Bernie Sanders: Sarah Sanders has the right to 'go into a restaurant and have dinner

[Adenoid_Hynkel]

Source: The Hill

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) on Wednesday came to the defense of White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders, saying individuals should "have the right to go into a restaurant and have dinner."

The Vermont senator made the comments while speaking on MSNBC about the recent uptick in public confrontations Trump Cabinet officials have faced. On Friday, Sarah Huckabee Sanders was asked to leave a small Virginia restaurant because of her role in the administration.

In addition, protesters confronted Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) on Tuesday over the Trump administration's border policies.

"I'm not a great fan of shouting down people or being rude to people," Bernie Sanders said. "People have a right to be angry when Congress gives tax breaks to billionaires and then wants to cut nutrition programs for low income pregnant women."


Read more: http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/394449-bernie-sanders-sarah-sanders-has-the-right-to-go-into-a-restaurant-and-have

---

Because "the revolution," or some such shit.

Anyway, here's some Buster-style civility for civil rights heroes:
https://m.

https://m.

[Napolion]

1. New Harvard poll: Biden 32%, Sanders 16%

I wonder why.
https://www.seattlepi.com/local/politics/article/Connelly-Biden-big-favorite-for-Democrats-2020-13031350.php

[NurseJackie]

19. That high, huh?

Sanders 16%

That high, huh?

[True Blue American]

33. Tell Bernie

Last edited Thu Jun 28, 2018, 11:32 AM - Edit history (1)

The people who own the Restaurant and the workers have a perfect right to hold the vote as they did and reufuse to serve Sanders.

That goes for Bernie,too.

[ChiTownDenny]

59. + 1

[lapucelle]

45. Here are the full stats from the latest Harvard Harris Poll.

Page 61

Who do you support today to be the Democratic nominee for President in 2020?

Base: Democrat
Joe Biden 32%
Hillary Clinton 18%
Bernie Sanders 16%
Elizabeth Warren 10%
Cory Booker 6%
Michael Bloomberg 3%
Kamala Harris 2%
Andrew Cuomo 1%
Kirsten Gillibrand 1%
Someone else 12%

And, for the fifth month in a row, the fiery independent from the Green Mountain State is nowhere to be found on the "most popular" list.

http://harvardharrispoll.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Final_HHP_Jun2018_RegisteredVoters_Topline_Memo.pdf

[Cha]

50. Brawaaaa.. Hillary's not even running..

Link to tweet

Mahalo, lapucelle

[Cha]

53. ...

Link to tweet

It's a long way off.. so much will change but right now he looks good to me compared to who's in 3rd place.

lol.. I just found this thread.

[Cha]

49. I'd take Joe Biden in a heartbeat!

Link to tweet

[trueblue2007]

84. I would take JOE also but I still love Hillary.

Other people i am loving. kamala harris for one.

[Cha]

85. Oh yeah I still Love Hillary.. here's what she has to say

about incivility..

Link to tweet

trueblue

[DownriverDem]

52. I know why

Bernie is not a member of the Democratic Party. He and his supporters hurt us in 2016. Biden is a tell it like it is Dem and former VP. Bernie needs to make up his mind.

[NurseJackie]

57. I laugh whenever I hear the claim that Bernie's the "most popular" politician in the known universe.

Bernie is not a member of the Democratic Party.

I laugh whenever I hear the claim that Bernie's the "most popular" politician in the known universe. The truth of the matter is that his "popularity" is being measured only by the unique demographics of his constituents in the state of Vermont... and then compared to similarly judged politicians.

Bernie's fans want us to believe that this means he's the "most popular" EVERYWHERE... of ALL POLITICIANS, but that's simply not the case. He's that popular only in his home state.... among his constituents and those who voted for him... not "everywhere".

But, it's worth nothing that it should be very easy for ANY politician to please the constituents of a very homogeneous state that lacks ethnic diversity. The more "the same" people are... the more they tend to think alike... the more their political and social interests align... and the easier it is for a politician to please MORE of them while displeasing less of them.

