NYT: Automakers Want Trump to Keep Biden EV Mandates in Place
No Experience Necessary: Kamala HQ TikTok Team Was Nothing But Gen Zers
Girl Allegedly Sexually Assaulted by Venezuelan Illegal Living in Family's Basement
Did Pam Bondi Really Steal a St. Bernard? Journalism Has Gone to The...
MSNBC Contributor Asks If We Want Someone Who Made Terror Watch List as...
ABC News Tell You How to Join Bluesky
Will 'Journos' Ever Learn?: X is the Mainstream, Not The Atlantic and Other...
Conservatives Not Pleased With Trump's Labor Secretary Nominee
Mayor of Denver Seems to Walk Back Threat to Use Police to Prevent...
Chief Diversity Officer at the NIH Retiring at the End of the Year...
Mark Cuban Goes Full BlueAnon Accusing Elon Musk of Having Bot Army
Trump's Surgeon General Nominee Praised Facebook for Its Censorship During COVID
Biden Says He Left the Country Better Off Than 4 Years Ago (Which...
WH's 'Building a Better Future' Post With Pic of Kamala Harris Waving Goodbye...
U.N. Secretary-General Seems a Bit Concerned His 'Climate Finance' Is Drying Up

Charles C. W. Cooke says there's no reason for Gov. Ron DeSantis to 'salt the earth' after victory over Disney

As Twitchy reported a couple of weeks ago, it looked like the memo had gone out, and Christina Pushaw posted a collage of headlines all pushing back against the “groomer” label that conservatives were using against those arguing that kindergarteners should be taught about sexual orientation and gender identity.

Advertisement

We did a post on the argument over the word “groomer”: Liberals, obviously, were deeply offended by such a disgusting homophobic slur, but there were plenty of conservatives and Principled Conservatives™ who also thought the Right should back off, as the battle had already been won. David French, for one, said redefining the word was “pure malice,” and NRO fellow Nate Hochman warned conservatives against throwing the “groomer” word around because it made us sound like the crazy ones.

In late March, Florida state legislators held meetings discussing the repeal of the 1967 Reedy Creek Improvement Act, which essentially allowed the Disney theme park to act as its own government. As we learned Wednesday morning, though, the Florida Senate, on a 23-16 vote, passed legislation ending Disney’s tax privilege, self-governing power, and special exemption status.

Charles C. W. Cooke writes in National Review that the battle over the Parental Rights in Education Act has already been won, and there’s no need for DeSantis or the legislature to salt the earth.

Advertisement

Cooke writes:

… advocates of further retribution tend to switch gears and contend that Walt Disney World is not “entitled” to the setup it enjoys in Florida, that no law is guaranteed to “last forever,” and that Disney’s special status, granted before 1968, was probably due for “reconsideration” anyway. In a vacuum, these arguments are all defensible, but in context, they represent an extreme form of gaslighting. Until about a month ago, Walt Disney World’s legal status was not even a blip on the GOP’s radar. No Republicans were calling for it to be revisited, nor did they have any reason to. Yes, Disney isn’t “entitled” to its arrangement. But Disney wasn’t “entitled” to it in 2012, 2002, 1992, 1982, or 1972, either, and yet, amazingly enough, the legislature showed zero interest in rescinding it when given the opportunity on those occasions. That it’s doing so now is ugly. That it’s pretending that it’s doing so out of a concern for “good government” is grotesque.

Ugly? Grotesque? What do you think … should the DeSantis administration just take the win and move on?

Advertisement

Advertisement

The thing about the “groomer” tag is that it hurt, and the reaction from the media was proof. Cooke is getting ratio’d by both sides for calling the Parental Rights in Education Bill “sensible.” You can’t win. Well, you can’t win that way.


Related:

 

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Twitchy Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement