bondage is present

So they ARE interchangeable if both mean "Two to fight?"

[Gobbla2001]

Originally posted by Ranger Mom
So they ARE interchangeable if both mean "Two to fight?"

yes... because someone could say "Let's Dance" to another if he wanted to fight... Tango is a dance...

[piratebg]

Does that mean you can only have two to tango? :confused:

[Ranger Mom]

Originally posted by piratebg
Does that mean you can only have two to tango? :confused:

Two is a tango, three's a crowd!!:p

[Gobbla2001]

Originally posted by piratebg
Does that mean you can only have two to tango? :confused:

yah, but you can have "one to cut in"

[STANG RED]

Originally posted by Gobbla2001
yah, but you can have "one to cut in"


I think you would end up with a tangle if you tried cutting in on a tango.:p

[zebrablue2]

Originally posted by STANG RED
I think you would end up with a tangle if you tried cutting in on a tango.:p



that would be correct--LOL...

[GreenMonster]

I'm stinkin confused. Could you guys go through this for me one more time, only SLOWER please?

[crabman]

The one I always have problems with is

For all intents and purposes

Or

For all intrinsic purposes

I have always argued that it is the second on but very few people know what intrinsic means so they say the first one.

[Gobbla2001]

Originally posted by crabman
The one I always have problems with is

For all intents and purposes

Or

For all intrinsic purposes

I have always argued that it is the second on but very few people know what intrinsic means so they say the first one.

I've actually heard people say "for all intensive purposes"...

[super1]

Originally posted by crabman
The one I always have problems with is

For all intents and purposes

Or

For all intrinsic purposes

I have always argued that it is the second on but very few people know what intrinsic means so they say the first one.

I believe that the original quote is "intents and purposes".

[super1]

Originally posted by Ranger Mom
Or are they both and do they mean the same thing??

I have seen both phrases used on here.

It takes two to tango.

It takes two to tangle.


Same meanings??

I'm pretty sure that "tango" is the original quote. And tangle wo uld pretty much give the quote the same conotation.

[BwdLions]

It Takes Two to Tango is what I've always heard. Of course, the other is good too. It does take at least two to tangle.

[crzyjournalist03]

Originally posted by BwdLions
It Takes Two to Tango is what I've always heard. Of course, the other is good too. It does take at least two to tangle.

two to tangle is wrong.

Have you ever tied your shoe laces into a knot? One lace, tangled. Unless you tied them together.

[3afan]

Originally posted by Ranger Mom
...
It takes two to tango.

...

I've always heard/used this one .....

[ronwx5x]

All things being equal, I believe I would prefer to tango rather than tangle, unless tangle has some connotation other than fight or wrestle. In which case, I may prefer tangle. Now I'm confused!

:rolleyes: :rolleyes:

[GreenGobbla]

it takes two to tango. or somethin like that

[Ranger Mom]

Originally posted by 3afan
I've always heard/used this one .....

That is what I have always used myself!

[Trashman]

I'm so confused!:vrycnfsd: