Desantis is a POS and needs his own thread

[Sawbonz 27,596]

3 minutes ago, Immaculate Vibes said:

Why discuss it anyway? 
 

Discussing gender identity stuff, as defined by liberals, with kids is creepy. 
 

Who talks about gender or sexuality with little kids that aren’t theirs anyway? Answer, creeps. 

Kids ask questions all the time. You are OK with a law that puts a teacher at financial and occupational risk for mentioning they have a same sex spouse.

 

I don’t see how you reconcile that with being a party of small government but hey whatever.

 

Funny  how the party that thinks things are so creepy is the party that keeps having members arrested for pedophilia and child porn. 

Edited April 21, 2022 by Sawbonz

[Johnny Sack 8,397]

8 minutes ago, TXSooner518 said:

Or at least that's what brain-dead fucking imbeciles who think math textbooks that mention African-American mathematicians are CRT or that mentioning a same-sex relationship is educating kindergarteners about sex or grooming them to be gay think. It's too bad there are millions of these brain-dead fucking imbeciles, because they are an incredible fucking anchor on our country with their gullibility, susceptibility to grift, bigotry, stupidity, and hatred all rolled up into one ball of dipshit. 

Amazing how the same yokels who always scream about FAKE NEWS are the first dumbfucks in line to believe this shit. 

I have read the text of the bill.  That shit isn't in there. It bans classroom instruction on gender identity or sexual orientation.

And it's why even half of Democrats support the law that prevents sick purple headed degenerates from talking about sexual orientation and gender identity with kids that aren't theirs.

[Johnny Sack 8,397]

3 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

Kids ask questions all the time. You are OK with a law that puts a teacher at financial and occupational risk for mentioning they have a same sex spouse.

 

I don’t see how you reconcile that with being a party of small government but hey whatever.

 

Funny  how the party that thinks things are so creepy is the party that keeps having members arrested for pedophilia and child porn. 

It does not do that.  I prevents classroom instruction.  Not mentioning you have a spouse.  And it does not target same sex.  It applies equally to any sexual orientation,

[Immaculate Vibes 114]

1 minute ago, Sawbonz said:

Kids ask questions all the time. You are OK with a law that puts a teacher at financial and occupational risk for mentioning they have a same sex spouse. I don’t see how you reconcile that with being a party of small government but hey whatever.

 

I don’t see how you reconcile that with being a party of small government but hey whatever.

 

Funny  how the party that thinks things are so creepy is the party that keeps having members arrested for pedophilia and child porn. 

Again, if you have kids you know how very easily you can divert conversations you don’t want to have. Teachers obviously can redirect kids or else they wouldn’t be able to get anything done. Doesn’t have to be touched. 
 

As for being for small govt, I don’t think having a say in certain aspects of your kids’ education, which you pay for, contradicts that. 
 

 

[Longhorn_Fan68 33,900]

4 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

Funny  how the party that thinks things are so creepy is the party that keeps having members arrested for pedophilia and child porn. 

yup. also funny that laws like this are basically policing their own party. dipshits

[TXSooner518 2,438]

Just now, Johnny Sack said:

I have read the text of the bill.  That shit isn't in there. It bans classroom instruction on gender identity or sexual orientation.

And it's why even half of Democrats support the law that prevents sick purple headed degenerates from talking about sexual orientation and gender identity with kids that aren't theirs.

So if during class, a student asks the teacher why Sally has two mommies, and the teacher says "sometimes women marry each other and they can have kids", that won't be framed as "classroom instruction on sexual orientation"?  Because DeSantis has literally explicitly said telling a kindergartener "you can be whatever you want to be" violates this bill. The author of the bill says a word problem that mentions "two mommies" violates the bill. The fucking preamble of the bill itself says the objective is to "prohibit classroom discussion" of these topics. So uh yeah, it is in there, Johnny. But keep on your with your boogeymean of "sick purple headed degenerates" OOOOOO HAIR COLOR SO FUCKING SCAWY.  

