News Reedy Creek Improvement District and the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District

LAKid53

LAKid53

Official Member of the Girly Girl Fan Club
Premium Member
Heppenheimer said:
The term I hear is "anti-elitist" and "anti-globalist". Which seems to translate as anyone with a bachelors degree or higher and anyone with a passport or financial interest in a foreign owned company... basically, anyone with a 401K.
Click to expand...

Perhaps someone should remind the governor which institutions granted him a bachelor's degree and JD.....
 
JohnD

JohnD

Well-Known Member
Tonto said:
The revisionism is amazing. Of course this was started by Ron. The legislature has been along for the ride.
Click to expand...
It didn't start in a vacuum. I don't wish to rehash but even Bob I. said Bob C. didn't handle the issue well - he promised all the resources TWDC had to oppose the parental rights bill - while also claiming TWDC had a right to free speech. They do, but Florida elected officials also have a right to take the words of Bob C. seriously.

Criticism to the officials' reactions is valid. I don't question that. But they didn't do what they did out of whole cloth either.
 
lazyboy97o

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
JohnD said:
It didn't start in a vacuum. I don't wish to rehash but even Bob I. said Bob C. didn't handle the issue well - he promised all the resources TWDC had to oppose the parental rights bill - while also claiming TWDC had a right to free speech. They do, but Florida elected officials also have a right to take the words of Bob C. seriously.

Criticism to the officials' reactions is valid. I don't question that. But they didn't do what they did out of whole cloth either.
Click to expand...
Stop making excuses for blatantly illegal, unconstitutional actions.
 
Brian

Brian

Well-Known Member
JohnD said:
It didn't start in a vacuum. I don't wish to rehash but even Bob I. said Bob C. didn't handle the issue well - he promised all the resources TWDC had to oppose the parental rights bill - while also claiming TWDC had a right to free speech. They do, but Florida elected officials also have a right to take the words of Bob C. seriously.

Criticism to the officials' reactions is valid. I don't question that. But they didn't do what they did out of whole cloth either.
Click to expand...
lazyboy97o said:
Stop making excuses for blatantly illegal, unconstitutional actions.
Click to expand...

GIF by Groundhog Day
 
Chi84

Chi84

Premium Member
JohnD said:
It didn't start in a vacuum. I don't wish to rehash but even Bob I. said Bob C. didn't handle the issue well - he promised all the resources TWDC had to oppose the parental rights bill - while also claiming TWDC had a right to free speech. They do, but Florida elected officials also have a right to take the words of Bob C. seriously.

Criticism to the officials' reactions is valid. I don't question that. But they didn't do what they did out of whole cloth either.
Click to expand...
Disney does have a right to free speech as well as the right to use resources to support organizations fighting the parental rights bill (Citizens United case).

The elected officials had every right to take Disney’s words seriously. But their position as elected officials prevents them from using the authority of the government to retaliate.

In our country, citizens and elected officials stand on different footing because the Bill of Rights was adopted for the purpose of limiting the government from infringing on the rights of citizens.
 
JohnD

JohnD

Well-Known Member
Chi84 said:
Disney does have a right to free speech as well as the right to use resources to support organizations fighting the parental rights bill (Citizens United case).

The elected officials had every right to take Disney’s words seriously. But their position as elected officials prevents them from using the authority of the government to retaliate.

In our country, citizens and elected officials stand on different footing because the Bill of Rights was adopted for the purpose of limiting the government from infringing on the rights of citizens.
Click to expand...
As I said, criticism is valid. But they didn't do what they did out of the ether. That is my point. Even Bob I. recognized that.
 
Brian

Brian

Well-Known Member
lazyboy97o said:
It does not matter. They are not allowed to do it. That’s it. End of story. Even if Chapek said Disney would go so far as to support the violent overthrow of the state that would have been protected speech.
Click to expand...
All @JohnD was doing is correcting the record. Another member claimed that "this was started by Ron," when in fact, DeSantis didn't just wake up one morning and say "you know what, I think it's time to go screw over the #1 tourism destination in my state, after nearly 55 years of status quo."

In reality, Disney threw the first punch. This is so blatantly obvious that even Iger conceded that. DeSantis punched back, albeit in a near-textbook example of chilling free speech, but that doesn't change the fact that Disney threw the first punch. Would I have liked to see DeSantis just say "Ok, groomers" to Disney and move on? Yes. Unfortunately, things escalated quickly and both he and Disney have gotten wounded in this battle.

As always, two things can be true at once: Disney started it, and DeSantis acted unconstitutionally.
 
Chi84

Chi84

Premium Member
lazyboy97o said:
It does not matter. They are not allowed to do it. That’s it. End of story. Even if Chapek said Disney would go so far as to support the violent overthrow of the state that would have been protected speech.
Click to expand...
I think people have a difficult time with the concept that the bill of rights imposes limitations only on government. I see a lot of posts saying that what’s fair for Disney is also fair for the legislature.
 
Chi84

Chi84

Premium Member
Brian said:
All @JohnD was doing is correcting the record. Another member claimed that "this was started by Ron," when in fact, DeSantis didn't just wake up one morning and say "you know what, I think it's time to go screw over the #1 tourism destination in my state, after nearly 55 years of status quo."

In reality, Disney threw the first punch. This is so blatantly obvious that even Iger conceded that. DeSantis punched back, albeit in a near-textbook example of chilling free speech, but that doesn't change the fact that Disney threw the first punch. Would I have liked to see DeSantis just say "Ok, groomers" to Disney and move on? Yes. Unfortunately, things went downhill.

As always, two things can be true at once: Disney started it, and DeSantis acted unconstitutionally.
Click to expand...
Yes, any violation of a constitutional right requires that someone first exercise that right.
 
lazyboy97o

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
Brian said:
All @JohnD was doing is correcting the record. Another member claimed that "this was started by Ron," when in fact, DeSantis didn't just wake up one morning and say "you know what, I think it's time to go screw over the #1 tourism destination in my state, after nearly 55 years of status quo."

In reality, Disney threw the first punch. This is so blatantly obvious that even Iger conceded that. DeSantis punched back, albeit in a near-textbook example of chilling free speech, but that doesn't change the fact that Disney threw the first punch. Would I have liked to see DeSantis just say "Ok, groomers" to Disney and move on? Yes. Unfortunately, things escalated quickly and both he and Disney have gotten wounded in this battle.

As always, two things can be true at once: Disney started it, and DeSantis acted unconstitutionally.
Click to expand...
Even here your gross groomer comment betrays the reality that Disney was already being targeted for their “wokeness”. Their perfectly legal actions were not in any way the sort of equivalency that has repeatedly been attempted.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom