Below is my column in Fox.com on free speech controversies brewing in the “House of Mouse” as both the company and its talent face public backlash over public statements. Free speech in the corporate setting presents unique challenges and conditions that are vividly demonstrated by the tough month the company is experiencing.
Here is the column:
Walt Disney once remarked, “You reach a point where you don’t work for money.” For shareholders of Disney, the most common complaint in recent years is that the entire corporation appears to have reached that point in pushing woke movies that have bombed with consumers and a political fight with Florida that has already cost the corporation dearly.
At the heart of two recent controversies are free speech disputes. The company’s new Snow White, actress Rachel Zegler, is publicly defending her right to trash the franchise’s original storyline and characters. In the meantime, the company is objecting that it is being punished for its own free speech in opposing Florida’s popular parental rights law.
Recently, Disney dropped all of its federal claims against the state of Florida over the company’s public opposition to the Parental Rights in Education Act. The only exception is its free speech claim that Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis has retaliated against the House of Mouse for speaking as a company against the law. (It has state litigation that is continuing on other claims.)
At the same time, Disney is facing another free speech controversy after Zegler used her casting as the new Snow White to denounce the entire premise and appeal of the original 1937 movie, calling Prince Charming a presumptive “stalker” and promising to ditch the whole love interest. She told an interviewer that Snow White is “not going to be saved by the prince and she’s not going to be dreaming about true love.”
What followed was a familiar groan to another Disney woke remake that seems to delight only Disney actors and diversity officers.
The problems with the film were magnified when even the dwarves seemed to get the axe after “Game of Thrones” star Peter Dinklage expressed his disapproval for the film and objected to the very notion of any of the seven traditional figures making a reappearance: “You’re still making that f—ing backwards story about seven dwarfs living in a cave together, what the f— are you doing, man? Have I done nothing to advance the cause from my soap box? I guess I’m not loud enough.”
He was indeed loud enough (which is surprising since his movie, “Cyrano,” bombed at the box office and took in just $6.4 million for a $30 million production). Soon after his objections, Disney posted a new vision of the dwarves as a happy band of male and female, racially diverse group of non-dwarves (except for one actor).
The backlash (and the actors’ strike) has now resulted in a delay of the release of the remake for another year and the sudden re-appearance of the original dwarves. (Disney insists that the earlier actors were just “stand ins” for the dwarves, which is a bit odd since the dwarves are digitally produced.)
Yet, right on cue, Zegler was back in the news with the release of the new images and date by reaffirming her earlier comments. Zegler encourages other actors to follow her lead in speaking out on such subjects.
Echoing Dinklage, Zegler declared that “we have to be fearless and loud in order to be heard, and to prepare for the backlash that occasionally comes with that outspokenness.”
Her rep quickly ran forward to say, “Snow White was not mentioned in her quotes.”
The concern was obvious with an actress stirring the same pot that has caused the movie to tank in promotions. For the rep, there is also the concern that talent are subject to contracts with reservation clauses on disparaging or damaging public comments or conduct.
The Zegler controversy reflects the fact that free speech is different in a corporate context. Even when the NFL caved to kneelers (despite countervailing rules against demonstrations in games), it had every right to bar such protests. Companies like Home Depot and Whole Foods have prevailed in barring the wearing of Black Lives Matter symbols. These companies are allowed to block political expression in the workplace deemed inimical to their brand or business.
Disney is now leading an interesting counter effort in fighting for the right of a corporation to speak on political issues even to the alienation of its consumers. It certainly has that right.
Over 60% of voters support the language in the Florida parental rights act. Nevertheless, Disney can make such political campaigns the priority over actual sales so long as the shareholders do not revolt.
From the outset of the fight with Florida, some of us could not see the possible winning strategy for Disney. Disney is losing money in critical areas, raising prices, embroiled in internal conflicts and laying off workers.
At the same time, CEO Bob Iger is facing an investor revolt.
Disney appears to be trying to move beyond its fight with Florida, but it is continuing to litigate its right to free speech. Ironically, many liberals who opposed corporate free speech rights in cases like Citizens United are supporting Disney in its claims.
Yet, the problem is not Disney’s right to speak as a corporation on political issues, but its right to continued favored status in the state.
Even if the controversy led to a reexamination of the status, would a court actually say that the state was barred from ordering greater corporate uniformity because Disney took a controversial public position? If so, Disney could insulate its corporate status by picking a fight with the state.
DeSantis replaced the handpicked Disney board and the state moved to force Disney to comply with the same laws as other corporations. The company is arguing that these measures were pure retaliation. The question is whether a court would feel comfortable in using such a perceived motivation to block an important state policy for uniformity in regulation.
Disney elected to go head-to-head in opposing the parental rights legislation and lost its favored status with both the state and many families. The question in the litigation is whether that is a prohibited cost to impose on the company or the cost of becoming a political advocate.
In the end, Iger will have to decide if Disney is now so profitable that it has “reached a point where you don’t work for money.” Snow White and the shareholders may hold different views on that question.
OT
UPS MUST BE PROSECUTED UNDER ANTITRUST LAWS
___________________________________________________________
Is that an elephant in the room or an 800-pound gorilla?
Delivery boys making $170K+???
Can you say, “Inflation?”
There needs to be an impartial and thorough investigation.
PROBLEM: Antitrust laws are unconstitutional – competition is the answer and there has been no vigorous answer since UPS stole or was gifted the “cream” of parcels from the post office.
