Sunday, June 24, 2018

Brain Fart Of The Day

I don't understand writer's block.
Five (max) minutes' surfing on the 'net cures it.
Case in point:

The following rhetorical pantload of, sorry, rose fertilizer, is what happens when schools no longer teach critical thinking and basic logic, because their students cannot pass the physical for that class, i.e. using their head for something more than just a hat rack:

 A restaurant in Virginia booted the White House press secretary from the premises. The co-owner did so due to her standards, and much coercion from her staff.

This, in my opinion, is completely up to the discretion of the restaurant. No restaurant, or any business, should be forced to serve those they don't want in their establishment. In a perfect world, the incident would be over, and the restaurant could continue feeding its clients. Unfortunately, that won't happen.

The restaurant is being bombarded by negative reviews, and the detractors are from all over the United States. I'm sure the usual ugly remarks and threats are numerous, which can be hard on a business if it has an internet site. The sheer volume of nasty comment, or emails, can choke a server and increase the cost for business.

There are many supporters too, but if the supporters are the usual supporters for those so quick to react without thinking, their not known for their spending, or charity. They'll swear their allegiance, and then shake their head, when the restaurant closes the door.

To add insult to injury, there is another restaurant in Virginia with the same name. Their business may suffer, and if enough damage is done, they may seek the help of a personal injury attorney to reduce the losses.

I doubt the restaurant survives. Such actions, with nationwide coverage, don't end well. The co-owner, and staff, probably thought they were preserving their integrity, which is a noble action. Unfortunately their ignorance may lead to bankruptcy, and unemployment. They choose the battle, but never realized they already lost the war.
Sorry, but HELL NO.

"In a perfect world", the owner and her halfwit staff realize that absent any actions of personal misbehavior on the premises whilst dining, they treat Sarah Sanders exactly like every other customer who enters their public establishment. Because they know if they fail to adhere to that minimum standard of civility (from whose meaning-rich root, civitas, springs also the word "civilization"), the Banshees Of Comeuppance will descend on their establishment, and drive their establishment out of business, for cause, and remove their jackassical DNA from the economic gene pool, exactly the "invisible hand" predicted in 1776 by Adam Smith, the explicatory father of capitalism and its functioning.

So, for the exact same reason we have public health codes, if you're in business to serve food to customers, you serve food to customers. Period. Paragraph. End of effing book.

This was not the Democrat Harpy Pub. It was not the Politically Correct Lounge. Although, to be fair, if you're going to act like that and name your fœtid swillery "The Red Hen", you could at least do potential patrons outside the courtesy of flying the appropriate flag:

That no such obvious clue was evident puts the onus for acting with scrupulous correctness towards all paying customers not otherwise misbehaving firmly upon the swill-dispensary in question, and not the patrons.
Having failed that test of basic civility and customer service, they deserve everything they get in response, hopefully up to and including bankruptcy, business failure, unemployment, and poverty.

Dulce et decorum est.

That's called laying in the bed you made.

If you run an eatery, and you put the "rant" in "restaurant", thinking thereby that a mere license to sling hash gives you carte blanche to dictate the occupations and political opinions of your patrons, stand the f**k by for one of life's little surprises to come along, in much the same way as both gravity and sunrise do.

Business owners absolutely have the right to eject anyone from their premises. But in no world, perfect or otherwise, save for one best described by Dante in Inferno, do they have any right to remain ignorantly and blissfully free of consequences for their actions, whether wise or blisteringly stupid.

And there are no unicorn-powered welfare machines pumping out strawberry-scented banknotes to the poor here in Reality, either.

If an owner has even as little as half a wit, they make their political statements with their checkbook, not their guest policy. And when neither they nor their employees, combined, can pull off an IQ level higher than average winter temperatures in Lexington VA, slinging hash is probably the upper limit of their intellectual endeavors, and even that is probably suspect. As in, I suspect they probably follow their nominal mascot, and serve chicken$#!^ on the plates, as well as at the hostess station. I wouldn't know, and I'll never find out.

But if this is news to you, and you're blogging about it, you maybe ought to heed the sage advice of rapper Ice Cube, and check yourself before you wreck yourself.

Just saying.

Bonus: Go check out Dianny's post on the same root topic.
This Facecrack reply in one of the links was gigglesnortworthy.

My contribution:



Anonymous said...

This, in my opinion, is completely up to the discretion of the restaurant. No restaurant, or any business, should be forced to serve those they don't want in their establishment.

So, does that also apply to Christian bakers that are willing to bake a cake for gays but do not want to put a particular message on the cake too?

I get a bit confused trying to keep up wit the twists and turns in what is politically correct and what isn't nowadays ...

Phil B

Anonymous said...

The left are nothing if not hypocrites.

Aesop said...

Free association is separate from freedom of religion and speech.
You cannot compel anyone to create a work for hire that they find repugnant. and you are similarly free to disinvite anyone from your premises.

The point is, you can also expect commensurate backlash against you for that decision.

the cake baking case, as was demonstrated, was nothing but an attempt to bait a baker the couple would not have patronized otherwise. It failed in court, failed the smell test, and as the baker in question wasn't beholden to a majority gay customer base, he's still in business, so it was a triple fail.

In the case of the WH Press Secretary, she was merely attempting to get a meal, not make a point, and once again, it was nothing but the Left baiting those with whom they disagree, on dubious grounds. But this time, they're the business owners, so that gun is going to backfire right into their own face.

Boo frickin' hoo, right?