Also, Vermont is a VERY small state. Less than 3-quarters of a million people. Just 623,657. Even if Bernie had an approval rating of 100% that's a mere 623,657 who think he's the bee's knees.

In contrast, a Senator from a large state like California could have an approval rating of just 50% and STILL be "more popular" than Bernie. (After all, half of the state's population of 39,144,818 is 19,572,409. And that's WAY MORE than a paltry 623,657.)

All I'm trying to say is this... he's got it made-in-the-shade as far as "popularity" in Vermont is concerned... but ONLY as far as Vermont is concerned.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Americans#Geographic_distribution
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vermont#Demographics

[True Blue American]

60. The Leaders of the Democratic Party are President Barack Obama

And VP Joe Biden.

[backtoblue]

6. What do you mean by

If we take action, what do we do if they respond? Anyone....?

[Mr.Bill]

11. If I was eating in a restaurant and one of Trumps henchmen came in

out of respect for the peace of other diners I would not make a scene. I would quietly ask my waiter to pack up my food to go after telling him why and I would get up and leave after paying. It would be great of many people did it in the same place. I have done it with local politicians I didn't like.

[forgotmylogin]

3. Fine then. I hope all cooks and servers observe the "right" to handle her food appropriately.

SHS should probably be grateful for the polite treatment she received at Red Hen and might want to get her food anonymously from McDonald's going forward as IQ-45 does.

[24601]

86. Food tampering is not a right but a crime. In some states, it's a felony.

[forgotmylogin]

87. Sure enough. That's why I said

"I hope they observe the right [and regulation] to handle her food properly."
I worded it poorly.

[rainin]

4. I love Bernie, but this is bullshit! If I own a restaurant, am I required to serve my child's

rapist? My child's kidnapper? My child's murderer? etc,etc. Am I being uncivil to refuse service to anyone?

If others can understand me refusing service to my child's rapist, then why can't I refuse service to some other child's rapist?

Follow the logic. The trump administration is kidnapping children, and that's just the latest horrible thing they've done. SHS is complicit with this administration. If she wasn't ok with what they are doing, she can leave. I don't want to serve kidnappers.

Are kidnappers now a protected class?

[rwsanders]

12. Yep!! Great as he is, the politician in him often rises up.

[metalbot]

31. Does that mean you support the baker and florist?

Because the view that they have the right to refuse to do art for gay weddings seemed pretty frowned upon here.

Now, you could argue that _because_ of those rulings you legally _can_ refuse service to people you don't like (even though those rulings where much narrower than what you're looking for here), but if you want to participate in the "I don't want to serve person X for moral/ethical reasons", then you lose the ability to criticize those who refuse service under narrower grounds.

[7962]

34. Nobody gets that. And they dont want to.

I remember during the "bakery" story, everyone saying that when you open a business, youre supposed to be open to ALL people. It was the central point made by many.
Now we have people openly urging food to be contaminated, among other things.
Keep pushing that the "line" is, and the other side will gladly push it further. And down the hole we go.

[paleotn]

38. That's a total non sequiter...

So, these individuals came out right wing nut job assholes straight from their mother's womb and cannot change? Is it that Dumpster, Huckleberry, McConnell, Ryan et. al were born this way and thus cannot help by shit on vast numbers of people? Does Huckleberry have some medical condition where she can't help but lie constantly? Are horrific policies part of their genetic makeup?

We judge them by MLK's standard....not by the color of their skin, or anything else they cannot change, but by the content of their character. Their character has been found wanting in the extreme, thus out on their asses they go. Deal with it!!!

[metalbot]

51. You are missing the point

In the recent high profile cases of discrimination that have come through the Supreme Court, SCOTUS made a narrow ruling that you can't force someone to perform artistic acts (baking a cake and arranging flowers) in support of something that they feel is morally wrong. Those rulings have been heavily discussed both in LBN and General. I'd encourage you to read them.

Almost uniformly, those decisions are condemned, and in each of the threads, you'll find an argument that goes effectively:

Once you open a business for profit, and you use common infrastructure to run your business, you don't get to pick and choose who you sell a thing to.

