No conversational ‘texting’ will be done, promise

Now that my wife and I have joined the race to catch up with the rest of society in the Telecommunications Age, I feel an overpowering need to make this declaration.

At least one of our new “smart phones” — and likely both of them — will never become devices to be used for what I call “conversational texting.”

I can speak only for myself and will let my wife speak for herself. But I declare right here and now that “texting” will occur on my phone only for specific and pertinent reasons.

Let me stipulate as well that I detest the term “text” when it is used in the verb form. I almost without fail add a derisive inflection in my voice when I even utter the word. Members of my family and some of my friends know what I mean. I’ve actually gotten a couple of my nieces to follow my lead — at least in my presence. They are good enough to add that tone of voice when they use the verb-form use of the term.

I also detest the sight of people walking through the mall, or across the street, or in the grocery store — anywhere, if you want to know the truth — with their heads pointed down at their hands that are holding some kind of telecommunications device. These folks generally are oblivious to their surroundings and most likely are engaging in some meaningless conversational “texting.”

My wife and I recently returned from a week’s vacation in Walt Disney World in Orlando, Fla. We noticed — more than once, I should add — something quite galling. It was the sight of young children cavorting while waiting in line for an exhibit while Mom and Dad were “busy” sending “text” messages to God knows who. The parents were paying little or no attention to the kids, which made us wonder: Why aren’t Mom and Dad enjoying the moment with their kids?

But I digress …

“Texting” has many functional purposes. I can send a message to my wife asking her what I should get at the grocery store. She’ll answer with instructions. She can send a message telling me if she’s been delayed up at an appointment. I’ll acknowledge that message. We can “text” our kids to give them an estimated time of arrival if we’re en route.

You get the idea, yes?

None of this mindless cyberspace chatter for this old-timer. If I need to chat with someone, I’ll call whoever I need to talk to — on my new cellphone.

Emphatic ‘no!’ on paying college athletes

I saw a Time magazine cover yesterday at work, with a picture of Johnny “Football” Manziel on its cover and a headline that says it’s time to pay college athletes.

I don’t need to read the article thoroughly to know I’ll disagree with it. Its premise is wrong on its face — in my humble view.

Manziel, of course, is the Texas A&M University Heisman Trophy-winning quarterback who endured a half-game suspension as his “punishment” for getting paid for autographs he signed. Manziel has become the poster boy for this ridiculous assertion that college athletes need to be paid for their services.

What utter nonsense.

They get paid already. Handsomely, too. The payment comes in the form of a free college education. Manziel is a blue-chip athlete who received a full-ride scholarship to Texas A&M. Did he get that scholarship because of his academic prowess? No. He’s being paid for his football skills, which put more than 80,000 people in the seats at Kyle Field and fills other stadiums to capacity wherever else the Aggies play football on any given Saturday.

How much would Johnny Football be paying if he wasn’t compensated? He’s pay about $8,000 annually in tuition and another $8,000 per year for room and board. I haven’t even calculated the cost of books, lab fees and other ancillary expenses that go with getting a college education.

Manziel gets paid. So do any of the scholarship athletes who compete in any college in the nation.

Pay these people? You must be kidding.

I remain wedded to the notion that student-athletes should have to toe the line. They should go to school, crack the books, study hard, work with tutors to help them get through those periods when they’re away from school participating in athletic events — and then play their guts out when the whistle sounds to start the game.

Mr. Football and his fellow scholarship athletes do not need more payment for demonstrating their athletic prowess.

‘Welcome to 2013’

The young man at the cellphone store didn’t mean to poke fun at my wife and me when he said, “Welcome to 2013” as we walked out of the place with our new cellphones in hand.

I turned to him and said I’m still stuck in the 1970s. We all laughed.

But with that, we’ve made the leap, purchasing a couple of “smart phones” that will do all kinds of things — a fraction of which we’ll likely use. But the stuff that’s included with these devices will be helpful.

