Should Sarah Huckabee-Sanders be allowed to eat in peace?

[3rdnlng]

10 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

It was said this morning by Obama's ethics czar...

Is that like "largest shrimp"?

[/dev/null]

27 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

It was said this morning by Obama's ethics czar...

 

On a side note, how many Czars has Trump appointed?  I recall Obama and GW Bush both had more Czars than the Romanovs, but not much about Trump Czars

[Juror#8]

59 minutes ago, BringBackOrton said:

This running metaphor sucks. 

 

You’re in the wrong sub-forum if that’s gonna be your attitude, friend.  

 

But I see you’re not about this life so I’ll jump off the train at the next stop. 

 

I’d be remiss, though, if I didn’t say that our side fun wasn’t unsolicited (maybe, “unprovoked” is the better word). I’m not sure I even knew who the !@#$ you were before you quoted me. 

[DC Tom]

18 minutes ago, /dev/null said:

 

On a side note, how many Czars has Trump appointed?  I recall Obama and GW Bush both had more Czars than the Romanovs, but not much about Trump Czars

 

Czars?  None.

 

Obersturmbanfuhrer?

[GG]

14 hours ago, Juror#8 said:

 

In the same way that people shouldn’t care if a gay couple is refused a cake by some butcher, baker or candlestick maker. 

 

 

People keep bringing this up, but the situations are different.  The baker refused to cater a special event for the couple.  He was perfectly willing to sell & serve anything in the bake shop that was available to all other customers.

[#34fan]

1 hour ago, B-Man said:

 

 

I wouldn't have agreed, if the owner had stated that a whole group could not have service.

 

However, if an owner denies an individual for service, rightly or wrongly, that is his/her business.

 

Just make it public and let the chips fall...............................

 

 

The fact that it's perfectly legal doesn't make it any less despicable.

 

It's my right to go there, eat $200 worth of food, and leave ZERO for a tip, but why would I do that? 

 

[/dev/null]

14 hours ago, Juror#8 said:

In the same way that people shouldn’t care if a gay couple is refused a cake by some butcher, baker or candlestick maker. 

 

But in the candlestick makers defense, a gay wedding presents an added risk of liability of their product being used in a manner not intended by it's creator

[IDBillzFan]

31 minutes ago, GG said:

 

People keep bringing this up, but the situations are different.  The baker refused to cater a special event for the couple.  He was perfectly willing to sell & serve anything in the bake shop that was available to all other customers.

 

On the upside, people who keep bringing this up make it easier to determine those who think for themselves versus those who mindlessly repeat what they're told without question.

[3rdnlng]

14 minutes ago, /dev/null said:

 

But in the candlestick makers defense, a gay wedding presents an added risk of liability of their product being used in a manner not intended by it's creator

Wax on, wax off.

[Juror#8]

1 hour ago, GG said:

 

People keep bringing this up, but the situations are different.  The baker refused to cater a special event for the couple.  He was perfectly willing to sell & serve anything in the bake shop that was available to all other customers.

 

Good point but to be fair I wasn’t analogizing those circumstances to justify the happening of one or the other. 

 

I’m trying to make my point that I don’t think a private business in nearly any case should be compelled to do anything they don’t want to do, sell to someone whom they don’t want to sell to, or service someone whom they don’t want to service so long as that business is not accepting public dollars/grants, etc. in the normal operation of their business. 

 

If they don’t want to serve someone for being black or French-Canadian or because they don’t like the cut of their jib, then so be it. If the business owner doesn’t like that person’s “cool disco dan” tattoo or doesn’t agree with their sexual orientation and therefore doesn’t want transact business, then ok. 

 

That business owner is in a profit-generating business. If he/she doesn’t want a brother’s bread in exchange for their wares then whatever, so be it.

 

I didn’t agree with ‘Heart of Atlanta’ for the same reason. I get what the end game was but philosophically I don’t agree with it. The circumstances in that case were distinguishable as well because, ostensibly, they implicated the Commerce Clause.

