Poor Sarah Sanders, victim of persecution

[9-10ths_Penguin]

The more I think about it, the more I see benefit to what happened.

This story fits into the larger narrative of "if you work for Trump, many people will see you as a pariah" along with the story that Trump staffers are generally seen as undateable in D.C. and similar stories.

It seems like this - along with Trump's own reputation - is making it hard to fill key posts. Combine this with Trump's unprecedented staff turnover and you get a real opportunity for people opposed to Trump: the more unattractive you make it to work for Trump, the larger the number of positions that will sit vacant, and the less capacity Trump will have to carry out his agenda.

... which also points to why all the slippery slope arguments here fail: a restaurant banning average Republicans does virtually nothing to actually stop Trump from carrying out his plans, but banning Trump staffers can have a real impact.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

There's a difference between merely disliking someone and having a conscientious objection to their actions.

^ Excellent!

 

[Lyndon]

It seems like from a rational perspective, if you're against bakers refusing to serve gay couples, you should be against restaurant owners refusing to serve Trump staff members, the thing is the people that are so outraged by the Sanders incident are the same people supporting not serving gay couples, which is hypocracy of the foulest order.

 

[Revoltingest]

It seems like from a rational perspective, if you're against bakers refusing to serve gay couples, you should be against restaurant owners refusing to serve Trump staff members, the thing is the people that are so outraged by the Sanders incident are the same people supporting not serving gay couples, which is hypocracy of the foulest order.

Would I qualify as "outraged"?
I say both refusals are ethically wrong.
But it I'm to be accused of hypocrasy [sic], at least spell the word correctly.

But the other question is are they legally wrong.
That's tricker because it depends upon local law & interpretation.
As things stand, both acts are legal (in their jurisdiction).

 

[fantome profane]

It seems like from a rational perspective, if you're against bakers refusing to serve gay couples, you should be against restaurant owners refusing to serve Trump staff members, the thing is the people that are so outraged by the Sanders incident are the same people supporting not serving gay couples, which is hypocracy of the foulest order.

Sarah Huckabee Sanders is not a protected or marginalized goup. She is an individual.

If somebody does not like me personally they have every right to kick me personally out of their restaurant.

I am not saying what this restaurant owner did was smart, or the right thing to do. But this is not a civil rights issue. And we shouldn’t confuse it with one.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I am not saying what this restaurant owner did was smart, or the right thing to do. But this is not a civil rights issue. And we shouldn’t confuse it with one.

I see it as a civil rights issue for the restaurant owner:

- she has the right to express her views.
- she has the right to petition (and protest?) the government by any legal means she sees fit to use.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

And I don’t know what Trump’s next big project will be, but I’m sure it will be horrific as well. A restaurant owner can’t do a huge amount to interfere with these plans, but she did what she could. Good for her.

What did she actually accomplish though? Why not ask for a private and civil conversation to discuss your concerns? People of the Right would still complain because the woman didn't leave Sander's alone, but then the Left would be able to defend her civil behavior. Instead, we're left dissecting the difference between group affiliation and what you do on a day to day basis. Instead of people and human beings, we are, collectively, seeing "the enemy." Really, it's a sad reflection of the state America is in.

 

[Revoltingest]

What did she actually accomplish though? Why not ask for a private and civil conversation to discuss your concerns? People of the Right would still complain because the woman didn't leave Sander's alone, but then the Left would be able to defend her civil behavior. Instead, we're left dissecting the difference between group affiliation and what you do on a day to day basis. Instead of people and human beings, we are, collectively, seeing "the enemy." Really, it's a sad reflection of the state America is in.

Does anyone really favor incivility as advancing political
discourse. I notice that it correlates more with personality.
The claim of incivility being politically productive seems
a rationalization to act out.
Those who are typically uncivil towards others favor incivility.
Those who are typically civil towards all favor civility.
So I'm not in the least surprised that you favor civility, since
you've yet to call me a "poopy head" in any disagreement.

