Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse

The New Coffee Room

  1. TNCR
  2. General Discussion
  3. DeSantis blocks funds because sports team tweeted something he doesn’t like

DeSantis blocks funds because sports team tweeted something he doesn’t like

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved General Discussion
40 Posts 9 Posters 253 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • JollyJ Offline
    JollyJ Offline
    Jolly
    wrote on last edited by
    #7

    Why not?

    “Cry havoc and let slip the DOGE of war!”

    Those who cheered as J-6 American prisoners were locked in solitary for 18 months without trial, now suddenly fight tooth and nail for foreign terrorists’ "due process". — Buck Sexton

    1 Reply Last reply
    • jon-nycJ Online
      jon-nycJ Online
      jon-nyc
      wrote on last edited by jon-nyc
      #8

      It’s still punishing a company for the content of their speech.

      "You never know what worse luck your bad luck has saved you from."
      -Cormac McCarthy

      Catseye3C 1 Reply Last reply
      • jon-nycJ jon-nyc

        It’s still punishing a company for the content of their speech.

        Catseye3C Offline
        Catseye3C Offline
        Catseye3
        wrote on last edited by
        #9

        @jon-nyc Thank you. I'd decided I didn't know enough to speak up, but my initial reaction was that it looked like DeSantis was using the power of the purse to punish a group for expressing an opinion he didn't like.

        Success is measured by your discipline and inner peace. – Mike Ditka

        1 Reply Last reply
        • LuFins DadL Offline
          LuFins DadL Offline
          LuFins Dad
          wrote on last edited by
          #10

          Yeah, it’s a step too far, but after seeing the companies that boycotted Georgia over a voter rights bill that was actually pretty tame and less restrictive than many other states, after seeing the corporate blowback against North Carolina for saying guys shouldn’t be peeing in the ladies restroom, and more… Yeah, I think it’s time for a little pushback against the corporate activism…

          The Brad

          AxtremusA 1 Reply Last reply
          • jon-nycJ Online
            jon-nycJ Online
            jon-nyc
            wrote on last edited by
            #11

            First amendment doesn’t compel private parties not to punish speech. But I agree with you it is foul. I have long bemoaned the loss of political DMZ.

            "You never know what worse luck your bad luck has saved you from."
            -Cormac McCarthy

            1 Reply Last reply
            • LuFins DadL LuFins Dad

              Yeah, it’s a step too far, but after seeing the companies that boycotted Georgia over a voter rights bill that was actually pretty tame and less restrictive than many other states, after seeing the corporate blowback against North Carolina for saying guys shouldn’t be peeing in the ladies restroom, and more… Yeah, I think it’s time for a little pushback against the corporate activism…

              AxtremusA Away
              AxtremusA Away
              Axtremus
              wrote on last edited by
              #12

              @LuFins-Dad said in DeSantis blocks funds because sports team tweeted something he doesn’t like:

              ... I think it’s time for a little pushback against the corporate activism…

              No, what you term "corporate activism" here is First Amendment protected speech. Individuals and private entities can "push back" if they want, but the state cannot. It is unconstitutional for the state to punish a private entity for the content of its speech.

              LarryL 1 Reply Last reply
              • HoraceH Offline
                HoraceH Offline
                Horace
                wrote on last edited by
                #13

                Even if our liberal friends on TNCR are unable to distinguish arresting people for exercising free speech, from denying a corporation discretionary public funds, I suspect the courts will be able to.

                Education is extremely important.

                1 Reply Last reply
                • jon-nycJ Online
                  jon-nycJ Online
                  jon-nyc
                  wrote on last edited by jon-nyc
                  #14

                  The punishment is the key fact. Doesn’t matter if the person was not by rights entitled to the thing that was taken away (eg promotion, contract). And yes there’s precedent.

                  Not to say it's a slam dunk - today's court is quite different from previous ones. Although I would imagine they fancy themselves strong on first amendment protections as well as suspicious of government overreach, they may turn out to be simple partisans behind all the prose and pageantry.

                  "You never know what worse luck your bad luck has saved you from."
                  -Cormac McCarthy

                  HoraceH 1 Reply Last reply
                  • jon-nycJ Online
                    jon-nycJ Online
                    jon-nyc
                    wrote on last edited by jon-nyc
                    #15

                    I’m just curious, are there any conservatives here that are against this ? And the Disney thing?

                    For the purposes of my question, answers like “I would normally be against it, but the libs have gone too far, so…” don’t count as being against it.

                    "You never know what worse luck your bad luck has saved you from."
                    -Cormac McCarthy

                    HoraceH 1 Reply Last reply
                    • MikM Offline
                      MikM Offline
                      Mik
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #16

                      Has DeSantis supported public monies for pro sports in the past? It seems to me the media is drawing a connection that may or may not be true.

                      “I am fond of pigs. Dogs look up to us. Cats look down on us. Pigs treat us as equals.” ~Winston S. Churchill

                      Catseye3C 1 Reply Last reply
                      • jon-nycJ Online
                        jon-nycJ Online
                        jon-nyc
                        wrote on last edited by jon-nyc
                        #17

                        You really say that with a straight face?

