Rosanne gets the ax!

[Rigby5]

Correct, she is still free to say those things, ABC is under no obligation to employ her.

Yes ABC was required to employ her because they had a contract, and because it is against state and federal law for an employer to terminate over political expression outside of work.

[Rigby5]

elections have consequences
tweets have consequences.

"free speech" means da gummint can't impinge on it -but commercial speech is subject to employers

Wrong, wrong, wrong.
Free speech is just like being free from any discrimination like over sex, age, race, religion, etc.
State and federal law is very explicit that it is illegal for an employer to terminate over political expression.

Just imagine if it were legal to do that?
Since almost all people are employees, then employers could then control and suppress almost all political expression.
You could not canvas, demonstrate, put up signs, etc., without fear of being fired.
That would destroy the democratic republic.

[Rigby5]

Do you believe that any particular race is superior any other?
I will understand if you need to evade the question, racist.

Of course no race is superior to any other.
In fact, races are such minor superficial differences, that they are all essentially nearly identical.
Anyone who actually knows anything about human racial science knows that actually all races are just variants of being Black.
Eve of Africa proved that.

[Rigby5]

Your desperation is showing.

Let me guess, you're a Trump supporter.

Black women are the ultimate decider of whether Clinton's comment was racist or not .. not a Trump supporter.

There are many reasons Hillary Clinton lost the 2016 presidential election, but a lack of support from black women isn’t one of them.

According to exit polls, more than 90 percent of black women voted for Clinton, continuing the trend that few demographic groups are as faithful to the Democratic Party as African American women.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.69eff3c9073b

Got anything else?

You are the one showing ignorance and bias.
For example, you claim to be a socialist, but if you were, you would know that socialism and racism are at odds.
And since Roseanne Barr ran for president as a socialist, you should know she is totally against racism.

[Rigby5]

what does that spurious claim have to do with Barr?

It means that one can made a derogatory statement towards one person, and not mean it towards a whole race and be a racist.

[Rigby5]

Just insulting someone of another race isn't inherently racist. The problem with what Barr said is that comparing black people's appearance to apes or monkeys is a long standing racist meme. Even if she didn't mean it like that, it's just such a terrible association for her reputation and the reputation of ABC if they continued to employ her.

Wrong.
The movie "Planet of the Apes" is anti racist, so in no way could it be about appearance.
And while you could have a blend of ideology between Muslims and the theocracy of Dr. Zais, you can actually breed with apes.
It is impossible for humans to do that.

Nor does that have any effect on Roseannne's reputation, since as a socialist eveyone knows she can't be racist.
Nor can ABC legally terminate anyone for the most racist comments anyone can imagine.
It is against the law to discriminate against ANY ideology, no matter how repugnant.

[Rigby5]

You might want to rethink that.

"After a West Virginia nonprofit director referred to Michelle Obama as an “ape in heels” on Facebook in November, reports suggested that she was let go from her job — before it was revealed she was actually just suspended and would return to work shortly afterward. But now, after some back-and-forth, Pamela Ramsey Taylor has finally been fired for good, the Washington Post reports.

Taylor, who served as the director of Clay County Development Corp., wrote in a November status, “It will be so refreshing to have a classy, beautiful, dignified First Lady back in the White House. I’m tired of seeing a [sic] Ape in heels.” Clay’s mayor, Beverly Whaling, reportedly commented on the post, “Just made my day Pam.”

Both the post and comment were deleted, but not before screenshots were taken and shared widely on social media. Taylor was removed from her position shortly afterward, and Whaling resigned from her post. Yet, the Charleston Gazette-Mail later reported, Taylor was merely on suspension and expected to return to her position on December 23.

According to the Post, Taylor has since been fired from her position, and the nonprofit — which provides services to low-income and elderly residents through government funds — has been placed under the watch of a state agency. Apparently Taylor’s post brought closer scrutiny to the nonprofit, exposing problems in how it was being run, including a lack of open meetings or nondiscrimination policies."

https://www.thecut.com/2016/12/woman...lly-fired.html

No, that is completely different.
That person was a public spokes person trying to get people to donate to the charity.
The financial consequences of a person in that position being political can have a financial effect that the employer does have a right to be concerned over.
That is totally unlike Roseanne Barr, who not only ran for president at a socialist, but plays a racist in the show.

[Rigby5]

I know. Interesting isn't it.......