Also you now say at the end of your post that they can't "talk about sexual orientation" so it seems you agree that shit is in fact in there.

[Pig Bellmont 8,739]

4 minutes ago, Immaculate Vibes said:

Why discuss it anyway? 
 

Discussing gender identity stuff, as defined by liberals, with kids is creepy. 
 

Who talks about gender or sexuality at all with little kids that aren’t theirs anyway? Answer, creeps. 

Kindergartners do family tree projects in my kids’ schools and all kids are asked to bring in pics of their families. Two of the kids in her class come from families with two moms. At what point does talking about family cross the line? Well the law is so vague (on purpose) where that project in Florida could cause some parent to sue the kindergarten teacher. GTFO with your bad faith troll job

 

Separately it’s interesting to see GOP in FL go after their own state’s largest employer. You really want to shut off corporate campaign donations, and run off job creation? It’s like they forgot what really runs politics: corporate money. Good luck making enemies with entities that can spend limitless funds on your opponents 

[TXSooner518 2,438]

4 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

It does not do that.  I prevents classroom instruction.  Not mentioning you have a spouse.  And it does not target same sex.  It applies equally to any sexual orientation,

Also bullshit that it doesn't target same-sex. If a book is in the curriculum and features heterosexual married partners, no problem. Homosexual married partners, ope, now we are "teaching sexual orientation"!!!! 

[Johnny Sack 8,397]

2 minutes ago, TXSooner518 said:

So if during class, a student asks the teacher why Sally has two mommies, and the teacher says "sometimes women marry each other and they can have kids", that won't be framed as "classroom instruction on sexual orientation"?  Because DeSantis has literally explicitly said telling a kindergartener "you can be whatever you want to be" violates this bill. The author of the bill says a word problem that mentions "two mommies" violates the bill. The fucking preamble of the bill itself says the objective is to "prohibit classroom discussion" of these topics. So uh yeah, it is in there, Johnny. But keep on your with your boogeymean of "sick purple headed degenerates" OOOOOO HAIR COLOR SO FUCKING SCAWY.  

Also you now say at the end of your post that they can't "talk about sexual orientation" so it seems you agree that shit is in fact in there.

You cannot have classroom instruction on sexual orientation, K to 3.  Whether it is heterosexual or homosexual. The words gay, lesbian, homosexual are not in the bill.

There is zero reason for a teacher to be giving classroom instruction on sexual orientation or gender identity with kindergarten children.  Most sane people agree with that.

[Johnny Sack 8,397]

3 minutes ago, Pig Bellmont said:

Kindergartners do family tree projects in my kids’ schools and all kids are asked to bring in pics of their families. Two of the kids in her class come from families with two moms. At what point does talking about family cross the line? Well the law is so vague (on purpose) where that project in Florida could cause some parent to sue the kindergarten teacher. GTFO with your bad faith troll job

 

Separately it’s interesting to see GOP in FL go after their own state’s largest employer. You really want to shut off corporate campaign donations, and run off job creation? It’s like they forgot what really runs politics: corporate money. Good luck making enemies with entities that can spend limitless funds on your opponents 

People sue all the time for bullshit.  It's why we have courts.

[TXSooner518 2,438]

1 minute ago, Pig Bellmont said:

Kindergartners do family tree projects in my kids’ schools and all kids are asked to bring in pics of their families. Two of the kids in her class come from families with two moms. At what point does talking about family cross the line? Well the law is so vague (on purpose) where that project in Florida could cause some parent to sue the kindergarten teacher. GTFO with your bad faith troll job

 

Separately it’s interesting to see GOP in FL go after their own state’s largest employer. You really want to shut off corporate campaign donations, and run off job creation? It’s like they forgot what really runs politics: corporate money. Good luck making enemies with entities that can spend limitless funds on your opponents 

It would also write off Disney's 2B debt to a cost of $2,000 per family in those counties, but Republican Governors pullling political stunts to impress the 75 IQ crowd at a cost of billions to their own taxpayers is en vogue this season, just ask Greggy.

