Like I said…take a break. This is a conversation between you and me…Jerry Brown is not a part of it. I think I made the point that the GOP uses a bogus choice argument to rag on gays…and from that they should expect others to do the same.
Nowhere is LGBTQ a part of this discussion. You can drag it in as a red herring but that won’t fly with me. LGBT, the Governor of California or the GOP’s stance on Gays are not relevant. Red Hen made a choice to ask Sanders to leave because they find her offensive. Sander’s makes a daily routine of dividing and insulting vast swaths of the American people as well as spinning and lying for a POTUS that does the same in spades. ( he called the Red Hen, a joint with a perfect government inspection record “filthy” a lie…does that upset the CRA and is it OK for a POTUS to do that ) The CRA does not go where Haass is trying to take it. Not in word or spirit. He’s doing that because there’s no other big hit you can swipe at Red Hen. Like an asshole carrying a AR-15 around a Walmart…Red Hen made a choice that was not intended to be popular. It is legal and it is the right of the Red Hen to do it.
Taking a 10 month old baby from its mother is a crime against humanity. Taking healthcare away from impoverished folks living in the inner city is a crime against humanity. Giving away the public resources of the American people to corporations to justify starving schools and services that make the lives of the American people better is a crime against humanity. That, not Sanders race or religion is what Red Hen did not want at its tables.
The owner of the restaurant has said that her clientele includes numerous Republicans with whom she and her employees disagree about many things. None of them are refused service. She said that Sanders being a public official was key.
“I was babbling a little, but I got my point across in a polite and direct fashion,” Wilkinson said. “I explained that the restaurant has certain standards that I feel it has to uphold, such as honesty, and compassion, and cooperation. I said, ‘I’d like to ask you to leave.’”
Sanders and company apparently left without protest. They offered to pay for what they had already eaten but were told there was no need.
Is Sanders complaining now?
Other than asking Richard Haass if there’s anything else he can think of that violated the spirit of the Civil Rights Act over the last, say, ten years … what else needs to be said?
Let’s be real about what SHS is about. She’s basically violent and it’s likely her friends are violent. The owner’s gay employees need to be asking themselves: is one of these wingnuts going to shoot me? Nobody knows what SHS is like after a few drinks.
By the way, many high-end restaurants in DC perform arbitrage on their waiting lines based on factors such as fame, fashionable attire, 100 bills to the doorperson, etc. Does this violate the Civil Rights Act?
Voting booths are confidential and the resturant has no way to know who voted one way or another, appearing on national TV to make excuses for your party’s crimes against humanity however is public and easily verifiable.
Ya, but then there I’d that pesky SCOTUS ruling that said that businesses can refuse service based on firmly held beliefs. The restaurant owner’s denieal of service to Sanders may violate the sperit of the Civil Rights Act but it may also be justified by the SCOTUS ruling allowing denial of service because the owner believes he/she should do so.
It was a very bad ruling but it also cuts in several directions all at the same time.
Oh and caging brown children doesn’t? This was a moral statement of disapproval, nothing more, and it had its basis not in the person of Ms H Sanders, but in her actions as a liar to the nation.
You calling her a Nazi is a pejorative, not a fact.
She may be a unrepentant liar and employed by a Fascist Asshole, but that does not give YOU the right to decide who can and cannot eat in a public establishment. That is defined BY LAW. You don’t get to decide.
If the presence of someone YOU loath in a restaurant offends you, YOU can leave, but you cannot force THEM to leave.
And you are wrong, It is EXACTLY like denying service to Blacks because “I don’t approve of them people”.
Get your head out of your ass and read the case law.
You are so hung up on “protected status” that you can’t see the forest for the trees.
A much, MUCH better action would have been for every other patron to get up and LEAVE. That would have gotten the message across much more powerfully than a petty display of “moral superiority”.
OH christ, throw sarah a bale of hay and she will forget the whole drama thing.
Maybe a happy tweet from her will get the gop thinking of something else. like working for the country maybe.
So, if the restaurant decides they don’t want to serve you or your friends based upon your political beliefs, they can kick you out?
What if they don’t want to serve Gays. or Blacks, or Latino’s, or Millennials?
Where do you draw the line? Who draws the line?
Be careful what you wish for.
Nothing in the Constitution gives you the right to never be offended by someone or something.
Grow up.