I love you George, but please advise which part of the Constitution forbids antitrust laws? And how about football coaches making $10 Million/year?
That part of the constitutions that forbids government from interfering in private contracts.
Why can’t football coaches make $10M a year ? Do you really beleive anyone plays a coach $10M if they do not produce $10M in value ?
If you beleive that – offer your services as a coach for half price. See if there are any takers ?
In a free market NO price – not that for goods, or services exceeds the value created for more than a very short period.
A coach that does not deliver is FIRED.
Quote it please
Article I, Section 10, Clause 1:
By your logic, a law forbidding conspiracies to commit murder, or bank robbery, are unconstitutional.
“By your logic, a law forbidding conspiracies to commit murder, or bank robbery, are unconstitutional.”
Huh?
Since when are those a voluntary agreement and trade among all of the concerned parties, i.e., a contract?
Excluding other thoughts, that provision restricts the states not the federal government.
“[W]hich part of the Constitution forbids antitrust laws?”
Ex post facto, for one. The “laws” are arbitrary and capricious, for another.
More importantly, they punish a businessman for his success.
And I love you also, Wise Old Lawyer, Esquire!
The American resolution is not dictatorship but free market competition; the answer is always competition. Those who resort to profanity in speech have failed; those who resort to tyranny in enterprise and industry have failed. Equity is the absence of bias and favoritism. The American thesis is freedom and self-reliance. And the answer is always competition.
I would like you to cite the Constitution, wherein Congress is provided any power to engage in central planning, control of the means of production, redistribution of wealth, and social engineering. You cannot—that “dictatorship of the hired help” does not exist in American fundamental law. You will, by contrast, find it featured prominently in Karl Marx’s Communist Manifesto. His motto was and remains, “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.”
Karl Marx wrote the Communist Manifesto 59 years after the adoption of the Constitution because none of the principles of the Communist Manifesto were in the Constitution. Had the principles of the Communist Manifesto been in the Constitution, Karl Marx would have had no reason to write the Communist Manifesto. The principles of the Communist Manifesto were not in the Constitution then and the principles of the Communist Manifesto are not in the Constitution now.
Government exists, under the Constitution and Bill of Rights, to provide maximal freedom to individuals while government is severely limited and restricted to merely facilitating that maximal freedom of individuals through the provision of security and infrastructure only.
The entire communistic American welfare state is unconstitutional including, but not limited to, matriculation affirmative action, grade-inflation affirmative action, employment affirmative action, quotas, welfare, food stamps, minimum wage, rent control, social services, forced busing, public housing, utility subsidies, WIC, SNAP, TANF, HAMP, HARP, TARP, HHS, HUD, EPA, Agriculture, Commerce, Education, Labor, Energy, Obamacare, Social Security, Social Security Disability, Social Security Supplemental Income, Medicare, Medicaid, “Fair Housing” laws, “Non-Discrimination” laws, etc.
Article 1, Section 8, provides Congress the power to tax ONLY for “…general (all, the whole) Welfare…,” omitting and, thereby, excluding any power to tax for individual Welfare, specific Welfare, particular Welfare, favor or charity. The same article enumerates and provides Congress the power to regulate ONLY money, the “flow” of commerce, and land and naval Forces. Additionally, the 5th Amendment right to private property was initially qualified by the Framers and is, therefore, absolute, allowing no further qualification, and allowing ONLY the owner the power to “claim and exercise” dominion over private property.
___________________________________________________________________________________
“[Private property is] that dominion which one man claims and exercises over the external things of the world, in exclusion of every other individual.”
– James Madison
Next question, Esteemed Counselor.
Nice try George, but that is not an answer. I like what you write but unfortunately you have pretty much zero support in the Supreme Court. The battle you are fighting was lost about a century ago.
Antitrust laws are unconstitutional – competition is the answer
Antitrust laws are aimed at protecting competition. They target anti-competitive practices.
There are no “anti-competitive” practices that are not also crimes – no matter who commits them that should be illegal.
I would further note that there is plenty of evidence that the so called “anti-competitive practices” DO NOT WORK.
There is no example of a monopoly that exists without government behind it.
Businesses are fragile – monopolies even more so.
Further big businesses are more fragile than small ones.
I beleive there is only one company that was the to 10 in the world in 1965 that remains in the top 10.
Most have FAILED. Most of the biggest companies in the world today did not exist in 1965.
If you use force or fraud against others that is ALREADY barred by ordinary criminal law.
WE need 3 types of law.
Criminal Law – a priori laws barring and punishing the deliberate use of force or fraud against others.
Contracts laws – the use of FORCE by government to compel people to keep their binding agreements.
Torts laws – these require those whose actions result in REAL harm to others make those they harmed whole.
That is the entirety of legitimate law and all we need.
“They target anti-competitive practices.”
BS.
They punish the most productive, and protect those who are less productive. They penalize success and reward mediocrity.
That’s arbitrary and incorrect. In freedom, with free enterprise in a free society, competition is always the answer and the only answer. Once you begin the tyranny of antitrust legislation, you lose freedom. You lose equity and begin to assign bias and favor; you move out of this freedom reality and into redistributive, collectivist, fantastic communism. Period. It is too simple for you to grasp. Your deep-seated, immutable desire is power and control. Sorry. You are not in the Constitution. Freedom is.
Antitrust laws are unconstitutional and without any legal basis under the Constitution.
You like them; the Constitution does not.