[Johnny Sack 8,397]

2 minutes ago, TXSooner518 said:

It would also write off Disney's 2B debt to a cost of $2,000 per family in those counties, but Republican Governors pullling political stunts to impress the 75 IQ crowd at a cost of billions to their own taxpayers is en vogue this season, just ask Greggy.

Pretty blue county.  Those people are probably glad to pay their fair share.

[TXSooner518 2,438]

1 minute ago, Johnny Sack said:

You cannot have classroom instruction on sexual orientation, K to 3.  Whether it is heterosexual or homosexual. The words gay, lesbian, homosexual are not in the bill.

There is zero reason for a teacher to be giving classroom instruction on sexual orientation or gender identity with kindergarten children.  Most sane people agree with that.

AGAIN you just ignore and deflect. Answering in a basic sense of why Sally has two mommies or having a book that has a married gay couple isn't "teaching sexual orientation", except to ridiculous snowflake ghouls who simply want cruelty to those different from them. 

[Sawbonz 27,596]

3 minutes ago, Immaculate Vibes said:

Again, if you have kids you know how very easily you can divert conversations you don’t want to have. Teachers obviously can redirect kids or else they wouldn’t be able to get anything done. Doesn’t have to be touched. 
 

As for being for small govt, I don’t think having a say in certain aspects of your kids’ education, which you pay for, contradicts that. 
 

 

State or federal government intervening in local school decisions is the antithesis of small government. You know that. But again you get to keep your taxes low right?

 

With respect to diverting kids’ questions why the  fuck should a teacher have to divert a question about their marital status? And why the fuck should anyone who claims to be for small government support a law calling for civil penalties against someone who does answer such a question?

[wildcat09 29,420]

13 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

Kids ask questions all the time. You are OK with a law that puts a teacher at financial and occupational risk for mentioning they have a same sex spouse.

 

I don’t see how you reconcile that with being a party of small government but hey whatever.

 

Funny  how the party that thinks things are so creepy is the party that keeps having members arrested for pedophilia and child porn. 

There's no reason at this point not to assume as a default that every Republican politician is a child molester.

[Pig Bellmont 8,739]

2 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

People sue all the time for bullshit.  It's why we have courts.

The legislature created a cause of action to chill this type of speech. That’s much different than a random frivolous suit. In this example the lawsuit was the intended result, which makes the case harder to defend and more expensive for teachers who are notoriously underpaid.
 

 But you knew that. 

[Johnny Sack 8,397]

4 minutes ago, Pig Bellmont said:

The legislature created a cause of action to chill this type of speech. That’s much different than a random frivolous suit. In this example the lawsuit was the intended result, which makes the case harder to defend and more expensive for teachers who are notoriously underpaid.
 

 But you knew that. 

K-12 teachers have no free speech rights inside of a classroom.

[Longhorn_Fan68 33,900]

3 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

There's no reason at this point not to assume as a default that every Republican politician is a child molester.

I've been doing that for years. Like the sun coming up in the morning.

[Sawbonz 27,596]

10 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

It does not do that.  I prevents classroom instruction.  Not mentioning you have a spouse.  And it does not target same sex.  It applies equally to any sexual orientation,

This is a lie. Read the bill. It is not only limited to sexually explicit discussion and even if it were you know very well as a lawyer the barriers to initiating civil litigation are much lower than for criminal prosecution. It was written that way purposefully as a intimidation tactic. Any stupid bitch can get a bug up their ass and file a lawsuit that could financially destroy the teacher they have a grudge against. I know you’re loving your low taxes right now, but you’re no true believer. Wait until the purity tests start happening and you don’t measure up. You’re going be fucked as well

[bonnieblue 542]

18 minutes ago, Immaculate Vibes said:

Why discuss it anyway? 
 

Discussing gender identity stuff, as defined by liberals, with kids is creepy. 
 

Who talks about gender or sexuality at all with little kids that aren’t theirs anyway? Answer, creeps. 

