But Seriously

Texting Lingo Every Parent Needs to Know (from FOTF)

Texting is everywhere. It seems that kids can text before they can even spell--but some of those misspelled and nonsense texts are actually codes. The article below describes some of the kinds of codes used in texting and links to a tech dictionary for text abbreviations. I did not copy the whole FOTF article, so click the link at the bottom of the page if you want to read it.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Assuming your son or daughter has a cell phone, do they text?

 

The Pew Research group recently concluded that most teens prefer texting to talking - with a third of them sending over 100 messages a day.

 

Tolerance for this type of behavior varies by family, of course, but almost no parent would knowingly permit their son or daughter to text crude, lewd or obscene messages.

 

But what about more vague or coded communications?

 

It takes a deft and alert parent to stay up to date on texting lingo, especially since the lexicon is constantly expanding and often doesn't make any logical sense. For example, if your child happens to text "420" to a friend, you better be prepared for a serious talk.  That's because texting "420" is the equivalent of asking if the other person has pot - or wants to get high. Apparently "420" is a universal symbol for the use and appreciation of marijuana.

 

Online tech dictionaries can help get you up to speed (click here), but the proliferation of coded sexual texting is enough to make your head spin.

via www.focusonlinecommunities.com

 

How do you ask for a kidney?

Mohan is on the list for a kidney transplant, but he's not holding his breath. Last year, 114 Arizonans donated one or more organs upon their deaths, according to Kris Patterson of the Donor Network of Arizona. Meanwhile, 1,462 Arizonans are waiting for a kidney.

So Mohan has decided to go looking for one, not only for him but for others who like him aren't lucky enough to have a family member who can donate. The problem: Where do you look? And how do you ask?

"How do you go and say, 'Can I have your kidney?'" he says. "I've looked at friends and I say, 'I need a kidney.' . . . It's amazing how your popularity kind of droops down a little bit."

Mohan, whose blood is Type O, says it's one of the hardest things he's ever had to do but the alternative is to remain tethered to a machine that is both prolonging his life and diminishing it.

So he is forcing himself to do what in the past came so easily: to talk, to ask, to spread the word about the impact one person can have on another's life, by giving up something that they don't need.

Lynn Closway, a spokeswoman for the Mayo Clinic's Transplant Center where Mohan is a patient, says friends, co-workers and strangers have donated kidneys. Half of Mayo's 163 kidney transplants this year have been from living donors, and half of those were from non-relatives.

Last year, a Phoenix taxi driver made international news when he offered his kidney to a woman he drove to dialysis three times a week. Unfortunately, medical issues disqualified him.

Closway says Mayo does extensive testing to ensure that a person who is a blood and tissue match is physically and emotionally able to donate. For information, call Mayo's Transplant Center at 480-342-0904.

Know that people like Mohan are waiting.

"I don't want to die yet," he says. "I've got things I want to do. I want to live. I want to go places, do things. I want to see my grandkids go to college and graduate. I want to go trout fishing. I'm teaching my grandson how to tie flies so that we can go fishing. There are great places in Montana I'd like to take him.

"I just hope there's somebody out there."

via www.azcentral.com

Organ donation awareness is an important part of our curriculum. We address organ donation to every driver education student we enroll. My Uncle Bob now finds himself in need of a kidney, so he is advocating for others, like himself, who will benefit from an organ transplant.

Some organs, like the kidney, can be given from live donors. Others can only come from deceased donors. Organ donation is compatible with every major religion. It does not disfigure the donor, and it does not cost money to be a donor. Organ donation is truly a gift of life.

If you are interested in registering to be an organ donor but you don't know how, visit OrganDonor.gov

Aside: I am saddened by the vitriolic attacks against Uncle Bob in the comments section after the above linked article. Once again, pro-government progressive liberals (ArizonaJoe) who preach "tolerance" act to kick a man when he is down.

GZ Mosque Controversy is Bizarre

Mark the moment: The battle over the Ground Zero mosque has passed through the looking glass and into the wonderland of insanity.

Surprise, surprise, the "summit" of national and local Muslim organizations early this week turned into a rally-around-the-mosque gathering. While that was predictable, the logic justifying the move is as scrambled as the landscape Alice discovered behind the mirror.

It is now the "extremists" opposed to the mosque who are the reason why it must be built, according to the Muslim supporters. At least one of whom, not incidentally, is a big supporter of Hamas and Hezbollah.

Growing out of the fetid swamps of moral equivalence, where extremism is in the eye of the beholder, the gathering illustrates how a preposterous sense of victimization is now the driving force behind the mosque. The initial vow that the facility would help heal the breach of 9/11 has vanished.