Anti-trust laws also target problems that do not actually exist.
The easiest way to understand why antitrust is stupid is to look at JP Morgan and the London Whale about a decade ago.
The Whale tried to corner the market – essentially what anti-trust is supposed to stop by using JP Morgans tens of billions in financial power.
He was wiped out by a small but smart hedgefund that picked up what he was trying to do and bet HEAVILY against him. After that others joined.
JP Morgan lost $4B
Studies in the 80’s found that even were a natural monopoly to occur – the market dominating player gets very small advantage from monopoly power.
Raising prices resulting in excess profits drives investors to existing or new competitors.
The laws of supply and demand are immutable. There is no monopoly that can work arround them.
The only way for actual preditory pricing is with government protection.
Tell that to the Rockefellers.
Wise, I am not sure what you are referring to but the break-up of Rockefeller made him richer. The components were worth more than the whole.
Normally what Rockefeller is accused of is negotiating rail freight rates lower than offered to competitiors.
Standard oil would go to the railroads and commit to hundreds of rail cars per day – every day no matter what – in return for lower prices per car or per gallon.
Standard oil also built its own tanker cars to go in those trains. So all the railroads had to do was deliver.
Competitors could have gotten the same rates – for the same commitments.
Standard oils rail contracts resulting in significant buildout of the rail system – because the committments by Standard oil payed for the expansion of rail service.
Most of us understand that if you commit up front to buying a large number of something over a long period of time you will get a much better rate.
Absolutely! But they called Rockefeller greedy because he had a lot of money and charged those less efficient companies a higher price (like they should). Let’s get even, said the anti-greed people.
As I said earlier, they got even by breaking the Rockefeller companies up. That changed very little where economics was concerned. Larger and guaranteed volume continued to get better prices. When they got even with Rockefeller and split him up, his companies were worth more as individual ones than as a whole. Rockefeller became richer.
What some people forget, and I think Estovir realizes despite the comments, is that there are 330 million people in America. Picking out one randomly to regulate will not provide the expertise required. Picking out one from the executive portion of a half-dozen of the largest pharmaceutical companies will be more suitable.
The regulators come from the companies regulated. That is why there is a revolving door between regulators and companies. The solution to the problem is to employ people who are knowledgeable but are willing to buck the prevailing system. Better yet is to trust the free market.
That is where people like Trump come in. He may not be thought of by many as the nicest guy, but he understands where the bodies are buried, who is burying them, and how the decisions are made. That is the type of person to clean up the mess.
The status quo is to hire a lackey from the pharmaceutical companies who does things that look like they are hurting big pharm. They might be, but at the same time, they are looking for competitive advantages. The $ 1-$2 billion in costs might adversely affect them, but it kills the ability of new companies to compete while the consumer pays.
.
One can extend the logic to the slightly different scenario we see today, where smaller firms are becoming the pipelines for big pharma.
The rockefellers out competed other businesses they did not engage in any conduct that was actually wrong.
Through out John D. Rockefellors lifetime the pricce of keroscene and later gasoline DECLINED consistently.
Rockefeller built a business empire and a huge fortune by providing people with a better safer cheaper product in ever larger quantities.
He put his competition out of business by doing a better job of provideing consumers a better cheaper safer product.
The falacy ofanti-trust laws was demonstrated by the fact that the breakup of Standard oil resulted in the first significant price increases in decades.
These companies are allowed to block political expression in the workplace deemed inimical to their brand or business.
The pharmaceutical industry invests great effort in creating a brand for their prescription drugs. Selling science is a very difficult task, esp one where non-physician consumers are part of the market mix, albeit secondary to physicians. Witness the massive confusion on vaccines and how every Tom, Dick and Harry today places themselves on pedestals when it comes to their knowledge of vaccine mechanism of action and adverse events. No pharma company would ever think of denigrating their product brand. It would be suicidal given the complex message involved in selling science.
Shortly after medical school I entered Big Pharma, and I learned how jealous the industry can be for their product brand. It becomes their golden calf, rightly so because it needs to make money to offset R&D expenditures. Thus when Disney became the first entity to retaliate against the State of Florida for passing legislation protecting children from sexualized school curriculum, it was ludicrous from a business, branding, sales and marketing perspective. That the State of Florida replied in kind to Disney was simply the Laws of Motion as articulated by Isaac Newton, esp the Third Law.
The Left love to frame the argument in their terms, their favor, and they know the Leftist MSM will propagate their lies. I learned in high school in our debate team, to never let your opponent frame the argument. Disney cast the first volley. They were first to retaliate on a matter that was outside of their business plan and market goals.
Joseph Biden started this monstrosity of corporations throwing their fund$, $trength and power$ to bludgeon Americans re: Left Wing ideologies. IIRC the Major League Baseball association, Coca-Cola Corporation, and others punishing the State of Georgia by repeating Biden’s lies regarding Jim Crow on steroids and Georgia election laws passed in response to the rigged elections of 2020.
Major League Baseball announced Friday that it is moving the 2021 All-Star Game out of Atlanta in response to a new Georgia law that has civil rights groups concerned about its potential to restrict voting access for people of color.
https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/31183822/mlb-moving-all-star-game-atlanta-georgia-voting-law
Now comes Disney crying because of loss revenue. Naturally the Left is not going to shovel money into Disney’s financial books. The Left have moved on to other targets to bludgeon: Jews.