Why do republicans keep talking and talking and talking about sexualizing kids? Between the extremely long list of republican politicians and conservative priests and religious leaders who have been charged will committing sexual violence against children, I would actually posit that republicans have the issue with sexualizing children. It seems like all they seem to think about.
 

Creeps indeed.

[Sawbonz 27,596]

10 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

People sue all the time for bullshit.  It's why we have courts.

And this law actually makes it much easier to sue and much more expensive to defend yourself from a meritless suit

[Longhorn_Fan68 33,900]

3 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

This is a lie. Read the bill. It is not only limited to sexually explicit discussion and even if it were you know very well as a lawyer the barriers to initiating civil litigation are much lower than for criminal prosecution. It was written that way purposefully as a intimidation tactic. Any stupid bitch can get a bug up their ass and file a lawsuit that could financially destroy the teacher they have a grudge against. I know you’re loving your low taxes right now, but you’re no true believer. Wait until the purity tests start happening and you don’t measure up. You’re going be fucked as well

wait, he's a fucking lawyer? like people actually come to him for legal advice? really?

2 minutes ago, bonnieblue said:

Why do republicans keep talking and talking and talking about sexualizing kids? Between the extremely long list of republican politicians and conservative priests and religious leaders who have been charged will committing sexual violence against children, I would actually posit that republicans have the issue with sexualizing children. It seems like all they seem to think about.
 

Creeps indeed.

[Johnny Sack 8,397]

3 minutes ago, bonnieblue said:

Why do republicans keep talking and talking and talking about sexualizing kids? Between the extremely long list of republican politicians and conservative priests and religious leaders who have been charged will committing sexual violence against children, I would actually posit that republicans have the issue with sexualizing children. It seems like all they seem to think about.
 

Creeps indeed.

 

[Sawbonz 27,596]

7 minutes ago, bonnieblue said:

Why do republicans keep talking and talking and talking about sexualizing kids? Between the extremely long list of republican politicians and conservative priests and religious leaders who have been charged will committing sexual violence against children, I would actually posit that republicans have the issue with sexualizing children. It seems like all they seem to think about.
 

Creeps indeed.

And now there are states that they can move to and marry child brides. Not creepy at all

[Longhorn_Fan68 33,900]

4 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

 

[Johnny Sack 8,397]

You guys get John Wayne Gacy.

[Longhorn_Fan68 33,900]

lol, dropping the name of a serial killer who has been dead for almost 30 years. that's all you got? fucking pathetic.

[DigglerontheHoof 21,255]

5 minutes ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

I just assume our local right wing nuts are child molesters…especially the ones on this thread.

[Captainant 27,826]

28 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

You cannot have classroom instruction on sexual orientation, K to 3.  Whether it is heterosexual or homosexual. The words gay, lesbian, homosexual are not in the bill.

There is zero reason for a teacher to be giving classroom instruction on sexual orientation or gender identity with kindergarten children.  Most sane people agree with that.

Was this even a thing that was actually happening? Was this a real problem that deserved the legislative attention and cost?

I haven't seen anything to support this narrative aside from the narrative.

[tx 3 putt 77,535]

1 hour ago, Sawbonz said:

I am amazed at how Republicans are taking something that literally does not exist anywhere i.e. sex education for kindergartners and enacting legislation forbidding it. 

apparently, you don’t watch South Park !!!

[bonnieblue 542]

2 minutes ago, DigglerontheHoof said:

I just assume our local right wing nuts are child molesters…especially the ones on this thread.

I mean… they must be. I can’t imagine wasting all of my free time dreaming up these graphic scenarios unless it was something you had a lot of experience with.

[Longhorn_Fan68 33,900]

3 minutes ago, bonnieblue said:

I mean… they must be. I can’t imagine wasting all of my free time dreaming up these graphic scenarios unless it was something you had a lot of experience with.

