2. To treat someone well in order to get something for yourself: "I'm sure he was just trying to use me in that situation because he didn't even say Thank you afterwards and hasn't called since."
If Jews want to increase the number of sheep in their flocks, they simply must use rams and ewes to make it happen.
checkout:
"The technology giant introduced Google Wallet, a mobile application that will allow consumers to pay at a store by waving their cellphones at a retailer's terminal instead of using a credit card [or cash]."
"The app, for the Android operating system also will enable users to redeem special coupons and earn loyalty points."
These statements were found on actual products. Really! Why? Is it ignorance on the part of companies or is this something out of “Instructions for Dummies?” Not all of them are blunders in English.
The warning labels are real because some companies are afraid of being abused by frivolous lawsuits that U.S. courts should be throwing out without further consideration. Instead, it is costing consumers millions of dollars because companies are actually required by law to pay large sums for nonsense lawsuits and, of course, these costs are passed on to those who buy their products.
Robert Dorigo Jones, president of the Michigan Lawsuit Abuse Watch, a consumer advocacy group says, "Wacky warning labels are a sign of our lawsuit-happy times."
- On hairdryer instructions: Do not use while sleeping.
- On a bag of Fritos: You could be a winner! No purchase necessary. Details inside.
- On a bar of Dial soap: Directions. Use like regular soap.
- Frozen dinner that says: Serving suggestion, Defrost.
- On a hotel-provided shower cap in a box: Fits one head.
- On Tesco's Tiramisu dessert: Do not turn upside down. (Printed on the bottom of the box)
- On Marks & Spencer bread pudding: Product will be hot after heating.
- On packaging for a Rowenta iron: Do not iron clothes on body.
- On Boots (pharmacy chain in the UK) children's cough medicine: Do not drive car or operate machinery after use.
- On Nytol: Warning, may cause drowsiness.
- On a Korean kitchen knife: Warning, keep out of children.
- On a string of Chinese-made Christmas lights: For indoor or outdoor use only.
- On a Japanese food processor: Not to be used for the other use.
- On Sainsbury's peanuts: Warning, contains nuts.
- On an American Airlines packet of nuts: Instructions, open packet, eat nuts.
- On a Swedish chainsaw: Do not attempt to stop chain with your hands.
- Label on a baby stroller (British, "pram"): Remove your child before folding the stroller for storage.
- A Batman costume carried a warning stating: "PARENT: Please exercise caution. FOR PLAY ONLY. Mask and chest plate are not protective. Cape does not enable user to fly.
- A plastic sled advises users to wear helmets and to avoid trees, rocks, or "man-made obstacles."
It also states: "This product does not have brakes."
- Addicted to Milk? A self-described milk-a-holic is suing the dairy industry, claiming that a lifetime of drinking whole milk contributed to his clogged arteries and a minor stroke. Norman Mayo, 61, believes he might have avoided his health problems if he had been warned on milk cartons about fat and cholesterol.
"I drank milk like some people drink beer or water," he said. "I've always loved a nice cold glass of milk, and I've drank [sic] a lot of it."
The Associated Press, 6/6/97.
Milk Lawsuit - Featured in Jay Leno's "Tonight Show" [a Talk-Show Host and comedian on American T-V].
As Jay Leno noted in his monologue on June 10, 1997, "Here's another reason why Americans hate lawyers. A man in suburban Seattle is suing the dairy industry because he's become addicted to milk and it has raised his cholesterol to dangerous levels. It's just as dangerous as tobacco. The government should have warning labels on milk, in fact this is the proposed warning label:
He, she, I and we—
And add to that list they—
Are always subjects of their verbs,
And not the other way.
After a preposition—
like for, between and to
Use him or her, not he or she.
(You’re also safe with it and you.)
Suppose you tell an editor,
“Just between you and I Š ”
You shouldn’t be at all surprised
To hear him say “Good-bye.”
Confusion is more frequent
When objects come in twos.
Just omit the first one; that
Should serve to unconfuse.
“Don’t hit Jim and I”
May to your ear sound right.
But leave out Jim; say “Don’t hit I.”
Now can’t you see the light?
When you try to do to others
As you’d have them do to you,
Do it to them, not they, my friend—
And do it to whom, not who.
Problems with whom and who?
Replace them with him and he—
And if you’ve learned to use them right,
Correct each time you’ll be.
To whom is given much,
From him is much required;
If you say he when you should say him,
You deserve it if you’re fired!
I probably should have been more precise with my discussion about “lose” and the [sic] example of “loose”. Whenever we mean that something has been lost, we should NEVER say, “I loose the hounds” or “I loosened the hounds” OR “The quarter back loosed his grip on the football” when LOST is meant!
The [sic] misuses are when people replace “lose” with “loose”. Again, I should have written, “... we NEVER ‘loose’ anything when ‘to lose’ is meant! They are two different verbs with different meanings and should not be confused. It’s certainly correct to say, “I let the dogs loose so they could run around (for example).” I maintain that it is unacceptable to say, “I loosed the dogs and I don’t know where they are” when “I lost the dogs .... ” is meant. Does this clarify the point?
I do appreciate the comments from readers. If nothing else, they make me aware that I must be more precise and probably should not have sent the letter out when I was so tired. It was after 2:30 a.m. (where I am) when I submitted the letter to the web and I wanted to get it out to see if it would go out properly (over the internet, that is).
For those who wrote, thank you. It means you’re paying attention and that’s better than being ignored. This reminds me of something I read recently about the “conspiracy of silence”. The phrase was coined by Sir Lewis Morris, a minor poet of the Victorian era. He wanted to be Poet Laureate in England but he never gained this honor. He claimed that critics were jealous of him and, as a result, damned his poetry when they bothered to mention it at all. He once complained at length to Oscar Wilde of this treatment, finally saying: “Oscar, there’s a conspiracy of silence against me. What shall I do?” Wilde replied simply: “Join it!”