Not sure why any of the Trump team or their supporters would ever eat out, because at least half of the people preparing their food and washing their dishes are people they want to kick out of the country.
My personal opinion is that a private business has the right to refuse anyone for any reason. They also do not have a right to cry foul when they face the repercussions from their actions. The baker from CO and Chic Fil A are examples. Does Chic Fil A and the CO baker deserve the same hate inspired rants as the Red Hen? There will be those who say those are completely two different examples ... only because it supports their ideologue. You are correct; The owner of the Red Hen and SHS handled the situation politely. The staff did not. It was the staff who literally had the owner drive down to the restaurant to kick SHS out. It as the staff who, yes, bragged on their white board about kicking SHS out. And it was the staff who posted it on facebook, once again, bragging. There would be no reaction if the staff never bragged about it on facebook. The reaction from the public is irrelevant. It doesn't matter what the incident is, extremist from all directions will react. This is why you should treat everyone with respect and not let your bias and retributions get in the way.
Mostly in agreement. Private business can reject any service for their own morals (or for any reason), as long as it is legal to do so (not discriminatory, or not effectively causing massive harm to someone or to some group). Every decision has consequences and all decision should be made in mind with that (the owner here said she didn't regret the incident even after the up-roar, so it indicate she isn't crying foul). Maybe there is more to it, but I don't see that post as a brag. It was a mistake though, because it did bring a private decision into the public domain, one that is going to create a firestorm, as it has. Same for the Press Secretary. p.s. I certainly don't hold an absolute view on this type of matter - you either must or not must serve... it all depends on the situation.
I agree. The incident itself seemed pretty tame, honestly. The restaurant owner thought it over, consulted her staff, found that some of them were uncomfortable with SHS being there for moral reasons, and made the decision to ask her to leave. I didn't get the impression that the owner made her decision lightly. Anyway, the owner politely and professionally asked Sarah to leave, and Sarah complied peacefully. The people SHS was with were not asked to leave, yet did so anyway. The business has a right to refuse service to a customer, and they simply exercised that right. Pretty cut-n-dry IMO. The only minor concern I have is the possibility of a long-term slippery slope. I don't want America's service industry to get in the habit of banning people just because they're a Dem, Rep, liberal, conservative, etc. Of course, it's unlikely that'll happen to any significant extent, since most places care about $$$ first. That said, it's important to note that she was asked to leave specifically for moral reasons (e.g. lying, complicit in bigotry, etc.), NOT because of her being a Republican. Sarah brought this on herself, and I think she knows it. Sarah Sanders deciding to tweet about the incident was a dumb move. Tactical mistake on her part, and it kinda undermines her initial politeness. As a result, I expect Red Hen to get a net boost in business for the next 6 months or so. I read somewhere else that the restaurant is located in a heavily Democratic town...if that's true, then that's even better for their future business. One of the staff members posted about the incident earlier and it gained some attention...but SHS's tweet was throwing a bunch of gasoline on the fire.
So let me get this straight - according to the right, a business has a right to refuse to serve homosexuals but it has no right to deny service to the Supreme Ruler Trump or his staff?
I didn't really jump to conclusions. I correctly noted the strange disconnect between her claiming a moral high ground of civility but (some would say illegally) using her official work account to greatly amplify the circle of people who would ever hear of this little event. Her motivation is clear: stoking the base, again (what she does all day every day), and painting liberals with a broad and negative brush. I totally agree that both sides do this as opposed to de-escalating situations. Honestly, I was having fun with a minor and unimportant event, but I didn't give any emoticons. I agree with most of the rest of your post except for the not-subtle implied insult. Cheers and onward.
I disagree that we should have protected classes that are not allowed to be discriminated against (in the sense of this topic, private businesses refusing service to other individuals). A business should be allowed to discriminate against either anyone or noone at all. Of course there are those who will find this harsh and find the statement bigoted, however it is their business. The reality is most people are tolerant. When a business starts taking an extremist view and refusing service, such as the CO Baker and the Red Hen, the public backlashes viciously and often unfairly. That is the price to pay when an owner/management decides to exert their political beliefs through their business. If a business has an open policy not to serve black people, they are not going to stay in business for long. They wont get the foot traffic, they will be constantly harassed and targeted by the public and the city will likely fine them for every possible violation that can be found. This kind of bigotry is no longer accept. I certainly wouldn't support a business that openly discriminates. The problem with protecting a class is that now that class can claim foul for anything. If its a small business, they can be litigated out of businesses even if a court rules there is no case of discrimination.
Discriminating against someone for their inalienable characteristics and discriminating against someone for the way they conduct themselves, are not the same thing.
There is no spitting in that video. We all know this is made up. Trump and Co distort the truth constantly and lie openly. Nothing they say can be taken as fact. This is Fake News
Funny how its lunacy when it's coming form the side you're not on. I can remember republican politicians inciting real violence against democrats I wonder if that was lunacy too, lol. https://newrepublic.com/minutes/130349/fed-merely-inciting-violence-donald-trump-wants-get-action https://www.cnn.com/2017/06/16/politics/mark-sanford-donald-trump-problem/index.html
Bourdain hated Trump. https://newrepublic.com/minutes/130349/fed-merely-inciting-violence-donald-trump-wants-get-action