Instead of the interfaith bridge, developers and supporters delivered a superhighway of grievance and false claims of discrimination. In a flash, the mosque has gone from a plan to assertions of legal right and absolute moral authority.

To merely question it is to be a bigot. It must be built or the whole country will be labeled anti-Islam. And you know what that means — kaboom!

They threaten violence, and we're accused of being intolerant.

In fairness, we can't blame this switcheroo only on the shady cast of slumlords and tax scofflaws behind the project. Mayor Bloomberg and then President Obama showed them the way by foolishly inflating a fairly routine land-use controversy into a historic test of American values.

see more at www.foxnews.com

I haven't been keeping up with the news lately.  All the political posturing around election season wears thin on me after a while.  Today, I decided to find the latest news on the abhorent Ground Zero Mosque and Terrorist Community Center (GZMTCC).  While there was no "news" per se, I did find an opinion column written by Michael Goodwin about a week ago.  Goodwin does an admirable job of expressing my opinion and my take on the GZMTCC situation.  

Essentially, if this building is supposed to be a bridge between cultural differences and if it is supposed to heal wounds, it is failing miserably and it has not even been built.  Some supporters of the Ground Zero Mosque and Terrorist Community Center have also been shown to be supporters of terrorist organizations like Hamas.  These same radicals decry opposition to the GZMTCC as "intolerant," and "biggotted."  They cry "unfair" and now, they no longer seem to care about building bridges (not a big surprise to those of us who were concerned about the project), instead, the Ground Zero Mosque and Terrorist Community Center must be built as a show of moral authority over the hateful (non-violent) Americans who oppose it.  Oh, by the way, if it doesn't get built, it will fan the flames of terrorist jihad and something "bad" could happen.

And the opinion of the one man most responsible for American security?  President Obama says, "We can absorb another 9/11."  I am guessing he means we can "absorb" one if it does not hit the White House.  I don't know about you, but I don't care to "absorb" another radical islamofascist attack.

Goodwin is right, we have fallen down the rabbit hole.  Click the link above to read the full article.

Obama Removes Creator From The Declaration of Independence

via www.youtube.com

Ann Coulter is right, he is not a Muslim, he is an atheist.

Velma Hart talks to Chris Mathews about President Obama

via www.youtube.com

Velma Hart Calls President Obama to the mat by one of his supporters.

Unfortunately, neither Velma Hart nor the President understand that the best way to lower unemployment is to cut corporate taxes so companies will hire more employees.

Dick Morris on Democrat Strategy in 2010

On the local level, Democrats are pedaling three lines of attack against their Republican opponents, one more pathetic than the next.

* Privatizing Social Security. Many Republican challengers have embraced the plan put forward by Wisconsin Republican Congressman Paul Ryan reiterating the old Bush proposal that people under 55 years of age be allowed to decide for themselves how to invest up to one-third of their Social Security tax payments. This sensible idea, rejected by a Republican Congress in 2005, is being twisted into a proposal for privatization of the system. Most people support the Ryan-Bush idea so when Republicans explain the details, they usually succeed in defusing the Democratic charges.

* Imposing a 23% national sales tax. Those Republicans who have endorsed the Fair Tax proposal pioneered by talk radio host Neil Boortz and the fiscally conservative Club for Growth have been hit with supporting a national sales tax of 23%. But the Democratic ads always forget to mention that this tax has been proposed as a replacement for -- not an addition to -- the federal income tax. The only people who are speculating that a VAT or national sales tax might be added on top of the income tax are in the Obama Administration. Again, once Republicans point out the truth, the Democratic allegation backfires since voters rather like the prospect of a world without the IRS, tax audits, and revenue agents.

* Shipping jobs overseas. In the most convoluted of all negatives, Democrats are accusing their GOP challengers of supporting corporate loopholes which reward companies that open overseas offices with tax favors. They derive this Republican position by construing the no-new-taxes pledge most Republican candidates have taken at the behest of Americans for Tax Reform, headed by Grover Norquist as meaning that no corporate loopholes will be closed. Of course, once Republicans point out that the Obama Administration pushed the General Motors bailout even though two-thirds of the GM jobs were abroad, proposed cash-for-clunkers even though almost half the cars were foreign, and supported TARP bailouts for banks much of whose money went overseas, the accusations fall apart.

That is it! That is the entire Democratic Party campaign! On the strength of these tender reeds rest the entire case of the Party to keep power!

via www.dickmorris.com

No Quran Burning on 9/11

GAINESVILLE, Fla. – A Florida imam says that no deal has been reached to move the site of a mosque at the site of ground zero in exchange for a Florida minister to call off plans to burn Qurans.

