Hi. With this page I'm just simply attempting to bring attention to what I think are odd (and sometimes just plain stupid) clichés, comments, phrases and other sayings which I've either heard, read or seen in, on around billboards, bumper stickers, commercials, conversations, movies, speeches, TV and elsewhere. 

Table of Contents: 
"Just say 'No' to negativity" 
"Just be positive" 
"Earn free stuff for your school" 
"Earn Free Gas" 
"How are you today?"
"...New Agey ...not ...flakey, spacey..."
"if you can't read this..." 
"not more than 3 to 4" 
"less addictive pain medications" 
"...the result of a lot of mens' downfalls..." 
 "...checked, checked and double-checked." 
"shattering the rules of gravity"
"think quick on my feet"
et cetera, et cetera (formerly, "Redundant Redundancies")
Research = Intuition ?


"Just say 'No' to negativity" 
They are more focused on their philosophical and/or religious aspirations than they are on reality. Forgetting that the very word "No" is negative in and of it self, they include it in this campaign phrase in their haste to spread the goofy notion that positivity is somehow actually always "Good" in and of it self. 
  (I just saw this one on a bumper sticker today, 20030521, on my way into work)


"Just be positive" 
As with the entry on this page called "Just say 'No' to negativity", this statement reveals something about the world view of the one saying it. Unlike the other one, this one was actually stated directly to me recently regarding meeting with a certain group of people that are getting together for the purpose of discussing things like God; whether God exists, etc. 

I was invited and I went. I figured it might be interesting and a chance for me to invite others to think critically about such things as well. 

It wasn't an entirely blind invitation. The meeting is being organized by someone from a Christian group in Longmont with which I met many times for such discussions back in 2001. At that time, I had already ceased to be a believer, but I was still interested in the idea of the community aspect of it all and decided to go along for the ride when my wife asked me to go and meet with them. 

Our association with that group (in the sense of meeting together regularly for discussions etc) lasted for apx. a year. It just became too much for some of them to take that I refused to claim to know for sure that there even is such a thing as a God, let alone whether or not we know for sure what that God is like. 

They couldn't handle the fact that (even though my past experience as an amateur Biblical scholar and theologian, worship leader, Bible study leader, teacher and small-group founder/leader had allowed me the luxury of a vastly richer understanding of the Bible and God as expressed in the Bible) I don't think it is appropriate for anyone to claim to know for sure about such things as whether or not there is a God, or whether or not the Bible is in any way from that God. 

Even though the pastor and I shared some fairly important core ideas in common and enjoyed meeting with each other and discussing things together; even though I was a singer/song-writer that expressed through my songs the very heart of the God they claim to worship more intimately and powerfully than they've ever heard before, eventually, they asked me to no longer meet with their group due to the artificial conflict of a non-believer thriving in such ways in the midst of a believer-based organization. 

My wife Karen and I had even been asked if we'd be interested in leading one of their home fellowship groups at one point. Of course, they eventually decided that they could not deal with having a non-believer (that knows the heart of the Living God more deeply and purely than most hard core Christians alive) leading believers in believer activities etc. So, that never came about. 

They couldn't handle the fact that I asked questions; why?, how do you know that?, where does it say that in the Bible?, what proof do you have for that assertion?, are you saying that because it's what was passed on to you from your parents or other people or because it's something you've actually discovered for your self as a result of studying (the Bible, the Earth, etc)? 

My 5th grade teach once stopped me in the hall as I was leaving class one day and said to me, "Curiosity killed the cat Steven". I think these folks had the same uncomfortable ideas and feelings swell in their heads when I asked questions as she did so many years ago. 

One way questions are taken is as an attack. If they are taken as an attack, then they are seen as negative. That's the only reason why, when I was meeting once again with one of these folks recently that they said to me, "Just be positive". 

I'm sure it will happen again; I will ask questions for which they have no reasonable answer (or no answer at all), I'll ask another clarifying question since I didn't gain understanding from the first one; they will sense it as an attack instead of as an interested individual genuinely attempting to understand how the other is thinking and where they're coming from and will paint me as the outsider (which, clearly I am anyway I know) and say that I'm no longer welcome in their discussions. 

Such is life for the freak with the evolved genetic trait of tending to want to seek to understand systems and figure out how they work and to either make use of them by replicating them somewhere else or to help them function more effectively where they're at. Just be positive though, right? 


"Earn free stuff for your school"
This is one mistake that our society fell into a long time ago. Actually I think it most likely inherited it from the last society, and so on, and so on, and so on... 

So, what's wrong with this statement? Well, here's a clue... If you have to earn something, then it is not free. 

This is not a complicated issue. It has become so clouded by our goofy thinking and inappropriate usage of words, phrases and concepts, that most people don't even realize it's there anymore. For instance, "Send us money to help support our organization and we'll send you this free gift". If you have to send in the money to get it, then it is not a free gift. 

Oh ya, another thing...why do we have to use the word "free" if we're already using the word "gift". Since when do we pay for something and then call it a gift (unless of course we're buying something to give our self a gift or to give as a gift to someone else...that's different, obviously)? Also, it is only a "gift" if it is given freely and for no reason other than the desire to do so. If it is given in exchange for products or services or special treatment or in the form of "paying back a favor" or any other goofy reason, then it is not actually a gift at all, but a payment. 

Things that we have to pay for are not "gifts", but "products". This is so simple. They even taught it to us as little kids in basic grade school economics. That which is produced is a product. That which is paid for is a purchased product. That which is given away for free, with no strings attached, is a gift. 