It is in very poor tastes to deliberately misquote.
You know full well I wrote, "I only expand to show that it is also basic to the constitution of MI, as well as the US federal constitution."
Which means I not only showed it was illegal for ABC to fire her according to state law, but also state and federal constitutional law.
I did not expand because that is the only way I can be right.

[Leonthecat]

Of course no race is superior to any other.
In fact, races are such minor superficial differences, that they are all essentially nearly identical.
Anyone who actually knows anything about human racial science knows that actually all races are just variants of being Black.
Eve of Africa proved that.

Good answer. But the question was never directed at you.

[blackascoal]

You are the one showing ignorance and bias.
For example, you claim to be a socialist, but if you were, you would know that socialism and racism are at odds.
And since Roseanne Barr ran for president as a socialist, you should know she is totally against racism.

Pretty stupid.



I don't give a rats ass what Barr ran as. People who are "totally against racism" don't spend time making obviously racist monkey comments.

It appears that you don't know much about Barr or socialism.

[kudzu]

Nonsense.
What she was saying is that the US was being too nice to the Islamic Brotherhood and Iran.
It was a metaphor over policies.

And YES, private employment most certainly does protect freedom of speech.
And fact your freedom of speech is supposed to be an individual right, so is supposed to be protected from anyone.

If you think that only government is prevented from discriminating against political expression, you are totally wrong.
The 1st amendment was incorporated after the 14th amendment was passed, and now is interpreted as an individual right by the judiciary.

Each state also have protection for free speech.
Here is CA law:
{...
But two sections of the California Labor Code (sections 1101 and 1102) specify that private employers may not do any of the following:

Make, adopt or enforce any rule or policy forbidding or preventing employees from engaging or participating in politics or running for public office;
Make, adopt or enforce any rule or policy that tends to control or direct the political activities or affiliations of employees;5 or
Use the threat of job loss to coerce, influence or attempt to coerce or influence employees to take or refrain from taking any particular course of political activity.6
It follows from these laws against employer political suppression or coercion that employers may not fire or retaliate against employees for their political activity or beliefs.
...}
So yes, private employment also has to allow freedom of speech.

Islamic Brotherhood? What is that?

Your California Code doesn't apply.. Roseanne isn't running for office.. Did it ever occur to you that ABC has very good lawyers? Where did you get your JD?

[kudzu]

No, that is completely different.
That person was a public spokes person trying to get people to donate to the charity.
The financial consequences of a person in that position being political can have a financial effect that the employer does have a right to be concerned over.
That is totally unlike Roseanne Barr, who not only ran for president at a socialist, but plays a racist in the show.

No different than ABC wanting a strong audience for their show.. ABC has skilled lawyers.

Roseanne is simply an ignorant big mouth..

[PostmodernProphet]

It is in very poor tastes to deliberately misquote.

actually, it tastes better than the crap you serve out......

Which means I not only showed it was illegal for ABC to fire her according to state law, but also state and federal constitutional law.

you showed us your hopes and dreams and pretended it was the law.......your Rigby posts are a waste, stick with the Legion persona.......

[kudzu]

Yes ABC was required to employ her because they had a contract, and because it is against state and federal law for an employer to terminate over political expression outside of work.

There is NO human rights doctrine that requires the government to protect Roseanne Barr from ABC. Its not a free speech issue. ABC bet on Roseanne and they got burned. They do have a brand to protect.

The original Planet of the Apes was 1968 and it was about the Vietnam war and the rise of Black Power..

Roseanne killed her own comeback ...

[Rigby5]

Pretty stupid.



I don't give a rats ass what Barr ran as. People who are "totally against racism" don't spend time making obviously racist monkey comments.

It appears that you don't know much about Barr or socialism.

No, you just are wrong about racism.
If someone gets angry, they don't necessarily think about what they vent.
And when they vent mindless anger at a single individual, if they use some language that is technically racist, that does not at all mean they are racist.
They likely are just angry at one individual, not a whole race.

People against racism make racist comments all the time.
There was just a segment of Bill Maher where Charlemagne Tha God was on, and he was all about violence against white crackers.
Which obviously was very racist comments.
Does that mean Charlemagne Tha God is a racist?
Of course not.
It just means he was angry and not being perfectly articulate.
The main thing he was concentrating on was projecting anger.
He would only be racist if he was attacking ALL white people.

That likely was all Roseanne was doing, projecting anger.
A racist comment does not at all ensure racism.
It would be racist to claim that it did.