That’s okay. I don’t expect you to catch everything.
I sure hope so. Because consistency. Although I think the odds of another member of the Trump administration coming to this particular restaurant is nil.
But then what’s all this about her getting singled out for being female? You and I both seem to agree that the restaurant — and any other restaurants that get headed up by significantly similar decision-makers — would treat various males the same way once someone says Hey That’s Someone I Recognize From The Trump Administration; and, if so, then where’s the hypothetical sexism?
There is no evidence that SHS is the only one being held accountable. Read any number of news stories and editorials regarding Pruitt, Sessions, Mulvaney, Ross, DeVos, Perry, Nielsen, Carson, Acosta, Pompeo, Mnuchin, Kelly, Pence, etc., all of whom have been publicly chastised for their efforts. It might be true that none of them have happened to have wandered into a restaurant staffed with members of groups whom Trump has sought to persecute while being the person who has officially supported Trump on his lies and attacks so that the staff felt sufficiently uncomfortable to ask their boss that they not be compelled to wait on them, (or, if they did, did not resort to using government channels to whine about it). That hardly makes SHS some lone victim.
You have implied (with no evidence) that SHS is the only one who has suffered this sort of phenomenon, rather than considering that SHS is the only one publicly whining about it (using government equipment in a potential violation of ethics).
To the extent that SHS has been held up as the face of the Trump administration, it exactly conforms to the point that she is the official face of the Trump administration.
Your floundering about attempting to make this about her sex ignores the fact that she was asked to leave by a woman who was the top official of the restaurant at the time of the incident. (Spicer was actually portrayed/mocked on national TV by a woman.)
So we have
claims of a violation of rights, (failed),
claims of sexism, (failed).
What are you going to try to thrown against the wall next?
Because the only one that’s hit the news with a vengeance is Sarah Sanders. I’m not aware of any incidents with other members of the Trump admin at this time. They must eat out on occasion though, you would think. It seems Ms. Sanders is the one who’s been made an example of. That she is female must be just a coincidence.
Whatever. I’m leaving for a vacation. Hope you have a nice conversation and I hope you actually make some sense of what has become a convoluted discussion.
Yeah, as long as Congresswomen are getting threatened with lynching and Trump supporters are pulling guns on protesters, I don’t think that’s a worry to have.
Since you’ve happily done zero research on the topic other clutching your pearls - Stephen Miller was heckled out of a restaurant just days previous, as was Kirstjen Nielsen. I’m fairly certain JimBob Turdburgler™, who operates the White House switchboard, hasn’t had any issues getting food, at the Red Hen or elsewhere. Could it possibly, just MAYBE, because of the actions of the named trio, and not their political affiliation or dangly bits?
Outside of that, I’m done. Keep trying to argue that an asshole’s “right” to a meal overwrites the right of a restaurant owner to deny service.
Show me where I made the slightest indication that I’m ripping on her only because she’s female.
I’m ripping on her because she’s a cheerleader for the Howling Yam and because she’s a despicable person.
You missed (at least) two. After a failed attempt to claim she had a right to be there he then said it was illegal to kick her out. I’m not sure what the difference was intended to be, but it was a separate argument. He also claimed that what happened to her was basically the same as racism.
You can tell he’s just throwing stuff at the wall to see what sticks since I have a feeling the saying what they did was illegal is probably, in his mind, another way to say they took away her rights. Similarly, after calling this basically the same as racism, and not getting anywhere, he attempted to call it sexism. Since I’m guessing ‘sexism’ is what he meant by ‘the same as racism’, he should have known that argument wouldn’t work.
A)That’s called flouncing. B)It’s not really convoluted at all. At least I haven’t had an issue following anything. If you’re confused by it, it’s only because you’ve come up with so many random reasons why what happened to SHS was wrong or illegal or unethical that maybe you’re just trying to juggle too many balls.
Perhaps you should start over. Really think about what you want to say and lay out a proper argument. If you feel there’s a legal case to be made (which you’ve said many times), link to the laws you feel were broken or the rights you feel were violated. As far as citations go, those ones are pretty easy to dig up. The Constitution and it’s amendments as well as federal, state and local laws are posted all over the internet in (sometimes) an easy to search format.