So, concerning the unconscious question asked above, "what's wrong with this statement?", the answer is obvious. However, if you missed it, here it is again... "If you have to earn something, then it is not free."
  (I saw this one either on some kind of product packaging or in some kind of news paper or magazine. I don't recall the exact context of the publication, but the ad was definitely aimed at children and/or young adults. Entry added 20030521)


"Earn Free Gas" 
Yet another like the one just above. I know, there are many of these out there. You might get tired of me complaining about such crap, but this time I actually have a screenshot :) 
Here it is in my "What's Wrong in this Image" section... the link 


"How are you today?"
Nothing necessarily odd about this question at all. What I'm talking about here are all the times people say this (or something like it) without any desire to find out the answer to the question posed by the words coming out of their mouth at all. 

A classic example from my recent past...
I went into an automobile rental store. The woman behind the counter asked me, "How are you today?" I said, well, do you really want to know or do you just want me to say "fine, how are you?"? She said, "fine, I guess". My point gets even clearer (and my satisfaction in carrying out what I really want to do in life) in the next segment of my interaction with these people. 

After farting around with her for 5 minutes or so trying to figure out what we wanted to rent, she said, "Ok, you can just wait right over there. They have to go get the car and bring it here for you and it'll just be a few minutes." So, I said, "So, a few minutes? How long will it really be? A few minutes means three minutes the way I usually mean that word. What do you mean by it?" She said, "It will be at least 10 minutes. Then they should have the car here for you and you can get on your way" So, you can see... another place where people say something when they don't really mean it. I don't know about you, but for me, there's a really big difference between "a few minutes" and "at least ten minutes". At any rate, I didn't get harsh with her. I just made the point by bringing it to her attention and left it at that. 

THEN, one of the most brilliant moments of my life.... When they finally got the car to us (twenty minutes later), the guy that helped us check it out and sign the paperwork asked us, "So, how's your day been today?" I said, "Do you really want to know, or is that just the cordial thing to say?" He said, "The cordial thing to say" So I said, "Well, then it doesn't matter. Does it?" He said, "Ah.... no. I guess not" Point made. Point understood. 

Now I don't know if these interactions have any realistic chance of ever making a healthy difference in anyone's life, but I try. What the hell are we doing wasting our time and energy spewing out gobs of nonsense jibber-jabber when we could be using that same energy in the pursuit of our own health and well-being in the form of being more open, honest and real with each other?  
(entry added 20030730)

"...New Agey ...not ...flakey, spacey..."
Today, somewhere (I don't recall) on the UCB campus, I heard someone say, "I'm kind of a New Agey kind of person, but not in a flakey, spacey kind of way though" 

...and I thought, "What?!?" How can they be serious? What's not flakey or spacey about being "New Agey". Or, I guess maybe I should hold off a bit, step back and be more patient and humble and not jump to conclusions about what they mean and ask the question, "What do you mean by 'New Agey'?" ...but.... nah... we all know what they mean, don't we? Oh boy. 

Seriously though, if they really are "New Agey" and if they refer to them self as such to associate them self with the "New Age" religion (Westernized Hinduism) and others that believe in it, then why say something like, "...but not in a flakey, spacey kind of way"? 

I think that's kinda like what I used to say when I was still a believer, "Well, I'm not exactly a Christian, and I'm not into the official religion of Christianity, but I do love God with all my heart and I do believe that the Holy Spirit lives within me and I do believe that Jesus will come back for me some day after I'm buried and raise me from the dead to go live with him forever in heaven."  

Even as progressive as I was near "the end of the tunnel" before I finally came all the way out of the land of make-believe, I was clearly still pretending that I knew for sure something that I could not have possibly known. I think you get my point... right? 
 [entry added 20030731_2241] 

"if you can't read this..." 
One time I saw this on an airplane emergency safety instruction card, "If you can't see well enough to read this, please ask your flight attendant for assistance". 
Can you see what bugs me about things like this? 
 [entry added 20040128_2027] 

"not more than 3 to 4" 
On a tube of cold sore medication that I recently looked at, the directions include this phrase, "apply to the affected area not more than 3 to 4 times daily", but Oops!!, if I apply it a fourth time, then I've applied it more than three  times...right?! 
 [entry added 20040801] 

"...the result of a lot of mens' downfalls..." 
"Women have been the result of a lot of mens' down falls, and it ain't gonna be me", said Nick, on the TV reality show, "The Apprentice" Thursday night, February 12th (Darwin Day), 2004. 
If you can't see what's wrong with this statement, please send me an e-mail. 
Ok, I'll give you a hint... ..... well, no I guess I won't. I'm really curious to hear what you think. If you can't figure it out I'll be happy to show ya, and I won't have an attitude against you or think you're stupid or anything like that at all.   
 [entry added 20040212 (Darwin Day) _2037] 

"...checked, checked and double-checked." 
Yep. I actually heard someone say it. This wasn't just any ordinary person either. This was on a recent TV (and radio) commercial from a famous automobile dealership in the Denver/Boulder area advertising used automobiles. About the vehicles, the announcer said, "...everything's been checked, checked and double-checked". 

Anybody that tries to tell me that that's not odd is "itchin for a fight". 
 [added 20040418] 

Reseach = Intuition ?
Just now (20051109_2009), while watching Martha Stewart's Apprentice TV show, I heard one of the applicant-candidates say, "Based on all this research we've done, we have a gut intuition."

I really wanted to put it up here right away. So, here I am, typing this in while the show is still going on.

How is it that people like that get to be on TV? I often wonder about this question. For instance, when watching "American Idol" (I'm a singer/song-writer) and other 'reality' TV shows that involve things I am skilled in and excited about doing.

Now, in this case, I'm obviously (or not) not at all excited about being the apprentice (Martha's or Donald's), but come on.

With comments like, "based on all this research we've done, we have a gut intuition", I guess I'd wonder about the nature of their 'research'. If their research equals intuition, then does that mean that their intuition was the substance of their research in the first place?

                      ?
What do you |~_~|