Republicans Taking Aim at Disney Is a Reminder That Both Parties Are Hostile to Free Speech

Republicans take aim at Disney because of their opposition to the Florida law, which critics have called the “don’t speak gay” legislation.

“For Disney to come out and put a statement and say that the bill should have never passed and that they are going to actively work to repeal it, I think one was fundamentally dishonest,  but two I think that crossed the line,” Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis said. “This state is run by the Florida people’s interests. This state is not run on corporate demands from California. They don’t run the state. They don’t control the state.

The governor told Fox News: “Disney has gotten over its skis on this.…When you are trying to impose a woke ideology on our state, we view that as a significant threat.”

Florida Lt. Governor: “We won’t back down from woke corporations.” Jeanette Nuñez said.

Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R–Tenn.) John Catsimatidis complained that “the wokeleft extremists use corporations to promote their agenda.” Blackburn’s comment to Catsimatidis, a politically active New York and Florida businessman who hosts an AM radio program, was reported by the New York Post.

Ironically, Republicans are complaining about politically-active corporations. Since the past decade or so, Democrats (or Democrat-leaning independent socialists) have voiced their disapproval about political participation by complaining about gun manufactures, oil companies, health insurance companies, and other issues.

Former President Obama attacked the Supreme Court justices in the audience during his 2010 State of the Union speech. Citizens United. “Last week the Supreme Court reversed a century of law that I believe will open the floodgates for special interests—including foreign corporations—to spend without limit in our elections,” Obama said. Obama stated, “I do not believe American elections should be funded by America’s most powerful interests. Or worse, foreign entities.”

In July 2010, Obama expanded on the point. “Because of the Supreme Court’s decision earlier this year in the Citizens United case, big corporations—even foreign-controlled ones—are now allowed to spend unlimited amounts of money on American elections,” Obama said. Imagine the influence this could give to special interests over politicians. Representatives of corporate lobbyists can tell Congress members that they must vote right if they want to face negative advertisements in their next election.

Sens. Chuck Schumer (D–N.Y.), Dick Durbin (D–Ill.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D–R.I.), and Bernie Sanders (I–Vt.) went so far as to introduce legislation to amend the First Amendment to give Congress the power to limit campaign speech.

The politician suddenly became a Republican governor. DeSantis and his allies in the Florida legislature, and the corporate lobbyists are from Disney and are defending teacher speech on sex and gender issues—well, maybe Democrats will look differently at the value of corporate speech, or the downside of restricting it.

Obama stated in 2010, “This shouldn’t be a Democratic or Republican issue.”

But it was not. The unconstitutional law that Obama was defending—and that the Supreme Court correctly struck down in Citizens United—was the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002. It was known as McCain-Feingold after the 2008 Republican presidential candidate, former Sen. John McCain (R–Ariz.Its prime champion was John McCain (R-Ariz). Former President George W. Bush signed it into law, although he had previously sworn to the Constitution, which included the First Amendment, as a Republican.

Why is it that politicians are so against corporate political speech

The only thing that can be used to limit the power of politicians in these times is the corporation. The rule of law, however, is not an obstacle. It is as simple as that. Citizens UnitedAs the evidence shows, politicians were not able to pass an anti-constitutional law. Obama denounced it with the Justices right in front of him when the Supreme Court rescinded it. Next, leading senators offered to amend the Constitution in order to gain more power.

People may differ on the merits of the Florida law. The law states that school staff or other third-party teachers may not instruct students about sexual orientation and gender identity in classrooms from kindergarten to grade 3. It also prohibits them from teaching in classes in the first through third grades in any way that isn’t appropriate or developmental for their age.

It may still serve some useful purpose by reminding liberals that banishment of corporate speech is not a way to advance liberty. The only requirement for politicians to meet voters is that they do so every two- or four years. But businesses have to earn the confidence of customers, employees, and shareholders—with widely varying opinions—on an ongoing basis. Even more perilous than “woke corporations” are the unconstrained politicians.