Each day Bill records a MICKnugget, a one-minute take on some issue that got his attention that morning. Below are the scripts for last week’s NUGGETS.
CLICK HERE if you’d like to hear them. Here are the scripts:
02.27.23- Dumping Dilbert
Gannett and other newspaper publishers are dropping the Dilbert cartoon over comments by its creator, Scott Adams.
While commenting on recent polling by Rasmussen, Adams stated that if the polling was right (that blacks did not think it was OK to be white and that blacks could not be racist) that it constituted a hate group and he wanted no part of.
He was instantly labeled a racist and the cancellation of his comic strip began.
Racist attitudes have not been depicted in his work, but the damage was done and Dilbert is on its way out. Now, the publishers are within their rights to publish what they choose. It’s their reasoning that is suspect. This is not about the work product, but the attitude of the artist.
Gannett’s statement said it leads with inclusion. One would hope a news producing entity would lead with facts. Facts don’t fit the agenda.
With Gannett and other publishers leading the way, Dilbert and we, the reading public, are paying the price.
02.28.23- First Dilbert, Now You!
First, it was Dilbert being cancelled over the public comments of its creator, Scott Adams.
Now, everyday Americans are getting the Dilbert treatment.
Meet Nathan Jensen and Nathan Greco, both Vermont State Troopers. Like many of their generation, they are online video gamers.
A state senator relayed an anonymous complaint he received on the troopers about comments they made while gaming. It’s worse than anonymous; it was a constituent relaying an anonymous complaint.
That’s right, a third-hand, anonymous complaint has these cops off the job while they are being investigated.
Who knows what they said, if they said anything at all? Who knows if there was an actual complaint?
When we stoop to these levels to find a problem with unpopular thought, nobody is safe from the purge.
Who’s next?
03.01.23- Absentee Advocates!
Where are the first amendment advocates? Oh, they are not being silent; they are just not speaking in favor of free speech.
You’d expect fellow cartoonists to be first in line to defend Scott Adams from the cancelling of his cartoon, Dilbert.
Not so. In fact, they are piling on in support of Adams being cancelled.
Do they not realize they could be next on the chopping block? Sure, Adams fell short of their sensibilities, but what if the tide turns and then they are on the short end of the stick?
They are not thinking ahead here. I guess it’s their air of superiority.
The sun doesn’t shine on the same dog’s hiney all the time.
The first amendment is designed to protect unpopular speech.
By advocating for Adams’ cancellation these cartoonists could be forging their own chains; they just can’t see it for the fire in their eyes.
03.02.23- Try Just Being a Zoo!
The Brevard Zoo finds itself in the midst of controversy and facing the wrath of the rainbow warriors.
It seems the zoo rented its facility to the D-33 State Representative for a fundraiser for his run to be a state senator.
The rainbow warriors are unhappy and staged a protest of the event because of the representative’s stance on LGBT issues.
The zoo is falling all over itself to show it’s as woke as it needs to be.
STOP IT!
First, should you be hosting any political event when you rely on government funding to operate? Second, should you be playing the politically correct game with any activist group?
Now, the zoo is considering extracting itself from politics, while bowing to the LGBT gods. Who runs the zoo, Disney?
They do a pretty good job of being a zoo. The politics and woke ideology have no part in that.
Maybe they should focus on what they do best- it surely isn’t politics!
03.03.23- The French Interloper is Back!
State Senator Jason Brodeur, the French Interloper, is back. This time it’s with an idea that should concern any constitution loving, free speech wielding American.
Brodeur wants to license and penalize political commentators.
Is the first amendment foreign to this clown?
Sadly, Brodeur is not alone. There is a companion bill in the Florida House.
Our legislature has a Republican super majority. It’s veto proof. But is that majority constitutional or conservative at all? How does a Republican body come up with speech limiting legislation and try to justify it?
This is a bad look for Republicans and it justifies comparison to Nazi’s and fascists.
It’d be nice to see these Republicans uphold the principles they tout when running for office.
Things like this cut both ways and these Republicans aren’t thinking ahead.
Do I have to pay a fine for this?