Imam Muhammad Musri tells The Associated Press that what he offered was a meeting among the Rev. Terry Jones, the New York imam planning the Islamic center and himself to talk about the mosque location.

Musri is president of the Islamic Society of Central Florida. He says he told Jones that he does not believe the mosque should not be there and would do everything in his power to make sure it is moved.

Jones says he believes a deal was reached to move the mosque and would fly to New York Saturday to discuss it.

via news.yahoo.com

While I recognize the right of any American to practice "free speech" by burning things, I am always appalled when people choose to burn things that other people regard as sacred or worthy of increased respect.

The moment that I heard that a Florida church would have a book burning ceremony on 9/11, I thought, "What a dork." Burning any book has bad connotations in America, but burning someone's sacred book is just not right. Making matters worse, it was a church that initiated the planned burning. Instead of fostering peace, this church deliberately pursued conflict. Way to spread the word about Jesus! (Not).

I was excited today to see a headline proclaiming that the book burning is cancelled and the church in Florida is not encouraging anybody anywhere to burn other people's holy books. I am even more excited that the burning was cancelled in a move that may mean the controversial Ground Zero Mosque (an act of equally bad taste) may be moved to another site. I am disturbed, however, that the AP article above was written by a jounalist who apparently hears conflicting voices in his head and writes in stream of consciousness style. The only point the article makes clearly is that the books won't be burned. Will the GZ Mosque be moved or won't it? This article says both.

Breitbart.tv » Former Marine ‘Stuns Crowd’ at Georgia Tea Party Event

via www.breitbart.tv

God Bless America

Morris: Obama doesn’t have a clue

...He doesn’t know how to stop the oil from spilling. He is bereft of ideas about how to create jobs in the aftermath of the recession. He has no idea how to keep the European financial crisis contained. He has no program for repaying the massive debt hole into which he has dug our nation without tax increases he must know will only deepen the pit.

Some presidents have failed because of their stubbornness (Johnson and Bush-43). Others because of their character flaws (Clinton and Nixon). Still others because of their insensitivity to domestic problems (Bush-41). But now we have a president who is failing because he is incompetent. It is Jimmy Carter all over again....

via Read more at thehill.com

I Read Arizona's Immigration Enforcement Law

Today, I read Arizona's new Immigration Enforcement Law. It took me about 20 minutes to read all 16 pages, but I probably could have done it in half the time if I just read the new amendments. Even though legalese is boring, I encourage you to read the law before you make a judgment about it.  Click here to read the law as it now stands.  I also found an insightful and clarifying blog article on the new law through NumbersUSA.  I have posted an excerpt below and a link to the entire article.  

(EDITOR'S NOTE: Unlike federal officials who have criticized Arizona's law, Rosemary Jenks -- an attorney and NumbersUSA's Director of Government Relations -- has read it thoroughly and offers here a full description of every thing the law does.)

 

Purpose of the Law:

• To ensure “the cooperative enforcement of federal immigration laws throughout all of Arizona;”
• To “make attrition through enforcement the public policy of all state and local government agencies in Arizona;” and
• To “discourage and deter the unlawful entry and presence of aliens and economic activity by persons unlawfully present in the United States.”

via www.numbersusa.com

Some say, you can't judge a book by it's cover. I say, you can't judge a law by the politicians who talk about it.  Unfortunately, as we found out this week, politicians will make judgements and comments without even reading a law.  Well, we could have guessed that before, since they will vote for a law without reading it (aside: I believe that ANY lawmaker who will vote for a law without reading it MUST be removed from office in the next applicable election.  If they are trying to pass so many laws that they can not read them, they are passing too many laws).

Government officials and private activists who scream about racism have no justification to do so with this law.  The law clearly prohibits racial profiling on page 6 lines 29 and 30 and page 10 line 26.  Anyone (public figure or private citizen) who says otherwise is simply lying.  These lies seem targeted to damage the reputation of the state of Arizona, but more so, they damage the credibility of the individual who repeats them.  Our president, attorney general, secretary of homeland security, and secretary of state's office have all been marred by their telling of lies.  Even foreign dignitaries from countries with heinous human rights violations like Cuba are speaking out on a law that simply says the state can meet it's obligation to enforce federal law.

Before you get caught in the hysteria of the argument, before you parrot the MSNBC or progressive party line, read the law and make an educated decision.  Refuse to spread lies that smear our states and nation.