Jump to content

White House press secretary says asked to leave restaurant for working for Trump


rooster59

Recommended Posts

take

4 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Since it seems that most journalists now present their opinions rather than report facts, it's very hard to find any credible source. Al Jazeera is about the only visual media that I respect now. The BBC lost it's reputation long ago, when it became infested by PC, and any Murdoch owned media isn't worth anything other than entertainment, IMO. Sky is so mad about weather reports, football and self promotion, it's surprising that it presents any news at all. Fox is basically opinion, but only in the small gaps between ads.

1) When does "opinion" becomes  propanganda, I wonder. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda

 

2) Or can it been objectively analyzed to obtain a relative percentage  of   everything   The Australian Robert Murdoch owns ..... ; maybe he is no worse  than Randolph Hearst just  with  much deeper  "Mediums" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellow_journalism             https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_medium_is_the_message

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So what's next?

 

An important point is made here that I've made before. "trump" fans are trying to suggest these incidents are equivalent to unfair discrimination only based on some personal identity thing like race or sexual orientation.

 

It's not that. It's something else. But now that it's started, hard to say where this leads.

 

Quote

 

Why Sarah Sanders was asked to leave a restaurant

...
But applying this to the average American divides us even more as a nation and makes it less likely that we can ever return to being the United States of America.

 

Going forward, it's likely that we will see more people speak out against Trump officials who publicly defend his cruel policies. The reality is that for many, the stakes are simply too high to remain silent as Trump attempts to radically transform our nation from the United States into Trumpistan.

 

 

Edited by Jingthing
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, kamahele said:

It was publicized by Sara Sanders using her government Twitter account and not by the restaurant.

"It was publicized by Sara Sanders illegally using her government Twitter account and not by the restaurant."

 

Added to your post.

Edited by JimmyJ
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Jingthing said:

The rotten apple didn't fall far from the tree.

 

 

 “Huckabee should be ostracized and ashamed.” Davidson later said he reported the tweet “because it clearly is designed to stoke hatred of a group.” Davidson went on to note that Huckabee “is not limiting his hatred-stoking to actual MS13 members, he clearly wants all Hispanic immigrants to be seen as criminal.”

 

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/06/mike-huckabee-sends-bigoted-tweet-calling-ms-13-gang-members-pelosis-campaign-committee.html

 

Sent from my Lenovo A7020a48 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

 

 

 

 

There are serious issues within the Huckabee family.

 

Her brother allegedly tortured a dog to death.

 

" His father told NEWSWEEK that his son did not engage in 'intentional torture.' "There was a dog that apparently had mange and was absolutely, I guess, emaciated."

 

http://www.newsweek.com/sons-past-could-come-back-bite-huckabee-94351

 

Her father is a good friend and defender of fellow Christian fundamentalist Josh Duggar (reality tv star), who is a serial sister sexual molester.

[A search will reveal plenty of links for this].

 

Articles reveal that it seems extremely likely that Governor Pappy Huckabee prevented prosecution on both issues.

 

The rock n' roll world sure lost out when Mike chose politics over music:

(When you're ready to surrender, first jump to 5:30 for the lead singer checking his phone for messages)

 

 

"  'Live free or die' unless you are a young immigrant child".

Edited by JimmyJ
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, DoctorG said:

Would you support making a muslim baker make one for Jews. black baker making for KKK, or Jewish baker for Nazis?

Following one or the other religion or following a specific political organization is a an ACTIVE CHOICE you make.

Being gay is not!

See the difference!?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, ELVIS123456 said:

Former Governor of Arkansas Mike Huckabee, Sanders’ father, responded to his daughter’s tweet expressing his dismay.

 

Aaaaawwww...ins't that nice!

hateful daddy defends his hateful daughter!

What are you trying to prove with this?

That there are people who can not see the forest for the trees?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Since it seems that most journalists now present their opinions rather than report facts, it's very hard to find any credible source. Al Jazeera is about the only visual media that I respect now. The BBC lost it's reputation long ago, when it became infested by PC, and any Murdoch owned media isn't worth anything other than entertainment, IMO. Sky is so mad about weather reports, football and self promotion, it's surprising that it presents any news at all. Fox is basically opinion, but only in the small gaps between ads.

 

Anyone who relies on cable TV news for a clear, nuanced understanding of what's going on in the world is going to fail. You'll get headlines and pictures, but not context and explanation and perspective, most of the time.

 

And no, outside of cable TV and clearly partisan news sources, "most journalists" -- the professional reputable ones and outlets -- don't present opinions rather than report fact.  That's just your false, myopic perception of what goes on in true professional journalism.