 

The fact is just don’t principally agree with the idea that a private business should be forced to cater to a patron.

 

Left. 

 

Right. 

 

Or indifferent. 

 

Edited June 24, 2018 by Juror#8

[BringBackOrton]

31 minutes ago, Juror#8 said:

 

Good point but to be fair I wasn’t analogizing those circumstances to justify the happening of one or the other. 

 

I’m trying to make my point that I don’t think a private business in nearly any case should be compelled to do anything they don’t want to do, sell to someone whom they don’t want to sell to, or service someone whom they don’t want to service so long as that business is not accepting public dollars/grants, etc. in the normal operation of their business. 

 

If they don’t want to serve someone for being black or French-Canadian or because they don’t like the cut of their jib, then so be it. If the business owner doesn’t like that person’s “cool disco dan” tattoo or doesn’t agree with their sexual orientation and therefore doesn’t want transact business, then ok. 

 

That business owner is in a profit-generating business. If he/she doesn’t want a brother’s bread in exchange for their wares then whatever, so be it.

 

I didn’t agree with ‘Heart of Atlanta’ for the same reason. I get what the end game was but philosophically I don’t agree with it. The circumstances in that case were distinguishable as well because, ostensibly, they implicated the Commerce Clause.

 

The fact is just don’t principally agree with the idea that a private business should be forced to cater to a patron.

 

Left. 

 

Right. 

 

Or indifferent. 

 

Hell yeah man!

[Juror#8]

4 minutes ago, BringBackOrton said:

 

 

? ?

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

44 minutes ago, Juror#8 said:

The fact is just don’t principally agree with the idea that a private business should be forced to cater to a patron.

 

Left. 

 

Right. 

 

Or indifferent. 

 

 

So, about those segregated luch counters...Obviously wrong, yes?

 

I agree with you, however. Businesses SHOULD be able to choose who and who they do not serve.

 

 

Edited June 24, 2018 by joesixpack

[Rob's House]

15 hours ago, Juror#8 said:

 

What’s silly is both your two sentence loose stool situation and your screenname. 

 

Both demonstrate that your purpose in this forum, and perhaps in life, is a reification of mediocrity and purposelessness. 

 

Anyway, back to where you went wrong ... it’s [still] not a “left” or “right” thing. It’s ideological because she doesn’t like the current administration’s policies on gays (apparently two of the servers at her establishment are gay), and what’s going on with border detentions.

 

I’m sure that many log cabin republicans and at least one of the two existing Mexican-American Republicans in the United States don’t like those policies either. It doesn’t make them less “right” or conservative. It just means that they have some layers of ideological disagreement that may cause them to profoundly disagree or even dislike a person that they might otherwise politically align with. 

 

The owner doesn’t like the Huckabee chick because she feels that she’s shady and a mouthpiece for some specific ideological disagreements that she has.

 

The owner could be politically independent for all you know.

 

Shitballs, she could be truly and completely apolitical.

 

Her policy or ideological disagreements doesn’t make her a leftist or even a a Democrat for that matter (though if I were to place a bet, I’d say she voted for Hillary). 

 

People are way too quick to ascribe political affiliations to others to drive their weird agendas. 

 

It’s like when people put cucumbers on pancakes and call it ‘melonflakes’ or rub chicken nuggets on vaginas to make it taste more like chicken. 

 

Don’t try to wax poetic about your preternatural food obsessions. 

 

I like that less than you trying to characterize everyone who likes gays as a “Democrat.” 

 

Sadly for them, you, and your !@#$ed up screenname, that whole effort is just intellectually lazy. 

 

I dunno. Maybe try again with a little more pizazz this time?

 

Dwigt. 

Sounds like she's a moron. What anti-gay stance has the administration taken?

[LaDexter]

It is perfectly clear that the political left doesn't think those who disagree with it have any rights at all...

