https://www.cbsnews.com/minnesota/news/minnesota-capitol-satanic-holiday-display/
https://x.com/mortforus/status/1868798389737124178?s=51&t=cLq01Oy84YkmYPZ-URIMYw
Welcome to another day in Walz's Minnesota. Why in the literal hell is there a satanic "holiday" display at the MN State capitol?
https://minnesotareformer.com/2024/12/16/low-income-mothers-lost-tax-refunds-to-tutoring-companies-using-overseas-instructors/
I'm shocked that we've learned of MORE fraud and abuse of taxpayer money in Walz's Minnesota. It's even more shocking that the major players are DFL leaders and Somalis.
https://x.com/libsoftiktok/status/1868728000180584949?s=51&t=cLq01Oy84YkmYPZ-URIMYw
https://www.wsoctv.com/news/local/man-accused-shooting-5-nye-uptown-sentenced-prison/UTCA4YHPXRHJRD7OJ4QHNO7X7E/
Let me get this straight, the same city (run by the DFL) that charged Daniel Penny for attempting to protect subway passengers from a potential assailant, just let a guy who admitted his guilt for shooting 5 people off with a 20-36 months sentence AND he gets credit for the 12 months he's already served. What's interesting is to look at this in context. NYC liberals tried to throw the book at Penny, literally changing the rules while the jury was deliberating, Biden and the rest of the left are calling for gun control after a school shooting, Biden pardoned his son on felony gun charges, and now this slap on the wrist for shooting 5 people. NYC is a freaking joke, and the DFL/APL are a bunch of hypocrites.
https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/5043206-senate-democrats-abolish-electoral-college/
"Sens. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii,) Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) and Peter Welch (D-Vt.), three leading progressive Senate voices, say it’s time to “restore democracy” by allowing for the direct election of presidents through the popular vote alone."
How, may I ask, does one "restore" something that never existed? Are these guys stupid? What's hilarious is that if this moronic bill gets passed Hawaii and Vermont immediately become irrelevant in US electoral calculus. The Chicago metro area will join the LA metro, the SF metro, and the NYC metro in ruling the US. The founders realized that democracy was a horrible idea for a national government and intentionally founded a representative/constitutional republic, enshrining protection for the smaller states in the constitution. The likelihood is that the constitution would never have been ratified without the electoral college.
https://www.cnn.com/2024/12/16/middleeast/syria-assad-prisoner-homs-intl-latam/index.html
This is absolutely hilarious. CNN (revered practitioners of real journalism) make a big deal of them freeing this political prisoner from a cell in Syria, then reporting the facts in a way that tries to make it sound like they weren't the ones who originally reported the false information.
https://x.com/mikebenzcyber/status/1868945446875676693?s=51&t=cLq01Oy84YkmYPZ-URIMYw
Why is the Biden administration paying Reuters (a revered practitioner of real journalism) $300 million dollars? If you're getting $3 00 million from someone don't you think it might affect how you cover them?
https://x.com/mjtruthultra/status/1868838710927577486?s=51&t=cLq01Oy84YkmYPZ-URIMYw
A court ruling just verified that an "antemortem blood sample" was taken from George Floyd. That literally means that someone took a blood sample from Floyd while he was still alive. If this is True it'll be quite the shock to the true believers who've accepted the Floyd narrative as gospel, and chosen to ignore various factors.
10 comments:
Why in the literal hell is there a satanic "holiday" display at the MN State capitol?
Religious liberty? I mean, if conservatives can erect Ten Commandment idols at state capitols, why not a Satanist display? Is one religion going to get preferential treatment over others in your world, if. you were in charge?
For what it's worth, the Satanists in the story you linked to do not actually believe in "Satan" or demons, rather, they advocate for and their belief is in increasing human understanding and knowledge.
Which religions get to post displays at state capitols in your maga world?
Given the general political position of the APL/DFL, that religious displays on public property are verboten, it's strange that this is the one they decide to privileged.
For years we've been told that Satanism is not a religion, now it is. Because folks who name their belief system after Satan aren't actually interested in Satan, who would ever think that.
Given that the 10 commandments are one of the foundations of virtually every legal system, I have no problem displaying them in courthouses, for example. As far as state capitols, who knows.
Great to see you advocating for Satan though.
Interestingly enough, public outcry killed the display at the capitol. I guess the hoards of MN progressive christians did have a hill they'd die on. Who knew, given how many of them were giving aid and comfort to the rioters, and are obsessed with abortion.
I guess in Dan's fantasy world, it's completely wrong to be speak up about things that you don't like. Except, that Dan constantly speaks up about things he doesn't like. The difference is that I was not advocating for government to remove the display, I actually think it sent a loud and clear message as to the values of the ruling DFL. Given everything going on up here, to think that someone in a position of power decided that this was important enough to make happen while basic services are being cut and property taxes are being raised on the cities with the highest numbers of the poor tells us something about the priorities of our government.
Right, because that's exactly what I'm doing. Advocating for a mythical boogety man.
Understand: I am advocating for religious liberty, just like my baptist and anabaptist forebears. It's a shame that modern conservative religionists no longer support the notion. Or rather, they support "religious liberty" ONLY for them and those who think like them. Which of course, is the opposite of religious liberty.
Not saying that's what you're doing. But you tell me: Do you support capitol buildings being used for Muslim, Satanist and Jewish displays, as well as conservative Christian displays?
Sure you are. If only you were that tolerant of conservative Christians, I'd believe you. In this case you are specifically advocating for religious liberty for those who worship (or at least named themselves after) Satan.
I honestly don't give a shit, except when a bunch of liberal nutjobs crap on Christianity and support this crap. The problem is that you (folx like you) and your "religious liberty" opposed putting the 10 commandments in public spaces, and opposed public Christmas celebrations. This is more about hypocrisy than anything.
1. I'm not sure that capitol buildings are the place for any religious displays.
2. I'm not sure what holiday the Satanists were celebrating.
3. If the decision is made to allow religious holiday displays, then by all means bring 'em all in. Maybe some Santeria with fresh chickens being sacrificed daily as well. How about the Aztecs and Incas getting some love here as well?
4. If public money was used for this, in a state that is determined to spend itself into oblivion, then absolutely not. Wasting money on shit like this is stupid when you just pissed away a 20 billion dollar surplus and are looking at a multi billion dollar deficit the next budget cycle.
Again, you support wherever you want.
Since this was a "holiday" display, I'd personally limit displays to religions that actually celebrate specific holidays in December.
It's interesting to me that in a post with a story about more fraud under the Walz regime, criminals getting a slap on the wrist from liberal DA's/judges, 3 idiots trying to "restore" a democracy that never existed, Biden paying of Reuters, and a George Floyd update (if true will be a massive story), that you decide to get your panties in a wad about some Satanists. Thanks for letting me know what's important to you.
You posted a bunch of opinion pieces, some of them using non-journalistic sources. I started at the top and commented on the first one that came along. I didn't have time or desire to read all of your "x" pieces. You are the one who placed that at the top of your pile of "news." Take it up with the manager of the blog.
As to your piece about the notion of abolishing the "electoral college," you noted the opinion...
What's hilarious is that if this moronic bill gets passed Hawaii and Vermont immediately become irrelevant in US electoral calculus.
No. One person. One Vote. The votes from Hawaii and Vermont count just as much as the vote from someone in Iowa or Montana.
On the flip side: The votes of the majority of the nation and the majority of cities becomes much less relevant and literally counts for less in the electoral college system.
Look, if you all want to win over the people in the cities, make a strong and compelling case for your arguments and policies. But DON'T make the places where most people live (including most people of color, mind you, and LGBTQ folks...) have LESS voting power than the rural places.
Where is the justice or reason in that?
Interesting that you consider a straight news story by the local NBC affiliate to be an "opinion piece". Of course there's no reason why you can't respond to the other substantive stuff, you just choose to use your "journalism snobbery" as an excuse. In the case of this post, there is only one Twitter link, from which it is easy to find a "news story". Beyond that, I post Twitter posts either because of embedded video or a link to another source, the vast majority of the time.
I appreciate it when you display your foolishness. If the Electoral College is removed every US national election will be decided by 5-10 metropolitan areas. States like VT, Hawaii, Iowa, and Montana will have zero impact on national elections. Hell, most of states like CA and NY won't have any impact on national elections.
But, as you note, you clearly want the US to move away from a constitutional republic composed of 50 sovereign states and towards the type of government that the Founders feared. Gotcha.
What a bizarre notion, your argument is that we should disenfranchise the vast majority of the country and simply submit to the demands of the voters of 5-10 metro areas. That's your idea of "justice". If one looks at the level of education in these areas you want to rule over you, I'm not sure that turning out citizens who are deficient in things like being able to read and do HS level math is a good plan for the future of the country.
You're right, making a case that uncontrolled deficit spending to the point that interest on the accrued debt will consume the entire budget, and that it is mathematically and economically impossible to "tax the rich" enough to fund the out of control spending for one calendar year, is simply poor messaging. Clearly the keep spending like drunken sailors (I apologize for offending drunken sailors) and "tax the rich" is a much better message.
It's cute when your snobbery shows through like this, and you just ignore things that don't fit your narrative.
Again, your ignorance of US history and the intent of the founders is impressive.
I have no problem with government subordination of non-Christian displays. Anyone with a cursory understanding of the founding of our nation knows that "religious freedom" referred to which Christian denomination of which one might be a member. Yet there was never any attempt to close down or prevent, say, Jewish places of worship. The issue is what religion played the strongest role (compared to any other) and the answer is Christianity. Christian displays, such as a Nativity scene at Christmas time, is not establishing a national religion. It's recognizing that...even if only nominally these days, given those like Dan who are citizens here...most Americans are still Christians, though the percentage in the beginning was far, far greater.
Also, no "government" put up Christian displays on government property. Americans who work as public servants did, and most of them are...at least nominally, such as those who are like Dan...and doing so is an American tradition. Those who whine are free to put up their satanic crap on their own privately owned properties. Complaining about displays referencing the faith which was the basis of most of the 50 states at their individual founding is nonsensical whining. Only progressive "Christians" take part in such.
Honestly, I'm ambivalent about religious displays on government property, I don't think it's a huge deal one way or another. Christmas stuff, and a menorah during December, sure why not. But the Satanist stuff bothers me for a couple of reasons.
1. There are no Satanist holidays that I am aware of, and it's unlikely that Satanists celebrate the birth of Christ. So what is the point of this "holiday" display?
2. In a state that's got so many Lutherans that you can't swing a dead cat without hitting a bunch of them, this seems like an intentional provocation aimed at Christians. It seems like less of a religious liberty issue than a big middle finger from the left. I suspect that they are thrilled that it's generated this much controversy.
It's just interesting to see Dan defending and making excuses for Satanists now.
Post a Comment