Another word being the vagueness found within the word "Politically" correct.
People hear different things whenever they hear "Politically Correct" being used. What I personally hear is a encrypted narrative about a type of people who refuse to apply their own logic and think for themselves.
These type of people wont go the extra mile that "Unfortunately" is needed today (due diligence) when choosing different "News Media" outlets.
The more common "News" seeker climate seems to have more to do with how well the "news cast" looks and has dressed for the occasion.
As if a cult of personalities that have visually prepared themselves not only for some runway exhibition but even more as to whether of Not they'll be perceived as visually appealling in in the eyes of the "Beholder".
This same shoe fits many feet today, wouldn't you agree?
Much of which has little or nothing to do with whether or NOT they're speaking of "Thoroughly Investigated" minute bites of "Information" that DO and WILL lead up to the "Truth" ultimately being revealed?
In terms of a man that drinks from His own well, how muddied has anyone;'s drinking "Water" become these days?
Where is the value of wisdom that speaks of Water that's been contaminated? What does "Living' Water" taste like these days and where does a person go in order to find this water that can sustain a righteous life style and/or opinion?
Wouldn't that also depend upon those who are determining what is considered "Righteous" in this world? And as such without having visited and paid (conjured) some "Medium" or estranged media that has in fact been "Outsourced"?
Exactly where do YOU get YOUR News from and is it being FOUND by YOU as the sitting jury to be trustworthy of late?
James 3:11-12
Can both fresh water and salt water flow from the same spring?
NIV
Is there any truth behind the reason why CNN is also being referred to as "Clinton News Network" by so many?
It's one thing for something at first to be considered a joke, yet when does any Joke become a Joke that's on "You"? The type of joke that does require not only "Observers" but also "Believers" of what's being spoken and that does not match up with the things they continue to "Do"? Common sense would suggest a Liar is not only in the room but also in Your Living room having been invited via "Satellite'?
In terms of the real meaning of something that is "New" which then in turn does in fact become "NEWS", shouldn't that said news also reflect as MORE informative than the last 12 hour or 12 month cycle of news already broadcast?
Isn't there a real reason why the said "News" no longer seems like something that is fact "NEW"?
Why does any supposed news that's also about politics ALWAYS seem to speak as it "USUALLY" does? Shouldn't news in its truest sense speak of something that is "NEW"?
To the Brethren out there have we failed to remember what the word "Gospel" was and IS intended to insinuate in terms of 'Good News"? What is it that makes any News also "Good News"?
In terms of extrapolation, why isn't it true most people who do enjoy watching the news are hoping to hear about something that's different?
What if common Sense were seen as something intangible that must be "Created" through the exercising of words?
Not to suggest something that's made in a Lab, Test tube, warehouse or on some assembly line, but such a thing which manifest as the result of positive interaction between people? Mutual conclusions which then manifest as the result of honor and respect for the Truth which has been "DRAWN" from within each?
We're living in a world where the invisible "They" we all like to refer to as we explore talking points has also become the dumping grounds for our emotions. Such a place which includes many of the things we don't agree with.
As we talk or converse we also flirt with this "Third Person", yet do we truly find ourselves honoring or respecting what we each want to make the world around also know we will take and/or make a"Stand" for?
This third person who conveniently never seems to be available or there in the moment to defend themselves, further emphasize or expound on what they've "Supposedly" said!
Exactly why are most arguments based upon peoples lack of memory? Tat to mean where there's so much replaying of what was supposedly said and often times only seconds prior?
By the end of an argument hardly anything being presented as if the Truth in turn ends up having anything to do with why the argument began in the first place? All that gets heard is "You said" which gets rebutted with "No You said this"?
How is that going to Play out with Jesus at His coming where some will hear, "I don't know you"?
What if this third person were to actually have a name? And that name as if a being whose name is Truth?
This format of conversing doesn't fit together with more common words such as "Heart Felt, Compassionate, Understanding, Considerate and last but not least "Thoughtful". Are the words of a creator who also creates through the use of words (Speach) also Well thought out words"?
The exclusion of Truth leaves much more to be said about the essence of humanity that's choosing to try and encrypt the conveyance of their heart during a face to face transfer of thought(s).
Many today desire to go nowhere near the truth. Could this reason have anything to do with the so called freedoms they would otherwise have to give up if they did? Exactly how many "Smaller Worlds will fit inside of a much bigger World"?
Exactly who is it that will ultimately decide where the boundaries of truth begin and end within any Kingdom that's also truly considered to be a "Sovereign Kingdom"?
It's easy to assume everyone else that's part of our conversation(s) knows exactly what we're talking about as we try to populate and in turn polarize the atmosphere with our words that will suit personal comfort.
