You said nothing wrong. Some people just feel embarrassed about being responsible for the current situation by voting for Trump. And they react to that embarrassment by trying to shift blame.
Does it really take an entire article to explain how Thiel, like so many before him, has simply been corrupted by wealth? His choice of topics to obsess over seems pretty arbitrary to me.
Firing someone for making a political statement is business. You never want to alienate half your consumer base.
COVID is still fresh enough that people should remember. If you were pro or anti anything 5 years ago it probably hurt you since sentiment swung both ways and both positions look silly in hindsight.
> Firing someone for making a political statement is business.
Except that he was fired right after the FCC chair threatened ABC. That feels more like government censorship than business.
Unless now "business" encompasses "it's better for business to not criticize the government". Which I suppose it does, under Trump. But that's not something we should accept or allow in a free society, under the constitution we have.
You don't have to disregard what Kimmel said, because he hardly even said anything. Relevant portion is the first 8 mins of this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-j3YdxNSzTk
What, in the clip, could reasonably be referred to as "the sickest conduct possible?" No one with a healthy, functioning mind could possibly use that language to talk about Kimmel's comments in that clip.
MAGA did, in fact, do their best over the weekend to cast the shooter as anything other than one of them. Comments made in poor taste? Maybe? Not really? No poorer taste than the president saying on Fox & Friends that he "couldn't care less" about promoting unity after the Kirk shooting.
"The abrupt decision by the network, which is owned by the Walt Disney Company, came hours after the chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, Brendan Carr, assailed Mr. Kimmel’s remarks and suggested that his regulatory agency might take action against ABC because of them."
So yes, ABC/Nexstar are within their editorial rights to make this decision, but that decision came at an awfully conspicuous time. So what, nothing to see here?
>So yes, ABC/Nexstar are within their editorial rights to make this decision, but that decision came at an awfully conspicuous time. So what, nothing to see here?
{Paraphrasing for those who don't get it]
Brendan Carr: That Kimmel guy sure is a pill. Will no one rid me of this meddlesome comic?
Hey ABC, It would be a shame if something bad happened to you guys, wouldn't it? In fact, let's do some investigating to make sure everything is on the up and up, yeah?[0]
ABC: How High?
[0] Right out of the authoritarians' playbook: "For my friends, everything. For my enemies, the law."
It was implied, but apparently, not clearly enough.
The issue is emphatically not that "Kimmel dissed our boy. He needs to be raked over the coals!" Nor is it "Kimmel had it just right! Fuck those MAGAts!"
The current controversy, while relevant to the above, is not the problem. What people think and believe and most[0] of what they say is, at least under current law in the US, not punishable by the state.
A government official (Brendan Carr) publicly threatened legal action, using the weight and resources of the Federal Government (don't believe me, listen to him say it yourself) against ABC/Disney[1] in retaliation for the legal (however you may feel about it) speech of Jimmy Kimmel.
Now you might think, "well so what? that jackass is always harassing the President and his most patriotic team. And now he's doing so about our beloved cultural ambassador, gunned down by some tranny loving freak just a few days ago. That sack of crap deserves whatever he gets!"
And you have every right to think that. And to speak it or write it or take out web/TV/print/billboard/etc. ads.
And you think, "Damn straight! I got rights. The First Amendment says the government can't punish me for what I say or think! And it's not a coincidence that it's the First one, is it?" And you're right.
If all that is true, especially the First Amendment[2] bit:
Congress shall make no law [...] abridging the freedom of speech, or
of the press; [...]
Which, as centuries of jurisprudence have confirmed, aside from a few (none of which apply in this particular context) exceptions[0], the government may not punish folks for what they say.
Which is exactly what Brendan Carr threatened to do with the resources of the FCC if ABC/Disney didn't take action against Kimmel.
Which is facially a violation of the Constitution (of which the First Amendment is an integral part), which is the supreme law of the land.
And so whether you think Kimmel was out of line or not, something we all should be able to get behind is that the government has no place telling us what we can or cannot say.
A right that Charlie Kirk took advantage of and was proud to extol. And good for him -- whether you agree with him or not. And if we (want to) live in a nation of laws, then Jimmy Kimmel (or you or me) should have the same rights and latitude.
It's called entertainment. He's a comedian. You're opposed to free speech and favor government censorship. News and journalists are supposed to do facts, not literal jesters.