                        Or do you really mean something like “can anyone actually prove that this was retaliatory?”

                        "You never know what worse luck your bad luck has saved you from."
                        -Cormac McCarthy

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        • MikM Offline
                          MikM Offline
                          Mik
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #18

                          Sure. There's nothing to back up the assertion outside coincidence. If you have something more than your assumption, let's hear it.

                          “I am fond of pigs. Dogs look up to us. Cats look down on us. Pigs treat us as equals.” ~Winston S. Churchill

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          • jon-nycJ jon-nyc

                            The punishment is the key fact. Doesn’t matter if the person was not by rights entitled to the thing that was taken away (eg promotion, contract). And yes there’s precedent.

                            Not to say it's a slam dunk - today's court is quite different from previous ones. Although I would imagine they fancy themselves strong on first amendment protections as well as suspicious of government overreach, they may turn out to be simple partisans behind all the prose and pageantry.

                            HoraceH Offline
                            HoraceH Offline
                            Horace
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #19

                            @jon-nyc said in DeSantis blocks funds because sports team tweeted something he doesn’t like:

                            The punishment is the key fact. Doesn’t matter if the person was not by rights entitled to the thing that was taken away (eg promotion, contract). And yes there’s precedent.

                            Not to say it's a slam dunk - today's court is quite different from previous ones. Although I would imagine they fancy themselves strong on first amendment protections as well as suspicious of government overreach, they may turn out to be simple partisans behind all the prose and pageantry.

                            So it's clearly unconstitutional, open and shut because precedent, but the supreme court might disagree because they're not as objective as you. Check.

                            Please do feel free to list this precedent you think exists.

                            Education is extremely important.

                            jon-nycJ 1 Reply Last reply
                            • jon-nycJ jon-nyc

                              I’m just curious, are there any conservatives here that are against this ? And the Disney thing?

                              For the purposes of my question, answers like “I would normally be against it, but the libs have gone too far, so…” don’t count as being against it.

                              HoraceH Offline
                              HoraceH Offline
                              Horace
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #20

                              @jon-nyc said in DeSantis blocks funds because sports team tweeted something he doesn’t like:

                              I’m just curious, are there any conservatives here that are against this ? And the Disney thing?

                              I am against the analogies you conjure in your attempts to convince people that this is a bad thing, but the quality of those analogies is suspect. I'm not against, in principle, an elected politician exerting the will of the people who voted for him, in allocating discretionary public funds. I might not like the decisions sometimes, but such is life. If I dig into it deep enough, the first thing I look sideways at is discretionary public funds being funneled to private corporations. But before this stuff with Disney and the Rays, if you'd asked me, "Horace, do you suppose political alignment, or misalignment, has something to do with whether a private corporation would be given public funds?", I'd have said "Yes, I suppose it would." I would not have said that with a shocked face.

                              Education is extremely important.

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              • MikM Mik

                                Has DeSantis supported public monies for pro sports in the past? It seems to me the media is drawing a connection that may or may not be true.

                                Catseye3C Offline
                                Catseye3C Offline
                                Catseye3
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #21

                                @Mik said in DeSantis blocks funds because sports team tweeted something he doesn’t like:

                                It seems to me the media is drawing a connection that may or may not be true.

                                Yeah, I had the impression that this article might well have been written by a journalist biased against Disantis. Not something I'd want to form an opinion by.

                                I emphasize might. I really don't know. But Florida, my god, is nothing if not made separate by its conformation and its issues.

                                Success is measured by your discipline and inner peace. – Mike Ditka

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                • JollyJ Offline
                                  JollyJ Offline
                                  Jolly
                                  wrote on last edited by
                                  #22

                                  If Florida has a line item veto like Louisiana does, the governor will often single things out he does not like for whatever reason - political or fiscal.

                                  Down here, the veto can be overridden by a 2/3's vote of the Senate.

                                  “Cry havoc and let slip the DOGE of war!”

                                  Those who cheered as J-6 American prisoners were locked in solitary for 18 months without trial, now suddenly fight tooth and nail for foreign terrorists’ "due process". — Buck Sexton

                                  1 Reply Last reply
                                  • jon-nycJ jon-nyc

                                    No idea but it wouldn’t change the constitutionality of it.

                                    CopperC Offline
                                    CopperC Offline
                                    Copper
                                    wrote on last edited by
                                    #23

                                    @jon-nyc said in DeSantis blocks funds because sports team tweeted something he doesn’t like:

                                    No idea but it wouldn’t change the constitutionality of it.

                                    Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

                                    Does "Congress" include the Governor of Florida?

                                    jon-nycJ 1 Reply Last reply
                                    • AxtremusA Axtremus

                                      @LuFins-Dad said in DeSantis blocks funds because sports team tweeted something he doesn’t like:

                                      ... I think it’s time for a little pushback against the corporate activism…

                                      No, what you term "corporate activism" here is First Amendment protected speech. Individuals and private entities can "push back" if they want, but the state cannot. It is unconstitutional for the state to punish a private entity for the content of its speech.

