3 ms·

They didn't say it was due to their opposition to this bill but for misbehaving. Disney has been doing quite a bit of things that Floridians don't like. Bringin

They didn't say it was due to their opposition to this bill but for misbehaving. Disney has been doing quite a bit of things that Floridians don't like. Bringing a young kid on ABC (owned by Disney) to promote transgenderism in prepubescent kids for example. This has been brewing for a long time. Like I said, the bill was the catalyst of this, but not really the reason.

WarOnPrivacy 5y ago
> They didn't say it was due to their opposition to this bill but for misbehaving. Not precisely. They clarified Disney's misbehavior was having "CA Values" in FL. It’s time for them to remember that we are not CA. They are a CA company. And we are not interested in their CA values here in this state. This and other "We're going after Disney" statements were made days/hours after Disney voiced it's objections to the Don't Say Gay bill. The legislators' messaging is fairly unambiguous here. The implication that dissolving RCIC was already destined to happen at this time, that seems disingenuous given that the Governor's staff had - only last year - carved out Disney from FL's unconstitutional SM law.
- _-david-_ 5y ago
  I think it was the opposition to the Parental Rights bill that allowed for the widespread support of removing the special privileges. I think that many in Florida including the some representatives wanted to remove the privileges before but couldn't find any reason that was popular enough. Things like promoting prepubescent trans children on TV never made the headlines so they couldn't run on that. When Disney opposed a bill whose stated goal is to protect children, which the majority of people in Florida regardless of political party support, while at the same time Disney had multiple employees arrested for human trafficking it opened an opportunity. The politicians took it and removed the privileges. I don't believe it would have happened at this time if Disney had not opposed the Parental Rights bill. Like I said above I believe it opened the opportunity up to do it. If Disney hadn't opposed this bill the next time they did something unpopular with the average Floridian they would have lost their special privileges. I think there is a long list of things that Disney has been supporting for years that the average Floridian opposes and considers CA values. I think promoting trans kids and putting warnings on old movies are good examples. I think the politicians who gave Disney an exception wanted to use Disney, but I don't think they actually supported Disney. Disney's support for various woke thing was widely known by conservatives. I doubt those involved with the exception supported Disney back then. They just didn't have the opportunity to implement what they wanted.
  - pstuart 5y ago
    > promoting trans kids I had too search for it. I found a PSA that I think you might be referring to: https://www.cnbc.com/2022/04/06/disney-networks-among-outlets-that-will-air-psa-featuring-trans-teen.html https://www.cnbc.com/2022/04/06/disney-networks-among-outlet... Do you take issue with its contents?
    - _-david-_ 5y ago
      That is not what I am referring to. I should have been clear. I was primarily talking about Desmond Napoles, but there are other cases that ABC has been involved with as well. This sort of thing has been going on for years.
  - colburnmh 5y ago
    > I think it was the opposition to the Parental Rights bill that allowed for the widespread support of removing the special privileges. Except that it wasn't "removing special privileges" from anyone but Disney: * What about the special privileges that 1800+ other entities have under Florida's special district laws? Why are they not also being discussed for dissolution? * Why was the bill introduced, passed with no debate in either house, and signed into law in a 4 day period and in a special session that was not even called for the purpose of debating special districts (it was amended by DeSantis to specifically allow this bill to be passed)? * Why is the bill structured to force Disney to transition all of the RCID infrastructure and services to Orange and Osceola counties before dissolution on July 1, 2023, but Disney cannot petition for the special district to be re-established until on or after July 1, 2023? That provision means Disney has to transfer all infrastructure/services to the county, petition the government to re-establish the special district, then transition all the infrastructure/services back to the RCID if the petition is granted. All the costs of that mandated, obviously useless double-transition, will be borne by both Disney and the counties taxpayers, and will likely be in 10s-100s of millions of dollars, each. PS: Yes, the final bill SB-4C dissolves a total of six special districts, mostly to obscure the fact that this was specifically targeting Disney, but none of the other five will suffer even a tiny fraction of the same financial or ongoing business impacts that Disney and Orange and Osceola counties and their taxpayers will.
colburnmh 5y ago
Just the characterization of Disney's opposition to the "Parental Rights in Education" bill as "misbehaving", is telling. Voicing you opposition of government legislation is a right enshrined in the first amendment. It's not "misbehaving"--it's exercising a constitutional right. What happens if the Florida legislature flipped Blue next election, and started passing legislation against right-leaning entities for "misbehaving" by voicing opposition to more liberal social policies? What happens if the legislature decides to use eminent domain to repossess your house because they disagree with a Tweet you made? Hopefully, you can see how these actions are pernicious attacks on the first amendment.