Take for example a husband and wife conversation within an otherwise neutral day that turns "South" into an argument without any supposed "Early notice"? Why is it when a simple question such as "What do you want to eat for dinner" gets placed on the table there can be such a direction shift in the attitudes towards one another?
Is it "Really" true though to suggest there was no "Early notice" or would it be more accurate to clearly state that the spirit of disagreement was there all along? In that it was simply waiting for a place to rightfully take up both space and time in terms of consumption?
A type of presence where maybe only one of the two was made aware of it's presence? Because if both parties are truly "For" each other, why do they both not turn and attack this essence (spirit) along the same "Front" because they are enjoined as if of ONE spirit?
What does a welcomed spirit look like?
How does it gain strength enough that it can manifest? Could such a spirit of divisiveness stay hidden among the baggage of our "Emotions"? One that only pops out and shows its face on demand as its host claims being unaware of it's presence?
Keep in mind within this example it applies to two people who claim they love each other through vows taken? And those vows made "Before" and in the eyes and awareness of God who is their mutual creator?
Imagine though if this same spirit of what I'm suggesting were to take place between two people who've yet to confess any type of coherent, long term and favorable devotion towards each other?
Yet NOW you have two people who are still choosing their OWN methodology as to how both are now somehow trying to "Cope" with this thing (relationship) they have since taken upon themselves and enjoined in? And as such without the truthful acknowledgement of what this third person spirit looks or sounds like as it's tone changes?
SO what's the easiest escape plan should things not work out where no one is "Willing" to find agreement? How long does agreeing to disagree work within a lasting marriage? That is before the real essence of the DISAGREEMENT later makes the choice to steal yet another choice and resurface some where else?
You know that obscure :"Somewhere Else" such as another argument that started out about something Totally different?
Obscure to mean where someone see it as a need to pick a fight in order to "Eventually" get heard? One where the results of any supposed real fight will always equal some type of pain? Away from which any Normal human would also look to escape from? Does it make "SENSE" to you?
Back to the dinner in question, "They" start out talking as if they're on the same page, but let something as simple as "Where do you want to got eat" come up and one of the two might easily find themselves sleeping on the couch either that or silently staring at the back of their mates head or out the bedroom window all night long. Was it really all about dinner?
More often though, isn't it true that if a talking point stays on the table for very long what usually gets fleshed out or maybe "Flushed" out is the not so obvious "Us vs Them"?
What about what's in their Heart? Is it more often the insecure question that's trying to find a way out that's not finding it's opportunity to where it can gets asked, "Do you know Me?
Instead and because of doubts it gets heard "Are you still with Me and For me" or "Are You against Me"?
The substance of the heart I would like to assume everyone hopes to be able to "find" is the heart of somone that is for them. Why is that on one occasion agreement can easily be expressed yet in another moment of time the right words are not available or are no where to be found?
How much of this mystery truly has to do with the type of atmosphere, sense of awareness of our OWN presence that is "IN ORDER"? In "Order" to mean certain conditions to where CAN find ourselves "Able" to express what's in the heart and without ANY form of reprisal whether it be at present or at some point in the future?
When any two people honestly sit down in an attempt to converse, like it or not we each give away tiny informational nuggets of information about ourselves. These things may seem to be encrypted, yet they're most definitely in the air we move around with the sound of our "Voice" and with the added punctuation of our not so silent body language.
Simply put there are just certain things the individual has taught themselves to trust (read) in during the transferal of things that are within our hearts. In terms neutrality and what God has made equal some are simply better at this mining (Discernment) process than others, yet that still doesn't explain why?
My first question would be, What is the person(s) in question belief system built upon? What fundamental framework are they trying to task with supporting what this fragmented "World" tries to seduce them into believing as if ALL that is said is also True?
Is there truly such a thing as Neutrality within what gets said? Meaning where an offender simply says, "I'm sorry" and as a result the "Trust" slate gets completely wiped clean?
Or does an interpretation of what gets said need "More" than anything of find find itself able to more than WANT to trust what is being spoken? I think we all want to Trust, yet is this prudent within what has become even more predominate in this world in terms of what actually has fueld and in turn "Caused' an increased sense of "Lack of trust"?
Herein lies the danger in trying to rely too heavily on someones (recorded) words whether it be via texting or email. Is there TRULY a difference between seeing someones words captured in print versus "Hearing" them speak?
News has entered into a "New" venue of late. Pay closer attention when you find yourself actually listening to a News broad cast of late.
I didn't catch it for its more recent regularity until of late, but today Most reporters can be heard trying to "Emphatically" implement/re-introduce words such as, "So and so is with us "On record" in their prefaced reporting. Much of this in my opinion has to do with more recent attacks on the media's "Credibility" across the board.