Edited by TallGuyJohninBKK
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's the photo I was hoping to find:

 

"Kim Davis to be released, but must not interfere with marriage licenses. Huckabee horns in."

 

Praise the Lord!

gothic.jpg?cb=1489083448

 

 

  • "ARK./KY. GOTHIC: The Huckabees and the Davises after rally for the disobedient county clerk."

https://www.arktimes.com/ArkansasBlog/archives/2015/09/08/kim-davis-to-be-released-but-must-no-interfere-with-marriage-licenses

 

Edited by JimmyJ
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That case is worse, of course, than the current one at hand because that woman was a public employee duty bound to perform government service. Whereas in this case, it was a private business entirely.

 

Still, this latest episode set me to thinking. Generally, I abhor any kind of discrimination. But I started to think, what if I was a private business owner and I had some KKK or Nazi guys come strolling into my business, on one hand, I don't believe in discrimination. But on the other hand, I also don't condone hate, bigotry, racism, etc etc.  How does one morally, ethically resolve that dilemma.

 

If I'm not mistaken, it's conservative Republicans who have traditionally argued that people in the private sector should not be forced to do things that are at odds with their moral or religious beliefs...like:

--pharmacists refusing to sell birth control pills.

--doctors refusing to perform legal abortions

--service personnel refusing to participate in gay marriage things

etc etc.

 

Maybe we need to add another category to that list -- refusing to serve corrupt, immoral, un-American, lying politicians and those who work for them.

 

 

Edited by TallGuyJohninBKK
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, duanebigsby said:

The USA has 16 territories. Is that not an empire?

No ,no in the true sense of the word - Wikipedia -Empire

Edited by riclag
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, riclag said:

No - Wikipedia -Empire

16 territories.

 

And an estimated FIVE THOUSAND military bases with "around 600" outside the US.

 

This is Empire.

 

" The Pentagon stated in 2013 that there are "around" 5000 bases total, with "around" 600 of them overseas.[2] "

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_military_bases

Edited by JimmyJ
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, riclag said:

No - Wikipedia -Empire

 

2 minutes ago, JimmyJ said:

16 territories.

 

And an estimated FIVE THOUSAND military bases around the world.

 

This is Empire.

 

" The Pentagon stated in 2013 that there are "around" 5000 bases total, with "around" 600 of them overseas.[2] "

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_military_bases

nope- We have always been the USA or America.

Edited by riclag
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, riclag said:

No ,no in the true sense of the word - Wikipedia -Empire

You are technically right but from the Wikipedia 

 

"The United States is not traditionally recognized as an empire, in part because the U.S. adopted a different political system from those that previous empires had used. Despite these systematic differences, the political objectives and strategies of the United States government have been quite similar to those of previous empires.[37] Due to this similarity some scholars confess: "When it walks like a duck, talks like a duck, it's a duck"

 

I'm thinking it's an Empire by this  reckoning.

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Following one or the other religion or following a specific political organization is a an ACTIVE CHOICE you make.
Being gay is not!
See the difference!?
 
You're a bit confused about the Jewish thing. Jews are Jews regardless of choice about observing the faith.

Sent from my Lenovo A7020a48 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So long as it doesn't turn to violence I don't see harassing people while they are out in public as a problem. That is the price people pay for supporting and defending these radical policies. She goes out every day and lies to the public. She attacks the press when they press her on subjects. She is worthy of criticism.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

Still, this latest episode set me to thinking. Generally, I abhor any kind of discrimination. But I started to think, what if I was a private business owner and I had some KKK or Nazi guys come strolling into my business, on one hand, I don't believe in discrimination. But on the other hand, I also don't condone hate, bigotry, racism, etc etc.  How does one morally, ethically resolve that dilemma.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Perhaps this will help:

 

"All this gibberish about 'civility' ultimately boils down to the fact that the rule of murderous Orwellian oligarchs depends on our being polite, compliant and obedient instead of moral, just and true."

-Caitlin Johnstone

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by JimmyJ
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, JimmyJ said:

3 years ago when the Supreme Court made gay marriage legal, a Kentucky clerk illegally refused to issue a license to a gay couple due to her fundamentalist Christian beliefs.

 

She also forbade any of her deputy clerks from issuing marriage licenses to gay couples.

 

Fellow Fundamentalist Christian, Former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee, then a Presidential candidate,  was her most avid defender, standing with her at rallies and press events, defending her right to:

a) Break the law;

b) Discriminate against gays.

