WDWHero
Active Member
Doesn't do any good if that laws continue to be bad and they don't stand up. Oh, also they continue to donate to anti-LGBTQ republicans.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
News Reedy Creek Improvement District and the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District
- Thread starter castlecake2.0
- Start date
Brian
Well-Known Member
I was responding to a member who was seemingly implying that Universal is just in it for the money.
Let me be crystal clear: Disney was extremely shortsighted in their initial handling of the response to the parental rights legislation. Like it or not, had they not put out that statement against the legislation, we would not be in this situation, and in doing so, they alienated an entire political party. Does that make the retaliatory action that followed right? No. However, two things can be true at once; had Disney chosen not to put out that statement, Reedy Creek would still exist with the landowner-elected board, and DeSantis and Co. were wrong to retaliate.
Universal, on the other hand, has taken a much calmer approach, with this being an example of their efforts to support LGBT causes while not alienating an entire political party in the process.
WDWHero
Active Member
You describing it as "mouthing off" makes it pretty clear how you feel about free speech.
I was responding to a member who was seemingly implying that Universal is just in it for the money.
Let me be crystal clear: Disney was extremely shortsighted in their initial handling of the response to the parental rights legislation. Like it or not, had they not put out that statement against the legislation, we would not be in this situation, and in doing so, they alienated an entire political party. Does that make the retaliatory action that followed right? No. However, two things can be true at once; had Disney chosen not to put out that statement, Reedy Creek would still exist with the landowner-elected board, and DeSantis and Co. were wrong to retaliate.
Universal, on the other hand, has taken a much calmer approach, with this being an example of their efforts to support LGBT causes while not alienating an entire political party in the process.
Figgy1
Well-Known Member
Both are exercising their rights and neither should be punished by the government
I was responding to a member who was seemingly implying that Universal is just in it for the money.
Let me be crystal clear: Disney was extremely shortsighted in their initial handling of the response to the parental rights legislation. Like it or not, had they not put out that statement against the legislation, we would not be in this situation, and in doing so, they alienated an entire political party. Does that make the retaliatory action that followed right? No. However, two things can be true at once; had Disney chosen not to put out that statement, Reedy Creek would still exist with the landowner-elected board, and DeSantis and Co. were wrong to retaliate.
Universal, on the other hand, has taken a much calmer approach, with this being an example of their efforts to support LGBT causes while not alienating an entire political party in the process.
If you or anybody else chooses to spend your money elsewhere that is your/their right
Brian
Well-Known Member
Better luck next time, pal.
Disstevefan1
Well-Known Member
Well done for BOTH Universal and Disney!
I am so glad I am not a Disney hater and a Universal lover and am a fan of BOTH and simply want BOTH to prosper so we, the tourist, benefit.
Let's hope Disney does not lose focus on their business while they fight these circular lawsuits that will last a long time.
WDWHero
Active Member
Why would this affect focus on their business? It's a gigantic company.
Disstevefan1
Well-Known Member
Universal just wants to spread Love and good Vibes and stay out of the Disney VS. DeSantis fight.
Smart move.
WDWHero
Active Member
No, they know they have to cater to far-right Republicans because they are building a brand new theme park. They already got a dedicated road out of it.
Chip Chipperson
Well-Known Member
I'd love it if one of the reporters present had the intelligence and fortitude to ask him to specifically identify which laws RCID allowed WDW to be "exempt from" and what taxes they didn't have to pay.
WDWHero
Active Member
he famously doesn't take questions or he gets really mad about being asked questions and then interrupts reporters
JusticeDisney
Well-Known Member
If you think Disney alienated an entire political party, you are simply dead wrong. Perhaps an extreme faction of the party, but nothing even close to the entire party.
I was responding to a member who was seemingly implying that Universal is just in it for the money.
Let me be crystal clear: Disney was extremely shortsighted in their initial handling of the response to the parental rights legislation. Like it or not, had they not put out that statement against the legislation, we would not be in this situation, and in doing so, they alienated an entire political party. Does that make the retaliatory action that followed right? No. However, two things can be true at once; had Disney chosen not to put out that statement, Reedy Creek would still exist with the landowner-elected board, and DeSantis and Co. were wrong to retaliate.
