Olsonist
Disgusting Liberal Elitist
'twad doesn't have enough brains to have the sads.Bringing some of those pesky liberal facts out into the light, eh?
Meat Wad's going to have the sads now.
Last edited by a moderator:
'twad doesn't have enough brains to have the sads.Bringing some of those pesky liberal facts out into the light, eh?
Meat Wad's going to have the sads now.
First off I don’t see you or the other side as my enemies. I know that claim along with Bullshitters is your favorite dog whistle.Thanks for confirming my suspicion that you would object to your enemy doing what you justify for DeSantis.
On Friday, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis and his Republican allies revoked Disney’s longstanding tax privileges in the state in retaliation for the company’s opposition to the right’s anti-LGBTQ culture war. In doing so, Florida Republicans have violated Disney’s civil rights.First off I don’t see you or the other side as my enemies. I know that claim along with Bullshitters is your favorite dog whistle.
Second I do not justify what DeSantis is doing I think it’s an overreaction. My point from the beginning was Disney getting involved in a law that did not effect them. Hobby Lobby did not object to the entire ACA LAW only the portion that was against their religious beliefs. What part of this law would effect WDW?
The part that abolishes Reedy Creek Improvement District, for those of us not trying to change the subject.First off I don’t see you or the other side as my enemies. I know that claim along with Bullshitters is your favorite dog whistle.
Second I do not justify what DeSantis is doing I think it’s an overreaction. My point from the beginning was Disney getting involved in a law that did not effect them. Hobby Lobby did not object to the entire ACA LAW only the portion that was against their religious beliefs. What part of this law would effect WDW?
You're right, he dissembles like @Dog, but I'm still not convinced. He may be someone else with the same disdain for truth.The part that abolishes Reedy Creek Improvement District, for those of us not trying to change the subject.
The subject encompasses more than what you wish to limit it too.The part that abolishes Reedy Creek Improvement District, for those of us not trying to change the subject.
1st amendment, uh, remedy :lol: for Disney?Their board quite likely has access to the numbers for Pride weekend vs Sibling Fucking but don’t leave out the MAGA Days. Corporate citizens should be celebrated for Citizens Uniting and Hobby Lobbying or Chick Fil A’ing to bash librul causes, but if they want to criticize The Nominee, the frothing bots will attack.
There’s a reason the cowards set this to take effect more than a year from now. It will never go into effect, but it has a great effect in terms of distracting from Al Lawson’s district getting carved up between the Boys, as well as the district currently served by that woman with the temerity to challenge Liddle Marco of H2O.
Okay bullshitter.The subject encompasses more than what you wish to limit it too.
YOUR tweet clearly was comparing Hobby Lobby to Disney as it pertains to HB 1557
Kinda shows how far Ur Fascists have come in a very short time….On Friday, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis and his Republican allies revoked Disney’s longstanding tax privileges in the state in retaliation for the company’s opposition to the right’s anti-LGBTQ culture war. In doing so, Florida Republicans have violated Disney’s civil rights.
This collision of conservative policies—anti-LGBTQ panic and tax breaks—came after Disney criticized Florida’s new anti-LGBTQ education law. Its critics know it as the “Don’t Say Gay” bill.
The law prohibits teaching about sexual identity and sexual orientation in some Florida classrooms. In response, Disney called for the law’s repeal and paused its political donations in Florida. Next, DeSantis rushed through a measure to deprive Disney World of its designation as special tax district, which has allowed Disney to self-govern its massive Florida theme park for 55 years. DeSantis saidDisney’s opposition to the bill “crossed a line.”
“Once upon a time Disney was a great partner with the state of Florida,” Republican state Rep. Jackie Toledo said. “Shamefully, Disney betrayed us.”
But retaliating against someone for exercising their First Amendment rights is a violation of that person’s civil rights. Even if that “person” is Disney.
“It is a violation of the First Amendment for the government to punish a corporation because of the company’s expressed viewpoints on political issues,” says Adam Winkler, a constitutional law specialist at UCLA School of Law and the author of We the Corporations: How American Businesses Won Their Civil Rights. “I think that we will see legal challenges to this. And I think there will be constitutional challenges to it.”
Florida might argue that Disney doesn’t have a right to a special tax privilege that other companies don’t receive. But under Supreme Court precedent from 1972, the government cannot rescind a privilege once granted for improper reasons such as retaliation for political speech. And Disney’s actions—both its statements and its decision to pause its donations—are protected First Amendment activity.
Over the last century, the Supreme Court has extended civil rights to corporations, insulating them from government reprisal for exercising those rights. It wasn’t long ago that Republicans were cheering this trend. “Corporations are people,” Mitt Romney famously said as a presidential candidate in 2012. The party also helped usher in the era of massive corporate political giving with the US Supreme Court’s Citizens United ruling, which secured corporations’ rights as political donors under the First Amendment, and backed the Hobby Lobby decision, which recognized some corporations’ religious beliefs. These rulings had significant downsides for American democracy.
“There is the irony that conservatives for the last 20 years have been emphasizing that corporations have rights too and should be able to spend money to influence electoral politics,” notes Winkler. “And yet, now they’re trying to punish a company for trying to influence politics.”
Interestingly, it shows something progressives have often not discussed, too. Other Supreme Court rulings on corporate rights, including the landmark press freedom case New York Times Company v. Sullivan, have helped maintain democratic norms. Autocrats use their control over the private sector to wield power, erode democracy, and stifle protest. But because of rulings like Citizens United Disney at least has the option to fight back on constitutional grounds.
“This whole situation highlights one of the hidden benefits of recognizing corporations to have rights, that corporate rights also serve as a check on government tyranny,” says Winkler. “If corporations did not have rights, then the government could run roughshod over corporations, and restrict their freedom of speech and profoundly hurt and harm democracy.”
Disney may have crossed DeSantis. But it’s DeSantis who crossed the line.
https://www.motherjones.com/mojo-wire/2022/04/desantis-dont-say-gay-republicans-florida/
Before falling back on your pitiful dog whistle perhaps next time you should read your clever little tweet before pretending it doesn’t say exactly what it says.Okay bullshitter.
Okay bullshitter.Before falling back on your pitiful dog whistle perhaps next time you should read your clever little tweet before pretending it doesn’t say exactly what it says.
Anyone want I point out Gropenfuhrer was a 1-termer?Bringing some of those pesky liberal facts out into the light, eh?
Meat Wad's going to have the sads now.
If not, I would disappear.You having fun here?
Trump will take care of it. He likes the uneducated, and cloven hoofed ones.... It's like clean coal, and the steel industry! It's going to be Bigly! The jobs will come back like flies to sh..... Um.... Trump brand steaks!
Holy crap, a 25% rise in property taxes could ruin a lot of people.