[Albwan]

of course not... white, and republican? duh

that's 3 strikes and yer out in murica

[Paulus]

17 hours ago, Buftex said:

Dev, you either have a bad, or selective memory then....you don't remember Michell Obama being referred to as "moochelle" repeatedly by a prominant conservative radio host?  

 

And, not that it matters  (but you brought it up), but Michelle has 7 inches on Sarah Sanders...

And, muscle weighs more than fat.

 

The sad fact is both sides have their "morons in the crowd."

 

It is funny how the Obama Admin would never hire an obese woman because they were hypocritical bigots (joke).

[KW95 - JA17]

If im the owner of a PRIVATE business.  I will deny whoever I want.  I will have to deal with the outcome afterwards.

 

In this case, from what I read, it was the workers who didn't want to serve her.  The boss asked why and they spoke about the crap she says and the crap Trump believes in and she decided to support her workers.

 

Sanders has a tough job.  She is a big liar!  Big as well!

[ALF]

Red Hen eateries feel the heat after Sarah Sanders booted from Virginia restaurant with same name

 

But when the co-owner of another restaurant named The Red Hen – this one almost 200 miles away in Lexington, Va. – refused to serve White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders on Friday night, it was open season on any eatery with Hen in its name.

 

“It was a bit of an interesting day yesterday,” Friedman told Fox News. “There were so many negative comments floating in on social media and people calling up my restaurants to threaten us.”

 

While Friedman tried to quickly quell any bird-brained backlash mistakenly directed at his Italian-influenced restaurant by posting on its social media accounts that his eatery had no affiliation to the one in Lexington, it did little to stop the flood of angry comments and calls.

 

One person called up one of Friedman’s other restaurants and threatened to blow it up, while another just repeated the word “shame” over and over again.

 

In Swedesboro, N.J., a family-style restaurant by the same name was also lambasted by supporters of President Trump – receiving about 200 phone calls and seeing their Facebook rating plummet to 1-star. The eatery was also finally forced to go to social media to clear up the issue.

 

"THE RED HEN IN SWEDESBORO, NEW JERSEY IS IN NO WAY AFFILIATED WITH THE RED HEN IN VIRGINIA,” a post on the New Jersey restaurant's Facebook page states. "Kindly check your facts before you erroneously defame an innocent business on Facebook."

 

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/06/24/after-sarah-sanders-booted-from-virginia-restaurant-eateries-with-same-name-feel-heat.html

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

25 minutes ago, ALF said:

Red Hen eateries feel the heat after Sarah Sanders booted from Virginia restaurant with same name

 

But when the co-owner of another restaurant named The Red Hen – this one almost 200 miles away in Lexington, Va. – refused to serve White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders on Friday night, it was open season on any eatery with Hen in its name.

 

“It was a bit of an interesting day yesterday,” Friedman told Fox News. “There were so many negative comments floating in on social media and people calling up my restaurants to threaten us.”

 

While Friedman tried to quickly quell any bird-brained backlash mistakenly directed at his Italian-influenced restaurant by posting on its social media accounts that his eatery had no affiliation to the one in Lexington, it did little to stop the flood of angry comments and calls.

 

One person called up one of Friedman’s other restaurants and threatened to blow it up, while another just repeated the word “shame” over and over again.

 

In Swedesboro, N.J., a family-style restaurant by the same name was also lambasted by supporters of President Trump – receiving about 200 phone calls and seeing their Facebook rating plummet to 1-star. The eatery was also finally forced to go to social media to clear up the issue.

 

"THE RED HEN IN SWEDESBORO, NEW JERSEY IS IN NO WAY AFFILIATED WITH THE RED HEN IN VIRGINIA,” a post on the New Jersey restaurant's Facebook page states. "Kindly check your facts before you erroneously defame an innocent business on Facebook."

 

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/06/24/after-sarah-sanders-booted-from-virginia-restaurant-eateries-with-same-name-feel-heat.html

 

Oh no.