                                      LarryL Offline
                                      LarryL Offline
                                      Larry
                                      wrote on last edited by
                                      #24

                                      @Axtremus said in DeSantis blocks funds because sports team tweeted something he doesn’t like:

                                      @LuFins-Dad said in DeSantis blocks funds because sports team tweeted something he doesn’t like:

                                      ... I think it’s time for a little pushback against the corporate activism…

                                      No, what you term "corporate activism" here is First Amendment protected speech. Individuals and private entities can "push back" if they want, but the state cannot. It is unconstitutional for the state to punish a private entity for the content of its speech.

                                      His logic is a prime example of leftwing mental illness. Desantis made it clear they had a right to say whatever they wanted to say. Then he made it equally clear that his action was NOT about what they said, but was entirely about the use of taxpayer money to build sports arenas. The ONLY - THE ONLY- one to link this to free speech was CNN. And never mind the proven fact that CNN is an absolute joke, leftists/democrats ( I don't list liberals any more because there are no liberals any more) believe whatever swill these failed leftwing propaganda machines say.

                                      "Ooooh, the first amendment, the first amendment!!!" they cry, totally ignoring the fact that they have already fucked over the first half of the first amendment, and now want to fuck over the second half of it. "Congress shall make no law regarding an establishment of religion, or the free excercise thereof" couldnt be more clear - but by the time the Left/democrats got done fucking it over now we refer to this as "the separation of church and state" and use that as an excuse to make laws regarding an establishment of religion and the free excercise of religion. Never mind that not only does the Constitution say ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about the separation of church and state, thats how theyve chosen to basterdize the first amendment, and now theyre attempting to use the same crippled logic to bastardize the first amendment's statement about free speech.

                                      And they have the gall to act as though conservatives are the ones who don't get it.

                                      Leftism and the democrat ideology are a mental illness, and a national threat. I for one won't sit quietly while they continue to fuck up our country.

                                      1 Reply Last reply
                                      • CopperC Copper

                                        @jon-nyc said in DeSantis blocks funds because sports team tweeted something he doesn’t like:

                                        No idea but it wouldn’t change the constitutionality of it.

                                        Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

                                        Does "Congress" include the Governor of Florida?

                                        jon-nycJ Online
                                        jon-nycJ Online
                                        jon-nyc
                                        wrote on last edited by
                                        #25

                                        @Copper said in DeSantis blocks funds because sports team tweeted something he doesn’t like:

                                        @jon-nyc said in DeSantis blocks funds because sports team tweeted something he doesn’t like:

                                        No idea but it wouldn’t change the constitutionality of it.

                                        Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

                                        Does "Congress" include the Governor of Florida?

                                        https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/incorporation_doctrine

                                        "You never know what worse luck your bad luck has saved you from."
                                        -Cormac McCarthy

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        • HoraceH Horace

                                          @jon-nyc said in DeSantis blocks funds because sports team tweeted something he doesn’t like:

                                          The punishment is the key fact. Doesn’t matter if the person was not by rights entitled to the thing that was taken away (eg promotion, contract). And yes there’s precedent.

                                          Not to say it's a slam dunk - today's court is quite different from previous ones. Although I would imagine they fancy themselves strong on first amendment protections as well as suspicious of government overreach, they may turn out to be simple partisans behind all the prose and pageantry.

                                          So it's clearly unconstitutional, open and shut because precedent, but the supreme court might disagree because they're not as objective as you. Check.

                                          Please do feel free to list this precedent you think exists.

                                          jon-nycJ Online
                                          jon-nycJ Online
                                          jon-nyc
                                          wrote on last edited by
                                          #26

                                          @Horace said in DeSantis blocks funds because sports team tweeted something he doesn’t like:

                                          @jon-nyc said in DeSantis blocks funds because sports team tweeted something he doesn’t like:

                                          The punishment is the key fact. Doesn’t matter if the person was not by rights entitled to the thing that was taken away (eg promotion, contract). And yes there’s precedent.

                                          Not to say it's a slam dunk - today's court is quite different from previous ones. Although I would imagine they fancy themselves strong on first amendment protections as well as suspicious of government overreach, they may turn out to be simple partisans behind all the prose and pageantry.

                                          So it's clearly unconstitutional, open and shut because precedent, but the supreme court might disagree because they're not as objective as you. Check.

                                          Please do feel free to list this precedent you think exists.

                                          This has nothing to do with the objectivity you so admire in me. It’s merely in recognition that the current court is different materially than the courts in the 4 preceding decades. Right now, the Mississippi law banning abortion at 6 weeks is clearly unconstitutional. In 4 weeks it won’t be. That’s just a fact.

                                          I don’t feel like spending the 10m it would take to find the precedents. One I remember involves the great city of Chicago. Believe it or not they’ve tried to punish companies that didn’t back the right guy.

                                          "You never know what worse luck your bad luck has saved you from."
                                          -Cormac McCarthy

                                          LuFins DadL LarryL HoraceH 3 Replies Last reply
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Don't have an account? Register

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Recent
                                          • Tags
                                          • Popular
                                          • Users
                                          • Groups