CDZ Endorsing State Retaliation

[Harpy Eagle]

Govt does it now. Jan 6th punishments Vs blm riots punishments.

Still comparing apples to hand grenades.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Still comparing apples to hand grenades.

Not in my view. You’re just not listening to my rationale. You may as well just type and give your smiley emoji to yourself.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Not in my view. You’re just not listening to my rationale. You may as well just type and give your smiley emoji to yourself.

I have read your rationale, I found it lacking.

The whole premise of this thread was that the Fla Bill takes all these things to the next level, something none of you can refute.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

I have read your rationale, I found it lacking.

The whole premise of this thread was that the Fla Bill takes all these things to the next level, something none of you can refute.

I disagree it’s the next level. Something you have failed to convince me of. Sounds like a you problem. So you have no issues when govt entities give special privileges but get upset when they take them away. Got it!

LOL

 

[Harpy Eagle]

I disagree it’s the next level. Something you have failed to convince me of.

Then give me a list of all the bills created by Dems and signed by Dems that specifically singled out a company and punished them for exercising their first amendment rights.

If you can do that, then I will agree 100% with you that it is not the next level.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

So you have no issues when govt entities give special privileges but get upset when they take them away. Got it!

Only when they take them away in violation of the Constitution. I have no issue if the state had said "this is not a good deal for us any longer, so we are going to end it.

But they did not do that. It is the difference between firing someone for being a bad employee and firing them for being white.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Then give me a list of all the bills created by Dems and signed by Dems that specifically singled out a company and punished them for exercising their first amendment rights.

If you can do that, then I will agree 100% with you that it is not the next level.

I have given you plenty of examples. We are going in circles. IRS was one.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Golfing Gator if it's a violation of the constitution then the courts will strike it down. Correct?

 

[BlueGin]

Then you can list all the bills passed by Dem legislatures and signed by Dem Govs doing this.

I will be happy to wait.

Interesting how you can’t even remember links requested and given in other threads.

Apparently you and dementia Joe have a lot in common.

 

[Damaged Eagle]

In 2012, the Obama administration was embroiled in a controversy over the accusation that they had instructed the IRS to target conservative political groups for special review of their tax exempt status. When the accusation became public, the Obama administration went into damage control mode, denying that it happened and trying paper over it and "move on" as best they could. Did they do it? Were they guilty of targeting political opponents for state persecution? Maybe. Probably. The point is, they knew it was wrong. Or, at the very least, they knew that voters would think it was wrong - even Democrat voters.

Do we still see it that way?

During the Trump administration, Republicans threatened to repeal section 230 of the 1996 Communications Decency Act in response to social media companies that had been censoring right wing content. Many people, on both sides of the aisle, saw this as political retaliation, that it was Trump "punching back" at the tech companies who spoke out against him, who censored his, and others' posts. But even then, they knew that it was wrong to do so as a means of gaining political advantage, that we shouldn't allow our leaders to target political opponents for persecution. Even Republicans who supported the proposal seemed to recognize this and worked hard to rationalize the attack terms of legal principles. They claimed it was an unfair, special perk, that should have never been passed, that doing so now wasn't persecution against Facebook and Twitter, but a principled change to a flawed law. That they were fighting for freedom of speech, and not just getting revenge on political enemies.

Now we have Desantis and the Florida legislature. They seem ready to throw off the pretense altogether. They've been quite open that they are revoking laws perceived to be benefitting Disney as punishment for opposing a recently passed law. Regardless of the rationale offer for revoking the law, the intent was clear. It was Disney's stated intent to fight the law that prompted the legislative action.



My question is - are we ready to endorse that kind of government? Should we allow government, local, state, federal or whatever, to punish political opposition with legal action? Is it ok for our leaders to "punch back" via the power of the state?

Reminder - this is CDZ. Trolls will be reported.

Disney and other big businesses deserve no more special perks or tax incentives than any Mom & Pop store is given.

*****SMILE*****

 

[Harpy Eagle]

We are going in circles. IRS was one.

The IRS was not one. The IRS was not a law written just to punish a specific company. The IRS was illegal.

For the IRS scandal to be an example you would need the Dems in Congress to pass a law saying that the IRS was allowed to focus only on Right leaning non profits.

Would you be in here defending that if /when it happens?

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Interesting how you can’t even remember links requested and given in other threads.

Apparently you and dementia Joe have a lot in common.

I remember them all, so far none have been given.

 

[Weatherman2020]

The issue under discussion is whether retaliatory government is something we should allow. Regardless of your opinion of the Florida/Disney situation. Should a sitting government be allowed to punish businesses or individuals for opposing them? Please try to answer the question and avoid trolling.

Should a government stop a strip joint from going in nextdoor to a school? A steel mill in a residential neighborhood? A pot shop nextdoor to a daycare?

Yes, government must have a leash on businesses for the benefit of what people want. And in this case, the people say no special perks for Disney, they’re just a huge corporation like any other.

 

[Weatherman2020]

The IRS was not one. The IRS was not a law written just to punish a specific company. The IRS was illegal.

For the IRS scandal to be an example you would need the Dems in Congress to pass a law saying that the IRS was allowed to focus only on Right leaning non profits.

Would you be in here defending that if /when it happens?

That’s the stupidest thing you’ve ever said, and that’s saying a lot. But good to know the next POTUS can have every government agency make it impossible to operate for every woke corporation with your blessing.

 

[Weatherman2020]

Still comparing apples to hand grenades.

Yeah, selfies in the Capitol are much worse than ransacking and burning down black owned businesses.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

That’s the stupidest thing you’ve ever said, and that’s saying a lot. But good to know the next POTUS can have every government agency make it impossible to operate for every woke corporation with your blessing.

Not my blessing, I have been arguing against that very thing for days. Do try and keep up

 

[Weatherman2020]

Not my blessing, I have been arguing against that very thing for days. Do try and keep up

You’re an idiot who claims the government can’t be biased unless a law is on the books.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

You’re an idiot who claims the government can’t be biased unless a law is on the books.

This is the CDZ, no name calling permitted. I won't report you this time.

And I never said that the government can’t be biased unless a law is on the books.

I said it is worse when the bias is codified into law.

 

[Weatherman2020]

This is the CDZ, no name calling permitted. I won't report you this time.

And I never said that the government can’t be biased unless a law is on the books.

I said it is worse when the bias is codified into law.

And again you lied.

For the IRS scandal to be an example you would need the Dems in Congress to pass a law saying that the IRS was allowed to focus only on Right leaning non profits.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

And again you lied.

No I did not, but I have not reported you for breaking the rules of the CDZ.

I said the IRS scandal was not the same as what this thread is about because what the IRS did was not done legally. What the IRS did was illegally and when they were found out they were made to stop.

For what the IRS did to compare to the topic of this thread, it would no longer be illegal for them to do so.