Understanding the meaning of words: FAIL
I was just accosted by 2 coworkers who asked me if I wanted Obummer to fail. I said yes I did. I want him to fail at all his leftist policies and practices. Our nation cannot afford it.
Their response was they couldn't believe I wanted my country to fail. I said you're wrong on all counts. Just the opposite, I want my nation to succeed on all counts, beyond my wildest dreams I want my nation to succeed.
Again their response was that if Obummer fails, the nation fails. My response was that if Obummer succeeds, my nation fails. (It's all in interpretation)
One of the 2 quickly drifted away at this point. However the other wanted to argue on, so I stuck it out.
He said he was tired of liberal and conservative media. He said he didn't like the hatred coming from conservative media, but failed to mention what he didn't like about liberal media. I asked what hatred was coming from conservative media, as he had mentioned Rush Limbaugh. Well, it's all just spewed hatred. When I asked him how he defined hatred, he switched to calling it spewed divisiveness. I said I didn't have a problem with that, so what was wrong?
I actually took the time to look up divisiveness and the definition is:
Hatred however has a slightly different meaning:
I will say this....Rush does call a spade a spade. Liberalism is evil. I don't hate liberals, but I do have an intense dislike for their beliefs, actions and ideas.
How can this be? It's because hatred isn't defined well enough here to understand the difference. A biblical definition can be made this way. 1 John 3:15 says that whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer.
So, I can discern by this that if I really dislike someone enough to want them dead, then I hate him. So, by this definition, conservative radio (for the most part) isn't spewing hatred. It could be construed as divisiveness, which if it is, then so be it. (I believe somebody has to stir up the people of this nation before we perish.)
As a matter of fact, he's only spewing the truth. And if liberals hate anything, it's having to deal with the truth. Take the definition of evil: morally wrong or bad....the wicked or immoral part of someone or something. Liberals have redefined evil as anything that disagrees with their ideals so they don't have to deal with the moral part of evil (or what is the truth of the matter...you know, right and wrong).
But let's go back for a minute. I said that this was all in interpretation. Let's take a look at the previous administration. The media and practically everyone who didn't vote for George Bush, wanted him to fail, or went ahead and outright claimed he was a failure. The guy that stayed to argue with me said that Bush was a failure from 9-11 on.
Oh really?
So, it's ok to call the opposition a failure, but if I think your party should not be successful in dragging us further down the drain, I'm asking the nation to fail?
Their response was they couldn't believe I wanted my country to fail. I said you're wrong on all counts. Just the opposite, I want my nation to succeed on all counts, beyond my wildest dreams I want my nation to succeed.
Again their response was that if Obummer fails, the nation fails. My response was that if Obummer succeeds, my nation fails. (It's all in interpretation)
One of the 2 quickly drifted away at this point. However the other wanted to argue on, so I stuck it out.
He said he was tired of liberal and conservative media. He said he didn't like the hatred coming from conservative media, but failed to mention what he didn't like about liberal media. I asked what hatred was coming from conservative media, as he had mentioned Rush Limbaugh. Well, it's all just spewed hatred. When I asked him how he defined hatred, he switched to calling it spewed divisiveness. I said I didn't have a problem with that, so what was wrong?
I actually took the time to look up divisiveness and the definition is:
–adjective
1. forming or expressing division or distribution.
2. creating dissension or discord.
Hatred however has a slightly different meaning:
Strong aversion; intense dislike; hate; an affection of the mind awakened by something regarded as evil.
I will say this....Rush does call a spade a spade. Liberalism is evil. I don't hate liberals, but I do have an intense dislike for their beliefs, actions and ideas.
How can this be? It's because hatred isn't defined well enough here to understand the difference. A biblical definition can be made this way. 1 John 3:15 says that whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer.
So, I can discern by this that if I really dislike someone enough to want them dead, then I hate him. So, by this definition, conservative radio (for the most part) isn't spewing hatred. It could be construed as divisiveness, which if it is, then so be it. (I believe somebody has to stir up the people of this nation before we perish.)
As a matter of fact, he's only spewing the truth. And if liberals hate anything, it's having to deal with the truth. Take the definition of evil: morally wrong or bad....the wicked or immoral part of someone or something. Liberals have redefined evil as anything that disagrees with their ideals so they don't have to deal with the moral part of evil (or what is the truth of the matter...you know, right and wrong).
But let's go back for a minute. I said that this was all in interpretation. Let's take a look at the previous administration. The media and practically everyone who didn't vote for George Bush, wanted him to fail, or went ahead and outright claimed he was a failure. The guy that stayed to argue with me said that Bush was a failure from 9-11 on.
Oh really?
So, it's ok to call the opposition a failure, but if I think your party should not be successful in dragging us further down the drain, I'm asking the nation to fail?
Labels: Fail
posted by Ricky at
2:12 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home