Losing revenue for any company is always a red flag as to leadership of a company. Disney made a foolish and potentially fatal decision in retaliating against Florida’s newly passed laws in protecting children. Disney came way too late to the realization that lecturing, hammering, and targeting parents as evil, with a laser like focus, might work for George Soros funded Democrat Party, but it does not work in business. That their recently launched movies have had successive flops is just gravy IMO. Couldnt happen to a better organization.
Whether Disney survives is anyones guess. Whether anyone cares is another matter. That Disney is no longer the organization once envisioned by its founder, is not disputed. Winning back their customers? Thats like expecting Democrats to apologize for locking down schools and society as strategies to mitigate COVID.
The Mouse that Disney built has been caught in its own trap. Florida does not need Disney. Biden, Democrat Governors and Mayors have increased Florida’s revenue by forcing millions of Americans to abandon blue states/cities.
DeSantis should make his friend Dave Rubin, a Jew, a married gay male, and a father of 2 children via surrogacy, a spokesman for the Florida Council of Tourism.
Never let your opponent frame the argument.
Estovir……..Beautifully and brilliantly stated!
The most fundimental problem with Big Pharma is that it is protected from competition by government from small and medium businesses.
Stupid purpotedtly anti-trust or pro consumer laws create barriers to entry that keep out competiton.
Monopoly power – even limited monopoly power is always granted exclusively by government.
Big Pharma is that it is protected from competition by government from small and medium businesses
Actually, no. It takes $1 Billion to bring a new drug to market in the USA. No other country has this obstacle. Neither small nor medium businesses have that type of money. As it is, Big Pharma doesn’t have the resources to invent new molecules for drug development. Biotech now invents the new drugs because they have the luxury to be solely focused on the science involved. Big Pharma brings them to market because they have the vast experience to deal with the government bureaucracy.
The biggest problem with Big Pharma is the same with most companies and businessmen: greed.
Greed afflicts just about everyone, including little kids.
Estovir – respectfully your argument is “no, but yes”
Why does it take $1B to bring a drug to market ? That would be US laws.
The government driven cost of developing a drug protects Big Pharma from competition
The fact that it costs $1b to bring a drug to market (I beleive it is close to $2B today) means that any problems that can not produce $1B in profits will never be developed.
Your biotech/big pharma split does not change anything.
No the problem with Big Pharma is not greed.
Your smarter than that.
First there is absolutely no business anywhere of anykind that is able to deviate significantly from standard Risk/ROI ratios. If there was one that had high ROI out of line with Risk EVERYONE would invest in it.
Big Pharma’s profits are NOT unusual relative to its risks.
I am not looking to defend all the conduct of those in the Pharma industry – just note that it is not unusual, and that with or without government it is self regulating.
“It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker, that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest. We address ourselves, not to their humanity but to their self-love, and never talk to them of our own necessities but of their advantages. ”
Adam Smith
Why does it take $1B to bring a drug to market ? That would be US laws.
No; the “Deep State” paradigm applies. The FDA is fickle, capricious, shoots from the hip and is beholden onto its own reflection like Narcissus. There is so much self-adulation that takes place within the FDA, and likely now Obama’s monstrosity of Deep State, that any company going up against the FDA must have rich resources to dance to the pied piper of the FDA. If you want to bring to market a new drug, or seek a new indication on an already branded drug, you must throw yourself to the mercies and fickleness of the FDA. It was maddening for me because in my latter years I was in the oncology division at one of the top 3 oncology pharma companies. Much of what is prescribed for oncology is off-label precisely because of the road blocks the FDA throws at pharma. Oncology is rarely a disease of cures but more about extending life by 6 months, a few years, maybe remission. Oncology is also multi-therapy with a complicated dosage and scheduling depending on the 3 or 4 drugs used in combination. Getting the FDA approval on each drug combination, generics and branded, dosage, schedule, cancer state (neoadjuvant, adjuvant, metastatic, etc) is impractical and detrimental to patients. So the FDA creates many unnecessary burdens on Pharma to get an indication pre and post-launch. Additionally, there are the nonscientific matters in the drug approval process: regulatory, legal, marketing, safety, labeling, the list is formidable. Americans do not appreciate the work and money involved to get the drugs they have.
Big Pharma used to invent new drugs and bring them to market. Not anymore. The Feds have made it so difficult that, as I stated, Big Pharma no longer has the resources (i.e. manpower, scientists, researchers, labs, raw materials, etc). Small to medium size companies can focus on these latter issues. When it comes to FDA approval, Big Pharma comes in handy.
Americans like to blame Big Pharma for everything. I too have my critiques of them. However the conspiracies about Big Pharma, both on the Left (e.g. RFK Jr, Ralph Nadler, etc) and now the Right (e.g. Alex Berenson, Joe Rogan, Epoch Times) are detached from reality. Is their corruption? you betcha. Where is there not corruption in America? Ask your wife if she can sing her praises of the legal system as a PD
Economic theories are just that: theories. Reality involves the human condition, and the human condition is flawed to the core, ruled my appetites. I began and end with the following
The FDA is fickle, capricious, shoots from the hip and is beholden onto its own reflection like Narcissus. Arent we all?
CONSTITUTION – NOT JEALOUSY, COVETOUSNESS, OR CHARITY IMPOSED BY TYRANTS AND DICTATORS
Why does it take $1B to bring a drug to market ? That would be US laws.