WarOnPrivacy 5y ago

> They didn't say it was due to their opposition to this bill but for misbehaving. Not precisely. They clarified Disney's misbehavior was having "CA Values" in FL. It’s time for them to remember that we are not CA. They are a CA company. And we are not interested in their CA values here in this state. This and other "We're going after Disney" statements were made days/hours after Disney voiced it's objections to the Don't Say Gay bill. The legislators' messaging is fairly unambiguous here. The implication that dissolving RCIC was already destined to happen at this time, that seems disingenuous given that the Governor's staff had - only last year - carved out Disney from FL's unconstitutional SM law.

_-david-_ 5y ago
I think it was the opposition to the Parental Rights bill that allowed for the widespread support of removing the special privileges. I think that many in Florida including the some representatives wanted to remove the privileges before but couldn't find any reason that was popular enough. Things like promoting prepubescent trans children on TV never made the headlines so they couldn't run on that. When Disney opposed a bill whose stated goal is to protect children, which the majority of people in Florida regardless of political party support, while at the same time Disney had multiple employees arrested for human trafficking it opened an opportunity. The politicians took it and removed the privileges. I don't believe it would have happened at this time if Disney had not opposed the Parental Rights bill. Like I said above I believe it opened the opportunity up to do it. If Disney hadn't opposed this bill the next time they did something unpopular with the average Floridian they would have lost their special privileges. I think there is a long list of things that Disney has been supporting for years that the average Floridian opposes and considers CA values. I think promoting trans kids and putting warnings on old movies are good examples. I think the politicians who gave Disney an exception wanted to use Disney, but I don't think they actually supported Disney. Disney's support for various woke thing was widely known by conservatives. I doubt those involved with the exception supported Disney back then. They just didn't have the opportunity to implement what they wanted.
- pstuart 5y ago
  > promoting trans kids I had too search for it. I found a PSA that I think you might be referring to: https://www.cnbc.com/2022/04/06/disney-networks-among-outlets-that-will-air-psa-featuring-trans-teen.html https://www.cnbc.com/2022/04/06/disney-networks-among-outlet... Do you take issue with its contents?
  - _-david-_ 5y ago
    That is not what I am referring to. I should have been clear. I was primarily talking about Desmond Napoles, but there are other cases that ABC has been involved with as well. This sort of thing has been going on for years.
- colburnmh 5y ago
  > I think it was the opposition to the Parental Rights bill that allowed for the widespread support of removing the special privileges. Except that it wasn't "removing special privileges" from anyone but Disney: * What about the special privileges that 1800+ other entities have under Florida's special district laws? Why are they not also being discussed for dissolution? * Why was the bill introduced, passed with no debate in either house, and signed into law in a 4 day period and in a special session that was not even called for the purpose of debating special districts (it was amended by DeSantis to specifically allow this bill to be passed)? * Why is the bill structured to force Disney to transition all of the RCID infrastructure and services to Orange and Osceola counties before dissolution on July 1, 2023, but Disney cannot petition for the special district to be re-established until on or after July 1, 2023? That provision means Disney has to transfer all infrastructure/services to the county, petition the government to re-establish the special district, then transition all the infrastructure/services back to the RCID if the petition is granted. All the costs of that mandated, obviously useless double-transition, will be borne by both Disney and the counties taxpayers, and will likely be in 10s-100s of millions of dollars, each. PS: Yes, the final bill SB-4C dissolves a total of six special districts, mostly to obscure the fact that this was specifically targeting Disney, but none of the other five will suffer even a tiny fraction of the same financial or ongoing business impacts that Disney and Orange and Osceola counties and their taxpayers will.

colburnmh 5y ago

Just the characterization of Disney's opposition to the "Parental Rights in Education" bill as "misbehaving", is telling. Voicing you opposition of government legislation is a right enshrined in the first amendment. It's not "misbehaving"--it's exercising a constitutional right. What happens if the Florida legislature flipped Blue next election, and started passing legislation against right-leaning entities for "misbehaving" by voicing opposition to more liberal social policies? What happens if the legislature decides to use eminent domain to repossess your house because they disagree with a Tweet you made? Hopefully, you can see how these actions are pernicious attacks on the first amendment.