I’ve appreciated the advice, recommendations and offers of help from my friends who’ve responded to an earlier blog post about the leap we were about to make. One of my sisters advised me against purchasing a smart phone, saying that “flip phones rock.” Sorry, sis. We made the leap.

We went with a Windows phone setup. I don’t need to explain this to most of the people in my life. They know what it is.

I will explain, though, that the purchase of the phones was every bit as complicated as I feared it would be. All the calling plans, data plans, texting plans, billing options, up-front phone cost variations were enough to give me a headache. And they did.

The sales rep who greeted us is a nice young man. We advised him up front of this truth: We are simple people who are not fluent in techno-speak. Our sons know this language; we don’t. “Explain this to me like I’m a 5-year-old,” I implored him, before backing off that request with the realization that a 5-year-old would understand all the jargon associated with 21st-century telecommunications. My wife then advised the young man to “talk to us like the old people we are.”

Well, the learning curve is a steep one for my wife and me. But this is part of life, I reckon. That curve will start to straighten out in due course, hopefully sooner rather than later.

You may keep praying for us.

Strike won’t start a new ‘war’

President Obama’s speech on Syria is worth reading over and over.

Of particular note should be the president’s assertion that a strike against Syrian military targets will not thrust the United States into another ground war.

He said it Tuesday night. He’s been saying it time and again since declaring his intent to hit the Syrians for gassing civilians on Aug. 21. The declaration has fallen on deaf ears. But read it here.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2013/09/10/full_speech_president_obama_addresses_the_nation_on_syria.html

Obama said it once again in a nationally televised speech to the nation. Will it persuade the doubters? I’m not taking that one to the bank. I have not been a doubter on that fundamental point, which is that the United States will not commit to a war with no end.

The president made it as clear as he could. Any military strike — if it comes — will have a specific set of goals. It will be brief, it will be intense and it will be intended to deter Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad from using the chemical weapons again.

The speech, of course, came during a period of intense diplomatic activity. Russia entered the picture with a plan to persuade Syria to surrender the chemical weapons and turn it over to international inspectors.

Again, the speech is worth reading. It’s attached to this blog post. Pay careful attention to the pledge that a strike — if the diplomatic initiative fails — will be a limited engagement.

I do not see a war on the horizon.

Assad to surrender weapons he doesn’t have?

Syrian dictator Bashar as-Assad virtually denied on Charlie Rose’s show last night that he possessed chemical weapons, which President Obama says he used in August on civilians in Syria.

Now he has agreed to get rid of the weapons. Reports say he’ll surrender the weapons to international inspectors, who then will dispose of them. He’s trying to avoid being hit by the United States, which President Obama has threatened to do as punishment for using the weapons.

http://video.pbs.org/video/2365076639/?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=pbsofficial&utm_campaign=charlierose

Which is it, Mr. Dictator? Do you have the weapons or don’t you? Did you gas civilians, including women and children, or didn’t you?

Assad dodged Rose’s questions fairly deftly Monday night regarding whether he used the weapons. He was even less convincing about whether his military establishment possesses them.

Take a look here at the interview.

Seems we have a strongman talking out of both sides of his mouth. Big surprise, eh?

Supermarket chain swallows another one

I dislike commenting on business matters, but the news today about the future of the grocery business in Amarillo is disturbing on its face.

Albertsons is buying United Supermarkets. Albertsons is based in Boise, Idaho; United is based right here in West Texas, in Lubbock. We’ve been shopping at United almost from the day we arrived in Amarillo back in early 1995. Albertsons now is planning to buy all seven Amarillo outlets.

Albertsons is not a bad grocery store chain. I’ve been familiar with the company going back to my youth growing up in Portland, Ore.

Something about this buyout, however, makes me nervous.

Perhaps it has something to do with how well Albertsons has done in Amarillo during the years we’ve lived here. From where I sit, not very well.

Albertsons has closed at least two big stores here. One of the closures was particularly troubling, in that it built a new structure at the corner of Interstate 40 and Washington Street, only to close the place altogether six or seven years later.