Correct. Unconstitutional laws. Freedom, free enterprise, free markets, and free market competition ARE the law. The constitution allows no regulation of any free enterprise or industry. The Communist Manifesto does. Regulation must be done by the industry itself to protect itself from deleterious litigation. Those presenting covetousness and jealousy herein desire unconstitutional dictatorship over free enterprise and industry. Congress has no power to set wages, set prices, or regulate anything other than money, commerce and land and naval Forces. The 5th Amendment allows only the owner of private property to “claim and exercise” dominion over private property. Property damage, bodily injury, etc., are illegal and actionable.
“The most fundimental problem with Big Pharma is that it is protected from competition by government from small and medium businesses.”
Absolutely! Though one cannot forget the importance of reputation, today reputation’s importance is diminishing. Reputation helped build mom-and-pop companies because the consumers lacked the means to research what they bought. Moreover, the consumer is not in charge. He is told what to do, and what to buy because insurers control every purchase they pay for. Even the physician has lost control since his paycheck most frequently comes from an insurer. This present methodology fails to increase quality or reduce cost.
The Government sets up crazy systems that increase costs and bar entry for newer competition. In that way, many actions by the government cause less competition rather than more.
There is an argument that it costs $1 Billion to get a drug to market, and that is true, except today, it is probably more than $1 Billion. That is why multinational pharmaceutical companies control the market, and smaller companies cannot compete. The $1 Billion passes on to the consumer, so it doesn’t bother the big or well-financed companies, but it protects the big companies from competition. Yet, that $1 Billion doesn’t protect the consumer the way it should since the whole process can be rigged.
These companies are so huge they control the pipelines in both directions. They control distribution to such an extent that an inferior drug marketed by Pfizer will rapidly become the best-selling drug while the superior drug hopes it can remain on the market. The same happens in the entry market pipeline. The producers of new pharmaceuticals, knowing that they will eventually have to use Pfizer or its equivalent for marketing, provide their pipeline to Pfizer by selling or splitting the profits. The government is a distant secondary player in this market.
The marketplace is a complex system that includes patients and doctors who one would think control the choices. They do not. The control of choices is made by the insurers (and hospitals), the middleman, the government, and the lobbyists to name a few. None of them directly connect to the patient. I won’t go into some of the poor quality control issues permitted by this system except to say we are kept in the dark, purposefully.
We need to revamp our entire method of buying medications. I do not worry about greedy businessmen. Greed pushes them to innovate and produce new and better products while the family asks, where’s dad?
“It’s the [private property], stupid!”
– James Carville
__________________
THE DOMINION ONE CLAIMS AND EXERCISES!
The 5th Amendment right to private property prevails over and trumps the 1st Amendment freedom of speech.
Shareholders enjoy the freedom to sell their position and buy the competition.
Consumers may boycott or purchase another product.
Individuals may accept or reject employment.
____________________________________________________
“[Private property is] that dominion which one man claims and exercises over the external things of the world, in exclusion of every other individual.”
– James Madison
Old dominion. Wasn’t that a Spanish Corp that ran the voting machines last time?
Ah, selective information is a dangerous thing, isn’t it???
I would suggest that the rebound at Disney is due to the sudden resignation of Chapek and the requested RETURN of Bob Iger as CEO and the many, many changes he brought with him. Look it up, especially the YTY and QTQ stock values over this period.
“Although Iger did not say what he plans to do specifically, he did comment on the dissolution of the Reedy Creek Improvement District, saying, “I had no idea what its ramifications are in terms of the business itself.” He continued, ‘The state of Florida has been very important to us for a long time, and we have been very important to the state of Florida.’”
https://www.disneyfoodblog.com/2022/11/30/every-major-change-since-bob-iger-returned-as-disneys-ceo/
As I understand it (which is very little), Disney is like a vassal state almost unto itself down in Desantoes’ hurricane country. Like medieval Italy back in the dark ages. .. DeSantos signed off on rectal feeding at Git-Mo, he can do the same for Disney.
*rebound? Money is not everything. .. Disney hasn’t been right since bugs bunny and foghorn leghorn.
(responding to Anonymous at 2:35)
“I believe this, that fairy tales are true.” – Italo Calvino
Joseph Campbell believed that Western society suffers from a chronic myth deficiency. Myths, legends, fairy tales, those are the marrow of the bones of society. Fairy tales, in their heart, are hero’s journeys – stories of overcoming adversity. They are medieval passion plays in written form. The characters in fairy tales are real. Wicked stepmothers exist (I had one). Love, hate, jealousy, heroism, redemption – all these are the stuff of which fairy tales are made. They are also very real.
In today’s society, the wokies play the part of the wicked stepmother, because they want to remove all vestiges of meaning and beauty from our lives, leaving us with Netflix, McDonalds, and the “Biden” administration. America is the Sleeping Beauty, bloody AND bowed but not dead, conceived in liberty and beauty and awaiting the right moment to emerge from our golden casket and resume our role as leader of the world.
Those who do not like this nonsense must stop giving their money to it. Don’t watch Disney films, don’t go to Disney, don’t buy Disney themed toys. Disney is not Snow White anyway. Snow White predates Disney by hundreds of years. Buy books for your children.
Jonathan: In AG Letitia James’s lawsuit against the DJT organization before Judge Engoron, Don Jr. is scheduled to testify today, followed by Eric tomorrow and then DJT. Will DJT actually testify? I doubt it because he is a coward. If DJT doesn’t testify Judge Emgoron can draw adverse inferences about the head of the family who refuses to testify.