It all boils down to a formula of comfort in My opinion. That comfort being what each person CAN handle or accommodate that is looking for a branch to "Perch" on in their own logic Tree" as well how much time or themselves they are interested in investing in what gets said and does go a supposed "Record".
Exactly who is this gate keeper (Master) of the spoken record(s) that are also supposedly being 'Well" kept and within a "Trustworthy" place?
In terms of antiquity TRULY what has ANYONE learned about not only a "Messenger", but even greater a messenger that is also "Trustworthy'?
Prov 25:13
Like the coolness of snow at harvest time is a trustworthy messenger to those who send him;
he refreshes the spirit of his masters.
NIV
Matt 11:10
This is the one about whom it is written:
"'I will send my messenger ahead of you, who will prepare your way before you.'
NIV
Some might argue with, "But what about hand written letters throughout antiquity"? The medium where people for centuries found themselves able to convey trustworthy thoughts regardless of the miles that separated them?
I'm firmly of the opinion, "A person CAN find out more about what they may or may NOT know about a person best when they're NOT present. Meaning many of those things "Said" we suggest to ourselves we noit only say we "Know" but also have been taught to "Trust"!
That is until the strength and weight of the undeniable comes along and whispers to us otherwise.
My argument is that today people are NOT weighing not only the words of others by the same standards "They" used to but also "They" are NOT weighing their own words by that same standard before the jury pool has been seated.
We have more people (another form of Media that may of may NOT be just) telling us today not only what everyone has said, but their intentions and motivation for having said so as well.
In this type of frame work not only is there barely enough room for the personage in question, much less what may or may NOT be true that concerns other Narratives being offered.
What ever happened to the age old phrase, "I don't know ask them, they are of age and can speak for themselves"? Why the need for so many other opinions today before a person is believed?
Surely there's a Righteous response EVERYONE can agree with floating around out there somewhere that's JUST waiting to be heard? Some might even refer to it as "Common Sense"?
Others might even relate to this answer as "True Wisdom"?
Today there's rarely a clean and clear delivery of words that ALSO find themselves without the need for some form of validation (bias) being mixed with them (words).
I've heard of a "Horse or Dog" whisperer what claim they know what's going through an animals mind, but what about a "Human Whisperer"?
I fully believe there is absolutely NOTHING wrong with "News" in and of itself yet only when it's NOT been tainted with "Bias or Slant" of any kind.
The dispensation of unbiased news these days is nearly "Impossible" to find. Why is this? You simply can't find this "Medium" on any Radio or TV network these days.
We might claim we're ALL speaking the same language, yet TRULY are we? The day when we ALL do speak the same language what will it sound like? "Common Sense" maybe?
Many side show reporters are attempting to try and sound like they are without bias and that by way by way of Trashing "Everyone"!
Usually all this type of horse play (no pun intended) is turns out to be is a ploy to try and get everyone to switch over and listen to them.
How easy is it to learn to loathe a "Politician", yet how many personalities have failed see what they have to say is beginning to sounds much like a "Politician". sw
My suggestion is? Refuse to be someone else's experimental project. Stop investing in conversation that's obviously NOT going anywhere or getting you or "Them" anywhere that's also 'Meaningful"!
Especially if the word Meaningful were being viewed as though it were an additional "Sense" that's full of the willingness having been made aware of all that is held in Common.
The acknowledgement of having One and the same creator is The Best place to start looking don't you think? Who better would know than the one that did create "Man Kind".
Don't simply look for a cult or a religion, instead set out in an earnest quest that does in fact Find what is True and Trustworthy....The type of Truth that does and can hold all things together and that through the completed exercise of ALL the things this world would otherwise twist and contort to the contrary!
My heart felt advice would be to make the "Choice" that WILLS it and will NOT accept anything less than the Truth!
Such a place might not only "Prove" to be where "Common ground is found, but a ground that is solid as a "Rock" and can be built upon.... Just saying!
Make of this following passage what You Will, yet know this that does pertain to a future that is no longer to be considered one that is also to be considered as Far away in the 'Distance" that is and Will Be at the "Head" over ALL mankind".
Rev 6:9-11
When he opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of those who had been slain because of the word of God and the testimony they had maintained. They called out in a loud voice, "How long, Sovereign Lord, holy and true, until you judge the inhabitants of the earth and avenge our blood?"
Then each of them was given a white robe, and they were told to wait a little longer, until the number of their fellow servants and brothers who were to be killed as they had been was completed.
NIV
SW
I agree with you. Sometimes, maybe most times, a person who repeats to a third person what the first person has said to the second person, will say whatever the first person has said in a tone which will emphasise what the second person believes on the subject, and through it can change both the meaning of what was said and also the personality of the one who said it.
ReplyDelete