United, meanwhile, has been growing in Amarillo and indeed throughout West Texas. It’s building a new store along Soncy Road. United has opened outlets in the Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex. The company has prided itself on being in business since 1917, for crying out loud.

Now it’s about to vanish.

I am not privy to what persuaded the family that owns United to sell to a supermarket chain based so far away.

The way I’ve always looked at United, though, is that it was the next best thing to buying “local,” given its home base just two hours south of Amarillo.

It’s the end of a retail era in Amarillo, and it saddens me.

Wrestling is back at the Olympics!

Tradition means something after all with the International Olympic Committee.

The IOC has announced that wrestling — the oldest Olympic sport of them all — will be competed at the 2020 and 2024 summer games. The IOC announced this week that Tokyo would be the host city for the 2020 Olympics; the IOC will announce the 2024 host city in 2017.

http://msn.foxsports.com/olympics/story/wrestling-wins-ioc-vote-for-place-in-2020-summer-olympics-090813?ocid=ansfox11

The IOC had talked for some months about getting rid of wrestling, which would have constituted one of the dumbest, most heartless and ridiculous decisions the Olympic governing body had ever rendered. IOC authorities said the public had lost interest in wrestling. It planned, though, to keep synchronized swimming and rhythmic gymnastics.

Get rid of wrestling? You must have been kidding!

The Olympics began in 776 B.C. in ancient Olympia, Greece. Wrestling is believed to be the first sport ever conducted at those ancient Games.

The athletes, I hasten to add, competed in the nude.

I suppose if the IOC wanted to gin up interest in wrestling in the 21st century, it could allow wrestlers to shed their tights and compete as their grappling forebears did back in the old days.

“It’s almost like you expected that to happen,” former American Olympic gold medalist and coach Dan Gable told The Associated Press. “But we certainly didn’t expect what happened in February to happen, and because of that you learn and work through the whole process.” What happened in February was that the IOC announced the end of wrestling as an Olympic sport.

Thanks goodness that tradition still speaks loudly when it counts.

Waiting on Mac Thornberry to weigh in on Syria

Has anyone seen or heard from U.S. Rep. Mac Thornberry lately?

I know that’s a rhetorical question. Some folks have seen and/or heard him as he travels through the vast 13th Congressional District of the Texas Panhandle, which he has represented since 1995.

But here’s the deal: The nation is roiling at this moment over whether President Obama should order missile strikes against Syrian military forces in retaliation for their use of chemical weapons, but Mac Thornberry, a senior Republican member of the House Armed Services and Permanent Select Intelligence committees, has been all but silent on the matter.

http://thornberry.house.gov/

I spent some time this morning perusing Thornberry’s website. I looked for press releases, issues statements, “white papers” on national security. Nothing in there about Syria.

I’m waiting for Thornberry to offer some wisdom on this matter, given that so many members of Congress have weighed in already.

I am acutely aware that much of the public commentary on Syria has come from the usual cadre of Democratic and Republican legislative blowhards. Thornberry isn’t one of them. He’s been a quiet and fairly studious member of Congress since winning the House seat in that landmark 1994 election.

However, he’s also had a ringside seat on some difficult national security issues. As a member of the House Armed Services Committee, Thornberry has been required to study diligently issues relating to the use of our massive military might. What’s more, as a member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, he has had access to some of the most sensitive national security material imaginable. The late U.S. Rep. Charlie Wilson, D-Lufkin — who also served on that panel — once told me that committee members saw virtually everything the president saw. I’m quite certain Thornberry has access to a lot of information about Syria and its possession of deadly nerve agents.

The nation has entered the most serious national security debate since President George W. Bush sought authorization to go to war with Iraq, citing dictator Saddam Hussein’s supposed cache of chemical weapons — which we learned later did not exist.

