Trump: 'Dirty' restaurant that refused to serve Sanders 'needs a paint job'

[ABX]

I noticed Saturday, one of the 'wrong' 'Red Hen' restaurants had about 30 thousand comments on the top two posts. They pulled their page down on Sunday.

Even a pub in Ireland with the same name was getting slammed with comments.

Confused Pro-Trump protestors go after the wrong Red Hen restaurant

As soon as the story broke that a Virginia restaurant refused service to White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders, you knew the blowback was coming. 
But some of the Trump administration supporters fighting back with nastiness are getting a bit confused, mistaking other restaurants for the one Sanders attempted to dine at on Friday....

https://www.yahoo.com/news/confused-pro-trump-protestors-wrong-154337250.html

[txradioguy]

Some more background on why Sarah got the boot.

Stephanie Wilkinson, co-owner of The Red Hen restaurant in Lexington, Va., told The Washington Post on Saturday that Sanders's support of President Trump's desire to ban transgender people from the military, in particular, was antithetical to her beliefs. 
The restaurant employs several LGBT employees, Wilkinson said, some of whom voiced concerns over serving Sanders because of her previous comments defending Trump's proposed ban.

<snip>

Wilkinson told the Post Sanders worked in an administration that is "inhumane and unethical."

She added that the Trump administration's policy of separating migrant families who are apprehended illegally entering the U.S. also contributed to her staff's concerns.

That practice, part of Trump's "zero tolerance" policy, was halted by the president after ongoing backlash prompted him to reverse his administration's position and sign an executive order to keep migrant families together. 

“Tell me what you want me to do. I can ask her to leave,” Wilkinson said she told her staff. “They said yes.”

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/393810-restaurant-owner-i-threw-out-sarah-sanders-over-her-defense-of

[WingNot]

Some more background on why Sarah got the boot.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/393810-restaurant-owner-i-threw-out-sarah-sanders-over-her-defense-of

That was thin.  Thin as piss on a flat rock in Lubbock during August.

[txradioguy]

That was thin.  Thin as piss on a flat rock in Lubbock during August.

Pure 110% political in motivation.

[Cyber Liberty]

So she asked her gay employees what to do, and she obeyed them, exercising not a whit of executive authority.  Probably thought running her kitchen like a democracy is a good idea.  Still does.  I wonder if she runs her yarn company the same way?

[XenaLee]

Conservatives SHOULD - but ForeverTrump® won't because.... they like that "HE FIGHTS!"

Never mind the fact that we are going frightfully fast from a cold war with Leftists and Statists in the GOP to an open hot war being stoked by everyone.

Bloodbaths are not pretty.  But that it seems is where this train is wanting to go.

Sadly when both the Communists/Marxists and the Trump Populists are inciting payback and mayhem - neither has any justifiable cause to support.  We simply go the route France went in the very late 1700s.

And meanwhile..... apparently most on the the Trump side are not bright enough to discern that they are playing right into the anarchist radical left's paws..... since chaos, violence and even another civil war is exactly what they want.   America, a wonderful idea but failed experiment.....doomed by sheer stupidity.   Sad, really.

[XenaLee]

So she asked her gay employees what to do, and she obeyed them, exercising not a whit of executive authority.  Probably thought running her kitchen like a democracy is a good idea.  Still does.  I wonder if she runs her yarn company the same way?

She's a leftie.  She never thinks.  She emotes.  It's how they roll.

[edpc]

Sadly when both the Communists/Marxists and the Trump Populists are inciting payback and mayhem - neither has any justifiable cause to support.  We simply go the route France went in the very late 1700s.

Looks like we’re starting in off 1990s banana republic mode.


The public shaming of party officials is more closely associated with Latin American politics. Last year, Venezuelan expatriates in South Florida engaged in what they called a “social media manhunt” of officials with ties to the regime, chanting them out of diners. The protest confrontations have been traced back to what were called “escraches” in the 1990s in Argentina, where victims of the former military dictatorship accosted their accused torturers in public confrontations.

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/06/25/liberals-attack-bondi-sanders-trump-667934

[WingNot]

She's a leftie.  She never thinks.  She emotes. 

Is that when they lose their feathers?

[XenaLee]

Is that when they lose their feathers?

No, you're thinking molts.   But it probably results in the same type of shedding (brain cells).

[Hoodat]

LOL!  And the difference is?

One refers to gender while the other refers to one's sexual preference.  The two are not the same.  There are homosexuals who marry persons of the opposite gender, and there are heterosexual persons who marry persons of the same gender.

No, I just don't have your imaginative interpretation.

Here it is for the fifth time:

In July 2012, Craig and Mullins visited Masterpiece, a bakery
in Lakewood, Colorado, and requested that Phillips design and
create a cake to celebrate their same-sex wedding. Phillips
declined, telling them that he does not create wedding cakes for
same-sex weddings because of his religious beliefs, but advising
Craig and Mullins that he would be happy to make and sell them
any other baked goods. Craig and Mullins promptly left
Masterpiece without discussing with Phillips any details of their
wedding cake. The following day, Craig’s mother, Deborah Munn,
called Phillips, who advised her that Masterpiece did not make
wedding cakes for same-sex weddings because of his religious
beliefs and because Colorado did not recognize same-sex marriages.

https://www.courts.state.co.us/Courts/Court_of_Appeals/Opinion/2015/14CA1351-PD.pdf

[WingNot]

No, you're thinking molts.   But it probably results in the same type of shedding (brain cells).