It is pretty depraved, all these ideas they come up with. I mean, seems like only a pedophile would come up with stuff like this. Therefore, it is my belief that Rom DeSantis is a pedophile. Anyone heard that Ron DeSantis might be a pedophile?

[Longhorn_Fan68 33,900]

oh man, grab your popcorn. shit's about to get electric in FL

 

[Immaculate Vibes 114]

 

[Michael Knight 12,995]

53 minutes ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

oh man, grab your popcorn. shit's about to get electric in FL

 

[Pig Bellmont 8,739]

1 hour ago, Johnny Sack said:

K-12 teachers have no free speech rights inside of a classroom.

Troll checklist:

-don’t engage the substance of the argument  ✅

-argue against different topic that no one was discussing ✅

If you were any lazier in your inauthentic defense of the legislation, you’d simply yell something about Hunter Biden or screen grab a Ben Shapiro tweet

[Satchel 6,949]

It seems Disney made a presentation to some elected officials in Florida detailing what it would look like should the company decide to exit the state. Apparently politicians in Florida don’t believe fat meat is greasy.

[smuggs 9,353]

56 minutes ago, Immaculate Vibes said:

 

District 28 covering the keys makes it look like there is some discharge dripping from America's dong.

[Hookah Horns 3,083]

It's truly breathtaking that Rhonda would shift 2 billion bucks in liabilities to the voting public for the sole purpose of showing his ass to Disney. The drooling morons that make up his base will eat this up, I'm sure. If there's one thing I learned from the Trump era, it's that the drooling morons have quite a hard time differentiating strength from micro-dicked petulance.

[Hookah Horns 3,083]

2 hours ago, Johnny Sack said:

 

Your orange lord has done much creepier stuff than this...to his own daughter. 

[ChuckNorrisActionJeans 2,682]

13 minutes ago, Hookah Horns said:

It's truly breathtaking that Rhonda would shift 2 billion bucks in liabilities to the voting public for the sole purpose of showing his ass to Disney. The drooling morons that make up his base will eat this up, I'm sure. If there's one thing I learned from the Trump era, it's that the drooling morons have quite a hard time differentiating strength from micro-dicked petulance.

and will the D's have an ounce of messaging strength to get this to the public at large?? They're getting steamrolled every which way.

[Satchel 6,949]

Not sure how Desantis sees this helping him in November if Disney makes moves to leave the state.

[Longhorn_Fan68 33,900]

4 minutes ago, Satchel said:

Not sure how Desantis sees this helping him in November if Disney makes moves to leave the state.

read somewhere he only won the last election by 35k votes and Disney has 70K+ employees in the state. I'm not a CRT teacher, but that math doesn't add up for him

[Don Johnson 4,757]

Disney can't just leave.

[bluto 4,943]

Sure looks like Disney is getting … cancelled 

[Longhorn_Fan68 33,900]

Just now, bluto said:

Sure looks like Disney is getting … cancelled 

is that what is looks like to you? I see a lege and a governor tripping over their tiny dicks in a move that will more than likely backfire for them. but that's ok, don't interrupt your enemy when they are making a mistake. I think Gandhi said that

[Satchel 6,949]

Just now, Don Johnson said:

Disney can't just leave.

They don’t have to. They can announce plans to go in a different direction as the election heats up. They’re ruthless and know how to play politics as well.

[Don Johnson 4,757]

5 minutes ago, Satchel said:

They don’t have to. They can announce plans to go in a different direction as the election heats up. They’re ruthless and know how to play politics as well.

You said "moves to leave the state."  They can't just pack up and start over somewhere else.  Disney leadership also has to answer to shareholders, who aren't interested in abandoning 31 hotels, 3 theme parks and 25,000 acres that is a money making machine.  Even if leadership promises them it's just a bluff for political purposes.

Edited April 21, 2022 by Don Johnson

[kevwun 15,928]

They most assuredly can move their corporate headquarters.  It happens all the time.

[Johnny Sack 8,397]

3 minutes ago, kevwun said:

They most assuredly can move their corporate headquarters.  It happens all the time.

It's in California.