Universal, on the other hand, has taken a much calmer approach, with this being an example of their efforts to support LGBT causes while not alienating an entire political party in the process.
Brian
Well-Known Member
As a member of said party, I don't know a single fellow member outside of these forums that hasn't, at minimum, lost respect for or trust in Disney through this whole fiasco. That's not to say that those same people agree with DeSantis' actions (many, myself included, don't), but the Company doesn't come out squeaky clean either.
WDWHero
Active Member
That's pretty sad.
Disstevefan1
Well-Known Member
Selling "Love is Universal" merch and donating 100 percent of the profits and staying out of a fight that has nothing to do with them is catering to the far-right?
Wow.
Last edited:
This narrative isn't true. Disney initially refused to respond until basically all their employee's unions demanded they issue a statement, only under that pressure (during a labor shortage, no less) did they say anything.
I was responding to a member who was seemingly implying that Universal is just in it for the money.
Let me be crystal clear: Disney was extremely shortsighted in their initial handling of the response to the parental rights legislation. Like it or not, had they not put out that statement against the legislation, we would not be in this situation, and in doing so, they alienated an entire political party. Does that make the retaliatory action that followed right? No. However, two things can be true at once; had Disney chosen not to put out that statement, Reedy Creek would still exist with the landowner-elected board, and DeSantis and Co. were wrong to retaliate.
Universal, on the other hand, has taken a much calmer approach, with this being an example of their efforts to support LGBT causes while not alienating an entire political party in the process.
I hardly ever see it brought up but desantis's response has always had the implicit underlying message that other companies should not bow to the pressure of their employees' demands and fight back against this kind of stuff because the state is now willing to wield its power to do more damage to the company than their employees can. What better example to make for this than the most iconic business in the state.
RamblinWreck
Well-Known Member
I have to strongly disagree.
I was responding to a member who was seemingly implying that Universal is just in it for the money.
Let me be crystal clear: Disney was extremely shortsighted in their initial handling of the response to the parental rights legislation. Like it or not, had they not put out that statement against the legislation, we would not be in this situation, and in doing so, they alienated an entire political party. Does that make the retaliatory action that followed right? No. However, two things can be true at once; had Disney chosen not to put out that statement, Reedy Creek would still exist with the landowner-elected board, and DeSantis and Co. were wrong to retaliate.
Universal, on the other hand, has taken a much calmer approach, with this being an example of their efforts to support LGBT causes while not alienating an entire political party in the process.
Disney’s tepid response to the Parental Rights bill would have hardly been heard about or cared about by the vast majority of Americans.
It had no power to alienate much of anyone, let alone a portion of a political party, without being blown out of proportion by a certain governor who wanted to boost his national profile.
flynnibus
Premium Member
again, sliver of truth being abused...
The RCID had superiority over other conflicting state issues where it had governance. They had their own rules... which generally were not abused to be substandard, but generally the opposite. They also had isolation from neighboring oversight.. but this is a stretch to claim 'exempt from' - but we know the speaker here is not afraid to stretch the truth. Ironically, they had far more high profile 'exemptions' in actual state laws simply because the legislatures let them lobby them in... yet they aren't attacking those.
Taxes comment is about taxes didn't have to pay taxes on things they funneled through RCID instead of doing themselves.
Surferboy567
Well-Known Member
According to his recent comments he intends to have the Florida Legislature pass a bill to nullify the developer agreement. Can the government do that? How does that affect the law suit?
That seems illegal, though I am not a legal expert. Can the government just pass new bills for every contract they disagree with? Targeting just Disney for this new bill gives Disney more ammo in their lawsuit.
That seems illegal, though I am not a legal expert. Can the government just pass new bills for every contract they disagree with? Targeting just Disney for this new bill gives Disney more ammo in their lawsuit.
Brian
Well-Known Member
I think you're giving the governor too much credit here. Disney amplified that statement across social media and it was widely reported on. Besides, it's not like we're talking about some obscure fintech startup; it's ostensibly the most beloved and influential entertainment conglomerate in the world.
I also think it's a mischaracterization to call their statement "tepid." Their response prior to this statement was, though.