Thank you.  Had a senior moment! 

[RedHead]

One refers to gender while the other refers to one's sexual preference.  The two are not the same.  There are homosexuals who marry persons of the opposite gender, and there are heterosexual persons who marry persons of the same gender.

So which one is the gay wedding and which is the same-sex wedding?

Here it is for the fifth time:

In July 2012, Craig and Mullins visited Masterpiece, a bakery
in Lakewood, Colorado, and requested that Phillips design and
create a cake to celebrate their same-sex wedding. Phillips
declined, telling them that he does not create wedding cakes for
same-sex weddings because of his religious beliefs, but advising
Craig and Mullins that he would be happy to make and sell them
any other baked goods. Craig and Mullins promptly left
Masterpiece without discussing with Phillips any details of their
wedding cake. The following day, Craig’s mother, Deborah Munn,
called Phillips, who advised her that Masterpiece did not make
wedding cakes for same-sex weddings because of his religious
beliefs and because Colorado did not recognize same-sex marriages.

https://www.courts.state.co.us/Courts/Court_of_Appeals/Opinion/2015/14CA1351-PD.pdf

Still not seeing it.

[Hoodat]

So which one is the gay wedding and which is the same-sex wedding?

A same-sex wedding is where two people of the same gender marry each other.  I personally know two males who did exactly that.  Neither is homosexual.  Both like women and continue to date women.  But they agreed to get married (in California) so that one could enroll in the other one's insurance plan.   Such a marriage was deemed not to be recognized  by the State of California per its own Constitution.  But some black-robed tyrant decided otherwise.

As for 'gay wedding', I am not sure what you mean by that.  To me, the word 'gay' means annoyingly immature.  But seeing how sexual preference is exactly that, a preference, then it is entirely plausible for one to consider him/herself of having one sexual preference at one moment, and an entirely different sexual preference at another.

Still not seeing it.

Clearly intentional.

[INVAR]

So which one is the gay wedding and which is the same-sex wedding?

Still not seeing it.

Irrelevant.

I discriminate against both with extreme prejudice.

[txradioguy]

So which one is the gay wedding and which is the same-sex wedding?

Still not seeing it.

Of course you don't.

Bless your heart.

[corbe]

   It appears Infrastructure Monday has been off, again.

[240B]

A same-sex wedding is where two people of the same gender marry each other.  I personally know two males who did exactly that.  Neither is homosexual.  Both like women and continue to date women.  But they agreed to get married (in California) so that one could enroll in the other one's insurance plan.   Such a marriage was deemed not to be recognized  by the State of California per its own Constitution.  But some black-robed tyrant decided otherwise.

As for 'gay wedding', I am not sure what you mean by that.  To me, the word 'gay' means annoyingly immature.  But seeing how sexual preference is exactly that, a preference, then it is entirely plausible for one to consider him/herself of having one sexual preference at one moment, and an entirely different sexual preference at another.


Clearly intentional.

@Hoodat

[aligncare]

I see the Trump critics here have made up their minds without knowing all the facts.

Sanders didn’t  ‘go after a private company’ at all. That’s nonsense. In fact she said nothing about the incident until a waiter at the restaurant tweeted about it. That’s when and where she responded, not in an official capacity, but as a private citizen.

[RoosGirl]

I see the Trump critics here have made up their minds without knowing all the facts.

Sanders didn’t  ‘go after a private company’ at all. That’s nonsense. In fact she said nothing about the incident until a waiter at the restaurant tweeted about it. That’s when and where she responded, not in an official capacity, but as a private citizen.

Did she use her private Twitter account or her WH Twitter account?  Anyway, I see more of a problem with Trump getting involved in any way than Sarah commenting on what happened to her.

[edpc]

Sanders didn’t  ‘go after a private company’ at all. That’s nonsense. In fact she said nothing about the incident until a waiter at the restaurant tweeted about it. That’s when and where she responded, not in an official capacity, but as a private citizen.

Your response can't be considered as a private citizen, if it's from the official press secretary account - especially when she has a private twitter account.  Nevertheless, all she did was state what occurred and didn't do anything wrong.

[WingNot]

Did she use her private Twitter account or her WH Twitter account?  Anyway, I see more of a problem with Trump getting involved in any way than Sarah commenting on what happened to her.

Why.  What difference does it make.  Leave the Trump thing out of the conversation.

[XenaLee]

Why.  What difference does it make.  Leave the Trump thing out of the conversation.

No.

[WingNot]

No.

No what? 

[RoosGirl]

Why.  What difference does it make.  Leave the Trump thing out of the conversation.

LOL  The article is about Trump.

Why?  Because I don't want an Obama sticking his nose in to "punish" a private business either.  And in general I believe a private business should be able to refuse service to anyone for any reason.