Despite two fines, DJT was on Truth Social with a meltdown over forcing his kids to testify. He accused Michael Cohen, who testified last week, of being a “sleazebag lawyer”. DJT said AG James is a “racist”. DJT also directed his ire at Judge Engoron: “Leave my children alone, Engoron. You are a disgrace to the legal profession!…Engoron is crazy, totally unhinged, and dangerous–our Judicial System has totally gone to HELL”. The only person DJT did not attack was Judge Engoron’s clerk. Probably only because the second $20,000 fine had its affect.
No other US citizen who finds himself a defendant would be permitted to attack and threaten judges, prosecutors or witnesses like DJT engages in almost every day. They would be facing a short term in jail. Engoron won’t take that bait. The only punishment that would really hurt DJT might be home confinement with orders to stay off the golf course and Truth social. Now that would be the appropriate punishment for the guy who spends most of his time on Truth Social–when he is not playing golf!
Yeah, dems never get special treatment. God you’re an idiot.
What are you talking about? Why can’t any American citizen “attack” (i.e., criticize) a judge, an AG or Michael Cohen (who is a sleazebag lawyer).
You are correct but “sleazebag lawyer” is redundant.
S-h-h-h-h. Urley-tay is an awyer-lay.
Ypu do not seem to understand – you are only permitted to attack – verbally or with actual violence those on the right.
This preposterous and aberrant legal abomination propagated by the partial, biased, extremist AG is political, ideological, racist and absolutely not juridical adjudication.
The completed act of charging and putting Donald Trump on the docket must have been utterly abrogated by the Supreme Court under its power of Judicial Review.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
The Power of Judicial Review https://www.justia.com/constitutional-law/the-us-supreme-court-and-judicial-review/
The Supreme Court can strike down any law or other action by the legislative or executive branch that violates the Constitution. This power of judicial review applies to federal, state, and local legislative and executive actions. The Constitution does not specifically provide for the power of judicial review. It arises instead from an 1803 decision known as Marbury v. Madison.
– Justia
How dumb is this post? Since when do public officials (or sleazebag lawyers) get immunity from criticism?
Dennis – When did Trump “threaten” the judge? Like most leftists, you attempt to conflate harsh, and often fair comments, with violence.
Are you saying that Micheal Cohen is not a sleazebag lawyer ?
And yes Engoron is nuts – even the ACLU has noted the gag orders are unconstitutional.
You also fixate on who is testifying.
While I do not mostly care – I can not see any basis for the testimony James is after. Her claim is the DJT overvalued his properties.
Aside from the FACT that would not be a crime if True and James claims regarding the property values is ludicrously stupid.
There is the separate matter that Eric and DJTjr have nothing to contribute.
Past that the supreme court more than 70 years ago ruled that judges can not prevent free speech that attacks the court the government or its employees.
I am persoally surprised Trump did not attack the clerks again – $20K is dirt cheap campaign advertising.
Outside of lawyers that are clueless regarding the law such as yourself – most people are bothered by Judges telling others what they can and can not say.
Actually yes, other US citizens disparage courts, judges, prosecutors and court staff all the time.
I would further note that NOWHERE in the constitution does it say that you lose your right to free speech because someone has dragged you into court.
This is a decided issue – and you are WRONG. In my community there is a citizen journalist who has made it his purpose in life to criticise the local courts,
Whether you like it or not – it is perfectly legitimate to call courts corrupt and incompent.
It is also legitimate to “threaten” them – as long as the threats are not immediate and credible threats of violence.
Do you have an example of Trump actually “threatening” any of these people with Violence ?
Trump has repeatedly “threatened” to ring the full force of the law down on those under his jurisdiction when he is elected.
It is both legal to thraten that and legal to do that.
AG James did exactly that to get elected. And she is following through on it.
Willis did the same.
Aparently in Dennis world – only lefties can make threats.
“Letitia James’s lawsuit against the DJT organization . . .”
Communists deserve more respect than James and her ilk. They declare openly: Your property belongs to the government. We’re confiscating it. These dishonest thieves confiscate under the color of the “law.”
Thanks, Dennis. Trump’s children MUST testify because DJT claimed that he handed over the running of Trump Companies to them–whether that’s true or not is irrelevant. It’s what he claimed, so they are answerable to testify about the misrepresentations and fraud found by Judge Engoron. And, I agree: regular people and lawyers have been jailed for contempt over far less-egregious things than DJT’s childish rants.
Desantis and Florida passed the Parental Rights and Stop Woke Law REFLECTING THE WISHES AND SUPPORT OF A LARGE MAJORITY OF BOTH CONSTITUENTS AND (BIPARTISAN) NATION AT LARGE.
That is what our elected officials are elected to do.
https://floridianpress.com › 2022 › 04 › new-poll-floridians-overwhelmingly-support-parental-rights-sp
https://americasnewmajorityproject.com/majorities-of-all-parties-support-florida-parental-rights-law/
lin.
That poll is misleading for one particular reason. They are not polling on the entirety of the bill. Only on one particular section that is actually reasonable to anyone.
“Classroom instruction by school personnel or third parties on sexual orientation or gender identity may not occur in Kindergarten through third grade or in a manner that is not age appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students in accordance with state standards.”
It’s the rest of the law that when fully explained changes the favorable outlook considerably in opposition.
