i mean, per - leeeze
personally i would rather have two in a bush.
what about you?
2006-06-12 14:32:21 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Other - Society & Culture
I'D HAVE TO SAY I DON'T WANT ANYMORE BUSH'S WITH BIRDS IN HAND OR IN THE BUSH BUT I WOULD TAKE THE BUSH GETTING THE BIRD
2006-06-12 14:38:01 · answer #1 · answered by ₦âħí»€G 6 · 1⤊ 2⤋
A bird in hand is a sure thing. The two in a bush are just speculation. I can tell by your question that your one that thinks, the grass is always greener on the other side of the fence.
2006-06-12 14:44:55 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes if it's a chicken or a duck.
No if it's a vulture.
Actually, I think all birds can be divided according to whether you want them in your hand or the bush.
2006-06-12 22:08:30 · answer #3 · answered by comradelouise 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It is a proverb. It means - it is better having a little in your hand rather than having a lot in other's hand. e.g. if you have £10, that is better than somone else have £20.
2006-06-12 16:17:28 · answer #4 · answered by tony b 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Why would you use your hand if you have two of the real thing??
2006-06-12 14:40:53 · answer #5 · answered by skyyn777 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Depends on whose hand and whose bush!!!
2006-06-12 14:36:27 · answer #6 · answered by colorados_lost_rose 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Ask a gambler
2006-06-12 18:56:03 · answer #7 · answered by trebs 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not in my bush!
2006-06-12 14:39:17 · answer #8 · answered by Manda Bear 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
yep i agree
means they wouldnt sh*t all over your hand
2006-06-12 14:36:58 · answer #9 · answered by jackie 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes...
2006-06-12 14:44:23 · answer #10 · answered by Liew K 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