President Obama’s national security team has presented what appears to be compelling proof that Syria has used the gas on civilians and it has more of it stashed away. He wants to hit those stockpiles in a series of air strikes. The military says it’s ready to go.

Mac Thornberry, our elected representative, has had time to digest the information.

I’m waiting to hear whether he supports striking at a seriously evil dictator.

Talk to us, Mac.

So long, Anthony Weiner

Anthony Weiner’s time in the political spotlight has been reduced to an hours-long countdown.

In less than a day, New York City voters are likely to hand the former Democratic congressman his walking papers and signal an end to his bid to become the Big Apple’s next mayor.

So long, Carlos Danger.

http://www.today.com/news/anthony-weiner-wife-humas-only-crime-standing-my-side-8C11108130?ocid=msnhp&pos=6

The rest of us out here in Flyover Country shouldn’t be concerned about Weiner. He once was a loudmouthed member of Congress, the body that writes federal law under which we all live. Then we learned that Weiner had been sending lewd text messages and videos of himself to women — none of whom is his wife.

He quit Congress in 2011.

Then he returned to the spotlight by announcing his campaign for mayor. Oops, then something bad happened yet again. We learned that Weiner hadn’t stopped the “sexting” after all, even after promising us he had stopped. He was using the “Carlos Danger” name to send the images to women — again, none of whom is his wife.

Weiner’s political fortunes plummeted. He’s now figuring to finish fourth in a field of Democratic candidates for mayor.

This entire episode has been an embarrassment for everyone. I’m even embarrassed writing about it, but it’ll be the final time I’ll comment on this man’s idiotic behavior.

New York is the most important city in the world, let alone America. It needs a mayor who is serious and who can be treated seriously. Anthony Weiner isn’t that man.

So long, Anthony.

When did phone-buying get so complicated?

I am about to make the most difficult, complex, mind-bending purchase of my life.

A new home? Nope. Already have one — and it’s paid in full, too.

A new vehicle? Did that one too recently. It was a piece of cake.

A recreational vehicle? Hah! Give me a break. It was love at first sight with our new fifth wheel.

I’m talking about a telephone. It’s the cellular kind, which you stick in your pocket and carry it around with you.

I know what you’re thinking. What can be so difficult about buying a cellphone? Well, let me tell you something: My wife and I will be able to settle pretty easily on the phone we want. It’s our sons and our daughter-in-law who are going to give us grief if we don’t get the “right” phone with the “right” calling plan and have all the “right” gizmos, gadgets and doo-dads that go with these devices.

My old-fashioned flip phone croaked this past week while my wife and I were celebrating our 42nd wedding anniversary at Walt Disney World in Orlando, Fla. I charged the thing up one night. Turned it off, then turned it back the next morning; it was charged fully. Then during the day, it went dead — as in terminally dead. I tried to put it back on the charger at the end of the day. Nothing happened. I played “Taps” in my head.

So, with that we’ve decided we’re finally going to “upgrade” our phones. We don’t know what we’re going to do. Do we go with a “smart phone,” an “I-phone,” or are they the same thing?

Which provider do we use? I’m inclined to stay with the one we have used since we purchased these old-time flip phones.

For the record, let me state that I waged a public campaign over the course of several years to be the last human being on the planet to purchase a cellphone. I declared victory when I acquired one — although a friend of mine and at least one member of my family tell me they’ve never owned a cellphone.

Neither of them can prove it to my satisfaction … so my claim of victory still stands.

I remember the old days when my parents had to decide whether to go with a push-button phone or stay with the old rotary-dial device. Heck, I even remember back even further when Mom and Dad purchased a rotary phone with one of those new-fangled twisty stretch cords.

We’ve entered a new age when phone purchases have become more complicated than what used to be the decision that gave us the most headaches. A new home or motor vehicle? Forget about it.

I will make one vow at this very moment: I will not be caught walking and looking down at the device while sending a “text message.” Not ever. Period.

I’ll need some quiet time now to ponder the huge decision that awaits us.

Pray for us … please.