 

KimDavis.jpg

 

 

" Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis, second from right, stands with Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee, right, attorney Mat Staver, second from left, and her husband, Joe Davis, at the Carter County Detention Center, Tuesday, Sept. 8, in Grayson, Ky., after Davis was released after being jailed for refusing to issue marriage licenses to gay couples. (Pablo Alcala/Lexington Herald-Leader via AP) ­­"

 

https://www.dallasvoice.com/defending-1st-amendment-10203827.html

 

"Kentucky clerk Kim Davis jailed, refuses to let deputy clerks issue gay marriage licenses"

 

https://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/2015/09/kentucky_clerk_kim_davis_appea.html

 

Then 3 years later a restaurant owner exercises her legal right to refuse service (not based on race, religion, sex) and he can't wait to condemn the restaurant owner.

 

[I'm really surprised I haven't seen any of the msm mention this].

 

"Then 3 years later a restaurant owner exercises her legal right to refuse service (not based on race, religion, sex) and he can't wait to condemn the restaurant owner."

 

Interesting precedent you applaud. So the next time some loony tunes bans someone because he/she doesn't like their religion, racial origin, sex, sexual orientation, then all they have to say is they don't like who they work for!

 

Either everyone has the right to refuse service to anyone, or no one can. Anything that is a mixture instantly promotes discrimination and is open to abuse especially by the politically correct.

 

The left are again showing their penchant for mob rule, prejudice and petty behavior to oppress democracy when it doesn't give them a result they approve of. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

"Then 3 years later a restaurant owner exercises her legal right to refuse service (not based on race, religion, sex) and he can't wait to condemn the restaurant owner."

 

Interesting precedent you applaud. So the next time some loony tunes bans someone because he/she doesn't like their religion, racial origin, sex, sexual orientation, then all they have to say is they don't like who they work for!

 

Either everyone has the right to refuse service to anyone, or no one can. Anything that is a mixture instantly promotes discrimination and is open to abuse especially by the politically correct.

 

The left are again showing their penchant for mob rule, prejudice and petty behavior to oppress democracy when it doesn't give them a result they approve of. 

"Either everyone has the right to refuse service to anyone, or no one can."

 

To me there is a big difference between someone working for and paid by the people and a private enterprise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, stevenl said:

"Either everyone has the right to refuse service to anyone, or no one can."

 

To me there is a big difference between someone working for and paid by the people and a private enterprise.

 

So are you ok with someone owning a service business being allowed to discriminate against someone because of their occupation?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

The left are again showing their penchant for mob rule, prejudice and petty behavior to oppress democracy when it doesn't give them a result they approve of. 

 

You're spouting a lot of inflammatory, false rhetoric here, especially when it's not the "left" but rather the right/conservatives that has long championed the supposed right of private citizens in business settings to refuse to do things that conflict with their religious or moral beliefs, even when those conflict with the country's actual laws.

 

Edited by TallGuyJohninBKK
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would be helpful here if someone can post and/or point to what the actual current legal standard in the U.S. is right now for private citizens in a private business context to decline service.

 

Is it legally OK, based on federal law and court decisions, for a private business owner to refuse service to patrons period regardless of the circumstances, or it's only OK provided that refusal isn't based on one of the protected classes (race, gender, sexual orientation)?

 

It would inform the discussion/debate here if everyone was more clear on just what the legal standard for this issue is in the U.S., again, in the private business setting.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

So are you ok with someone owning a service business being allowed to discriminate against someone because of their occupation?

A private business refusing to provide service to someone based on that person's actions is not the same as refusing service for someone because they're black, or Jewish, or Muslim, or gay.  Can't you see the difference? 

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Berkshire said:

A private business refusing to provide service to someone based on that person's actions is not the same as refusing service for someone because they're black, or Jewish, or Muslim, or gay.  Can't you see the difference? 

Exactly! 

The examples I gave before were O.J. Simpson, Bill Cosby, and Bernie Madoff. Two black men, one Jew. It would be perfectly understandable for a restaurant to not want to serve them, not based on their ethnicity, but based on their NOTORIOUS behavior. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

So are you ok with someone owning a service business being allowed to discriminate against someone because of their occupation?

I am in the service business, and refuse people, or make a very unattractive offer for them. Not based on religion, skin etc.,  but based on how I perceive them to be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, riclag said:

No ,no in the true sense of the word - Wikipedia -Empire

 

1 hour ago, riclag said:

 

nope- We have always been the USA or America.

Back to my original point, - well whatever you are wanting to call yourself, you have an economic and military reach that outdoes the Mongolian, Roman or British Empires and whatever you want to call it, we are all witnessing it's demise and destruction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.











×
×
  • Create New...