 

[Shad]

Because they really weren't relevant.

How so? Joining a group is still an action, endorsement of the group and its actions. That is an action in itself.

That doesn't make her immune from others judging her as a person.

Considering the judgement of her as person includes her actions in politics and the administrations without which this thread and event would most likely never have occurred.

 

[fantome profane]

How so? Joining a group is still an action, endorsement of the group and its actions. That is an action in itself.



Considering the judgement of her as person includes her actions in politics and the administrations without which this thread and event would most likely never have occurred.

So if I as a “civilian” say horrible offensive things and spread misinformation I can be banned from the Red Hen, but a member of the Trump administration has special protection at restaurants?

 

[Shad]

So if I as a “civilian” say horrible offensive things and spread misinformation I can be banned from the Red Hen, but a member of the Trump administration has special protection at restaurants?

Never said that. I am asking where people draw the line and if removal would be applied to someone not as well known in the public eye. Otherwise this was just grandstanding due to publicity.

Sanders is still a civilian.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Sanders is still a civilian.

Yes, and her actions while performing her duties are not exempt from public judgement.

 

[Shad]

Yes, and her actions while performing her duties are not exempt from public judgement.

Never said it was. I am not making any exceptions for Sanders here. I am asking what the limit is and if it applies to people without Sanders' position in the public eye. Would you kick out a local mayor for statements you did not agree with. A political activist. Etc etc. Would you kick out someone in a MAGA hat?

 

[Revoltingest]

Yes, and her actions while performing her duties are not exempt from public judgement.

In the news, we see that the Red Hen's owner is also subject to public judgement & uncivil protest.
The Red Hen Restaurant Forced To Close After Protests, Threats, Manure
I haven't heard her opine about how everything has played out
so far, but it would be interesting to hear her reaction.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

In the news, we see that the Red Hen's owner is also subject to public judgement & uncivil protest.
The Red Hen Restaurant Forced To Close After Protests, Threats, Manure
I haven't heard her opine about how everything has played out
so far, but it would be interesting to hear her reaction.

I can't say I'm surprised. It's the age of rage, anger, and knee jerk reactions. And now some people are without a job, all because we act ****ing insane.

 

[Thermos aquaticus]

It seems like from a rational perspective, if you're against bakers refusing to serve gay couples, you should be against restaurant owners refusing to serve Trump staff members, the thing is the people that are so outraged by the Sanders incident are the same people supporting not serving gay couples, which is hypocracy of the foulest order.

I don't see it that way. If you dislike someone because they constantly lie to the American people that is one thing. Your sexual preference is part of who you are. They seem like very different things to me.

Personally, I would serve both even though I very much detest what Sanders does on behalf of the White House. I would rather lead by example than make an example of someone.

 

[Revoltingest]

I can't say I'm surprised. It's the age of rage, anger, and knee jerk reactions. And now some people are without a job, all because we act ****ing insane.

No, no....you have it all wrong!
Think about all the....
Nah...not in the mood to mock the hater's claims of positive change.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I can't say I'm surprised. It's the age of rage, anger, and knee jerk reactions. And now some people are without a job, all because we act ****ing insane.

According to that article, they just closed for the night because the road was blocked. Other sources I’ve seen have said that the restaurant is booked solid for the next month.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

No, no....you have it all wrong!
Think about all the....
Nah...not in the mood to mock the hater's claims of positive change.

Reminds me when Frank, on God Bless America, asked what's the point of having a civilization of we're no longer interested in being civil? It's definitely a Left leaning movie, but you should check it out. It's a movie of killing reality TV stars and "news pundits," disruptive and noise movie goers and the West Borrow Baptist Church, they throw Fred Phelps off a cliff, and it glorifies Alice Cooper.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

There's a Black Mirror episode where each day the person who gets the most DIAF tweets each day gets eaten by robot bees. Pretty cool.