The problem, since the beginning of this thread, is that you continue to claim that laws were broken and rights were stripped but have ignored requests and even flat out refused to back that up, choosing instead to abandon one argument and move on to another when the heat is on, eventually settling on it just being wrong for them to refuse her because they’re a business and they should take money from her because she has money and twenty bucks is twenty bucks and/or refusing her may upset other customers. But if they only reason you can come up with for it being wrong to refuse service to her is because they might lose customers, that’s really just a business decision on their part and hardly a legal issue at all.
Again, decide what your argument is and make a case for it.
But here’s an example of why it’s ‘convoluted’.
First you claimed she was kicked out because she’s a woman and claimed it was due to sexism.
However, when called out on that you said that other members of Trump’s team would hopefully also be asked to leave, which suggests that you know it’s not sexism at play here. You continued on to say:
to explain why it’s only her we’ve heard about and
which goes to show you didn’t do attempt to see if it had happened before. As noted, before the SHS incident, male members of Trump’s team had been asked to leave other restaurants as well.
PS, I’d like to note, regarding what you said earlier about alienating their customers, wouldn’t they really only alienate [about] half of them? Even if they did, it seems just as probable that for all the customers they alienated they’d gain new ones from the unalienated side. That’s sort of the polarizing nature of politics.
You left out an extremely important aspect of scapegoating: the person (or animal) is INNOCENT and bears the sins of everyone UNFAIRLY. In the literal example, the goat certainly didn’t commit any sins. Can you say the same of SHS? Is she as innocent as a goat? I think not.
Let’s try it another way. Think about these “sins” we are contemplating here and ask yourself who actually DOES deserve the blame for those sins. Make yourself a top ten list. Is SHS in the top ten? I definitely think so. And she’s not the only female in my top ten either. Kellyanne Conway is in my top ten.
A fair point. Sarah Sanders is certainly no beast of burden being sent into the desert. She is no virgin being thrown into the volcano.
The volcano would throw her back.
I’ll take “Things You Don’t Hear Every Day” for $600, Alex!
If you don’t know who they are, then a simple google should tell you quite a bit. They’ve been in the news quite a bit recently. I am not sure that your claim of ignorance is actually a useful debate tactic here.
But, refresher, Milo Yiowhat’shisname is a “comedian” who says hateful things about all minorities, and defends pedophilia (which was the final bridge too far for conservatives to continue to publicly support him).
Richard Spencer is the white supremacist who organized the rally in charlottesville last year, and has organized further rallies at college campuses, and is planning a celebration for the anniversary of the murderous activities of last year’s rally again this year.
Would you welcome either or both of those into your establishment? You never answered my question about Bill Cosby either, is that because you don’t know who he is either?
That you have not seen other members of the administration treated with less than utmost deferential respect in public is only a reflection of your ignorance about it, not a reflection of the actual situation. Yes, male members of this administration have also been held to account in public. That this is the only one that happened to go into this particular restaurant is not sexism.
Sorry. What was your question about Bill Cosby?
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
To save you the trouble of scrolling up to other posts that you responded to already, I asked, just like Milo and Richard, if you would refuse service to him?
Now that I have described Milo and Richard to you, based on those descriptions, would you welcome them, or Bill Cosby into your establishment?
How many people that have been asked to leave that restaurant have been women? How many men?
“Convoluted” is not the word I would use to describe this conversation. “Ludicrous” comes to mind, as do “asinine” and “vacuous”, but I wouldn’t have ever used “convoluted”, at least not all by itself like that. I’d use it in a sentence like “Biffster’s ever-changing reasons for Sarah Sanders being the real victim are getting convoluted” but not to describe the whole conversation.
Where I come from, we have a charter of rights and freedoms that protects individuals against discrimination. I used to look up to Bill Cosby when I was a kid. I still have some respect for what he used to stand for, even though he’s a shell of man now. I would probably serve him because that’s the way I roll. I don’t know who Milo and Richard are.