Here’s commentary from your buddies at CNN:
https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2022/04/21/florida-governor-ron-desantis-rising-poll-numbers-ebof-enten-vpx.cnn
“That is what our elected officials are elected to do.”
It is as simple as that. The left believes elected officials are supposed to enslave the people for their benefit. They love telling others what to do.
Disney is not a non-profit institution. It gouges money from the people, which is their right, but the state should not be involved in helping them do so to the disadvantage of other theme parks that are competing.
The reason Reedy Creek passed permitting Disney to become almost an actual Kingdom was its quality benefit for the citizens of Florida. That quality benefit long since disappeared, and families in Florida do not believe they should continue this unique set of laws protecting one company while not similarly protecting the competing ones.
Disney’s special status protected them financially, but now that Disney is trying to impose California morality on Florida’s children and parents, such unique laws should end.
Nothing in the law states that its special status elevating one company over another after granted should exist forever. Disney wokeness overstayed its welcome, and it is refreshing that its status and rights reverted so that all companies can compete on a level platform.
Woke Disney deserves to go out of business. This is NOT the Disney that Walt created. Walt would be disgusted over the America-hating, God-hating, freedom-hating hate factory that the company bearing his name has become.
Jonathan: You are correct. 1st Amendment rights end at the entrance to the workplace. Another example of some of the restrictions on “free speech”–something that has been lost on some of your loyal followers on this blog.
The fight between Fl GOP Gov. Ron DeSantis and Disney continues after the theme park publicly opposed the governor’s “Don’t Say Gay” law. Claims and counter claims in federal and state courts. It’s all part of DeSantis’s “anti-Woke” agenda in Fl that he hopes will propel him to the GOP presidential nomination next year. The polls show that outside FL, DeSantis is getting little traction. 82% of Dems and 63% of GOP voters do not support the Governor’s candidacy–primarily because of DeSantis’s attempt to punish a company for its political stances.
And DeSantis is finding it hard to find money for his campaign over his fight with Disney. Maga-donors have deserted him. Citadel CEO and billionaire GOP donor Ken Griffin, who backed DeSantis in 2022, has refused to back DeSantis this time around. Griffin said: “”The ongoing battle with Disney, I think, is pointless. It doesn’t reflect well on the ethos of Florida”.
You have frequently taken the position that the answer to “bad speech is more speech”. So it is counter intuitive you would want to back DeSantis in his attacks on the “free speech” rights of Disney and its economic future in Fl. But, then, the 1st Amendment has always taken a back seat when it comes to your political agenda.
Please show the exact text of the law that reads “Don’t Say Gay”. You are a lying idiot.
Advocating for violence against children and their parents is not something demoncrats or their now woke and twisted corporate takeover companies like disney should be doing.
This is all worse violence than the be peaceful statements Trump made on J6.
If it’s not a violent death for babies it’s violent castration of children you demoncrats advocate for and violate the 1st amendment with.
Investors are taking their checkbooks elsewhere. The problem with the woke at Disney believe that everyone in America thinks like they think. The old saying is that money talks and BS walks. Some old adages really tell it like it is.
Capitalism built Disney. Consequently all the Anti-Capitalist should boycott Disney. Instead they hold a business built because of Capitalism on a pedestal. I know, just like what Obama said, You didn’t build that.
Freedom and free enterprise built Disney. In America, the system is freedom and free enterprise, not capitalism. Capitalism is the freedom and free enterprise to manipulate valuable assets, including money. Capital is comprised of assets valued, ultimately, in money. Capitalism is moneyism. When you refer to economic activity in America as capitalism, you ignore the critical American essence: Freedom. Without freedom and free enterprise, capitalism is monetary dictatorship. Xi Jinping rules by harsh dictatorship while tolerating “capitalism.” Xi has no intention of disturbing the enslaved geese that are laying the golden eggs in China, despite the complete dearth of true freedom and free enterprise they suffer. The highest form of capitalism is that of freedom and free enterprise, as was the case in America in 1789 under the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Sadly, American freedom persisted only until 1860, when the incremental implementation of the principles of communism was commenced by Lincoln (emphasis on his fellow traveler, Karl Marx) and perpetuated by his successors, communists (liberals, progressives, socialists, democrats, RINOs, AINOs) et al.
Has anyone noticed all the patriotic commercials that Bud Lite is putting out. Buds true position could be proven by firing the woke employees who put out the Delany commercial. Short of that I ain’t buying it or its beer. Go woke go broke.
I wonder if Bud Light actually heard the customer base. They certainly have been loud enough.
Those “patriotic commercials” constitute a red herring. Bud Lite wants potential customers to look here not there. It was never about Dylan Mulvaney; it was always about the owners and management at Bud Lite. A SLAP in the face. They need to get up on Olde Paint and get the —- where they ain’t. Unforgivable!
Apart from anti-capitalism, because idjit young woke people fail to see that is what empowered them to post on their phone in the first place (which likely their parents pay for), and being unable to make the distinction between free market vs. cronyism, and basically have no ability to critically think whatsoever – this is only going to continue. i would laugh my little behind off if Disney went bankrupt, as they just seem to not want to relent in spite of their stock tanking and their movies being watched perhaps only when they are an option on airplanes. I hope that many more of these companies that saw fit to put indoctrinated, artistically bereft morons in charge of their companies face the same consequences. Too rich to fail is not a thing even if it takes a little while, see Apple Computer circa the early to mid-90s for evidence. They very nearly went bankrupt after being on top of the world, and in spite of our modern foibles, not that much has changed in the market sense except for the medium through which it is channeled, and that is something that the idiots in question don’t seem to understand. We are largely also talking about the recipients of generational wealth, again, who have never built anything themselves in their entire lives, all the way from the high chair. Let it all burn that’s fine with me. Sensible people will rebuild from the ashes these idiot brats leave behind.
