loser

He who thinks to save anything by his religion, besides his soul, will be a loser in the end.

A loser doesn't know what he'll do if he loses, but talks about what he'll do if he wins, and a winner doesn't talk about what he'll do if he wins, but knows what he'll do if he loses.

Let the truth and right by which you are apparently the loser be preferable to you to the falsehood and wrong by which you are apparently the gainer.

A loser doesn't know what he'll do if he loses, but talks about what he'll do if he wins, and a winner doesn't talk about what he'll do if he wins, but knows what he'll do if he loses.

The words "winner" and "loser" have many meanings. When we
refer to a person as a winner, we do not mean one who makes
someone else lose. To us, a winner is one who responds authentically
by being credible, trustworthy, responsive, and genuine, both as an
individual and as a member of a society. A loser is one who fails to
respond authentically. Martin Buber makes this distinction as he re-
tells the old story of the rabbi who, on his deathbed, is asked if he is
ready for the world to come. The rabbi says yes. After all, he will not
be asked, "Why were you not Moses?" He will only be asked, "Why
were you not yourself?"

He who conquers is not the victor unless the loser considers himself beaten.

You must never be satisfied with losing. You must get angry, terribly angry, about losing. But the mark of the good loser is that he takes his anger out on himself and not his victorious opponents or on his teammates.

A winner rebukes and forgives; a loser is too timid to rebuke and too petty to forgive.

Agnosticism is a perfectly respectable and tenable philosophical position; it is not dogmatic and makes no pronouncements about the ultimate truths of the universe. It remains open to evidence and persuasion; lacking faith, it nevertheless does not deride faith. Atheism, on the other hand, is as unyielding and dogmatic about religious belief as true believers are about heathens. It tries to use reason to demolish a structure that is not built upon reason; because, though rational argument may take us to the edge of belief, we require a "leap of faith" to jump the chasm.

If Wall Street paid a tax on every “game” they run, we would get enough revenue to run the government on.

And so it's inescapable and people who proclaim scrupulous honesty can only proclaim that if they don't examine closely the things they believe.