Question: does Disney’s continuation down a money-losing path of wokeness present an example of stakeholder capitalism?
Money has no conscience. A good money manager also has no conscience; their only concern is a positive outcome monetarily. Once conscience enters into monetary matters your left with confusion (I don’t like what was said, BUT?). Disney is a great example of this dilemma; they seem to be nibbling their toe’s all while drowning in the EPCOT Future World Pond.
I do not see this as much about free speech as not learning from other’s mishaps. Not getting into the bigger argument of right and wrong, Disney is making a classic mistake. They obviously did not learn the lessons from other corporations when you insult your customers. They are experiencing losses over movies that customers do not want to watch due to messaging.
Yet how do they respond? By ignoring their customers, who then stay away and cost the company more money. Does Disney and their proxies truly think this is a smart strategy?
Maybe they should ask Bud Light….
“They obviously did not learn the lessons from other corporations when you insult your customers. ”
They didn’t insult their customers. Not even a majority of them. The state didn’t like being criticized by Disney for passing a law. The state or more specifically the governor felt offended by the criticism and chose to punish Disney and smeared its reputation by spreading falsehoods about its intentions. It’s a small group of people that are offended by the idea that Disney caters to a diverse audience.
Anon – Quiet Man isn’t talking about the dispute with the governor, but the wokeness alienating customers and causing Disney’s products to bomb.
The dispute with the governor is directly related. The governor’s criticism of Disney’s “woke” content is piling on on behalf of a minority of Disney’s customers. Because Disney’s customers also include the LGBTQ community and they are also a good number of their employees.
The governor illegally retaliated against Disney’s criticism of the law and used the issue for political gain. Obviously the governor is not gaining any new ground due to this issue. In fact it’s proving to be an anchor around his campaign.
Ultimately Disney will prevail in court long after DeSantis drops out of the running.
The dispute with the governor is directly related.
No, you’re desperately trying to pull it in. If you read what Quiet Man said, it has nothing, zero, nada, zilch, to do with the dispute with the guv.
That is the Bud Lie you drank talking. Drink too much and you become intoxicating. Next thing you will start to think you have intelligence.
How big do you think the LGBTQ community is?
In any even t, the laws in question had no direct effect on Disney’s operations. They should have said nothing.
Disney had absolutely zero reason to speak out against the law.
Quiet Man: Agree, please see my comment from earlier this morning, 11:12. Kids come to Disneyland for fun, not indoctrination with “woke” ideology, themes, and “revised” classic characters. lin
Lin – where’ve you been? Glad to see you back. BTW, if you want to leave a screen name, just click the envelope button and type in the usual information.
Yours,
Uncle Henry
Hi there Not-so-old-thinker. Thank You. it worked.
The Quiet Man
The interesting thing about the matter is that among its target the “woke” represent less than 3% IN THE WORLD and the majority of those awake do not have to spend even 3 days in the parks! It’s here and in France, Asian culture doesn’t come into that game, so they’re basically working for California and Paris. As for films, Netflix has also done poorly with those Victorian remakes in (black/white). The last thing was that I went to see Aladdin in Madrid at the theater, and I came out stupefied, the Genie had a Cuban voice and the musical remakes had a Latin rhythm and I Dominican speaks to you!
Let corporations and individuals say what they want. It is the basis for our 1rst amendment. What is not guaranteed is public response. If the speech of a corporation/individual creates results that deter potential customers from utilizing that corporation or individual – no harm done to our constitution and the unpleasant results should be accepted by those making the speech as the potential outcome of their speech. Our constitution does not guarantee that everyone has to like the content of free speech, just that it cannot be censured. Why is that so difficult for many to comprehend?
While reminiscing this morning I thought of my father who made me learn about Newton after I was detained by the local police for being an up and coming delinquent, I was 10 at the time. His instruction was to research and tell him what I learned but not before I had exhausted my research. Below is a guide that everybody (this includes companies) should heed when making postulations?
Isaac Newton: “and to every action there is always an equal and opposite or contrary, action” …
Albert Einstein: “with every action there’s an equal opposite reaction. With every problem, there’s a solution: just a matter of taking action.”
Ralph Waldo Emerson: “Cause and effect, means and ends, seed and fruit, cannot be severed; for the effect already blooms in the cause, the end preexists in the means, the fruit in the seed.”
A thought on Disney, you can train a mouse to learn the maze path, or to ring a bell for food, but it seems you can’t train a great business administrator from a fool.
George W,
Very insightful.
Seems to me, the fools at Disney and other companies think themselves as in a fight and despite their losses, they double or triple down thinking they are winning the fight while the box office/bottom line says differently aka reality.
I think the shareholders are the only ones with a legit complaint.
One would think at some point they would learn to avoid stepping on rakes.
Until then, stand back and enjoy the show.
What one of my longtime Usenet allies wrote equally applies to Disney.
https://forum.pafoa.org/showthread.php?t=380110&p=4515750#post4515750
– Christopher Charles Morton, dba Deanimator
The natural laws of economics via the free market system will be the final judge as to whether a business entity will remain on terra firma or no longer remain.