How on earth is it possible that we could argue that a baker MUST bake a cake for a gay wedding, yet a restaurant owner has a right to refuse to serve someone because of their political views. Nobody chooses to be gay, but I certainly hope that if you are gay and get married that you are CHOOSING to get married, and that marriage isn't somehow being forced on you by your biology. Now, you may argue "but everyone has a RIGHT to get married", and I'd agree with that. Everyone has a RIGHT to a political world view, even when it's abhorrent.

I'm not trying to be dense or combative here, I seriously don't understand how refusing service to someone because you don't like something they do is any different from refusing to do something for a gay wedding because you think gays shouldn't marry.

[rainin]

58. We are not arguing political views. We are not arguing about policy. Democrats usually

support the idea of two parties, where ideas can be debated and consensus established, usually for the good of all. We are talking about an administration that lies. SHS lies to the American people consistently. We are talking about an administration that kidnaps children.

Our government protects certain people because they are discriminated against as a "class". This means the individuals who went into that bakery had not personally offended the baker. They were part of a "class" the baker disapproved of.

We recognize as a country that certain "classes" must be protected, we don't protect individuals in the same way.

For example, my company can fire "at will". That's legal. They don't need a reason to send me on my way. OTOH, if they were firing me because I was a POC, they would have a lawsuit on their hands.

If they can fire me "at will", then I can refuse service "at will". Have you never dined at a restaurant that had a sign that said "we reserve the right to refuse service to anyone"? I have.

[7962]

67. Yes, and when some DO refuse, we've seen it here and bitched to high heaven about it.

When you open your door for business, you should serve anyone who isnt causing a problem in your business whether you like them or not. We cant attempt to look morally superior but doing crap like this pulls that rug right out from under us.
And believe me, these types of actions get noticed by the large number of people who dont pay much attention to politics. And it rubs them the wrong way no matter WHAT side does it
Discrimination is discrimination. And if we look at who is "protected", at some point these laws may be challenged as a violation of the equal protection clause.

[rainin]

68. This is why dems are considered spineless. You and I will have to disagree.

[Cha]

74. Dems aren't "considered spineless" you're the one throwing

that broad brush insult on our Democratic Party.

[7962]

78. I guess so. But I've never considered Dems to be spineless.

I dont think throwing someone out of a business shows a "spine" at all, it just makes you an ass.
Do like some of the Right wingers did when Obama was president; just post a sign in the window saying "Republicans not welcome" and it takes care of itself. We all blasted THOSE assholes too. Hey, that Starbucks manager asked those 2 black guys to leave without mentioning race, they should have just LEFT, since they have the right to refuse service to anyone!
Like mentioned in this column in the Chicago tribune
http://www.chicagonow.com/dennis-byrnes-barbershop/2018/06/progressives-are-not-served-here/


Obviously the ship has already sailed here, and thats likely not gonna change. As you said, we'll just disagree on it. But I bet we agree that trump is an ignorant jackass

[paleotn]

70. YOU don't get the point....

Read my response a couple more times and see if it makes sense to you. A gay person is gay at birth. It's the same as being born black or female. You have no choice in the matter. Thus, discriminating against someone based on those inborn qualities is morally wrong and at the heart of the Civil Rights Act. Discriminating against someone who's gay simply because they're gay is morally reprehensible..period, end of fucking story. BEING A LYING FUCKING ASSHOLE is a choice. She wasn't thrown out for being a woman or being from Arkansas or for her religion. She was thrown out for being A LYING FUCKING ASSHOLE, who covers for a pResident more dangerous to our democracy than any this country has ever known. ONCE AGAIN, I repeat the eloquent words of Martin Luther King...." I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character." HER CHARACTER was found seriously lacking. That is in no way, shape or form comparable to the case in Colorado. If it had been my business, I'd have not been nearly as cordial, as she would have had a hard time getting my size 11 keen hiking boot out of her ass.

AGAIN, your argument is a total and complete non sequitur. Get it?

[Cha]

75. Well done, paleotn

Thank you!

[metalbot]

81. Sorry, I'll try again

I agree that people are born gay. You cannot discriminate against someone for being gay. Full stop.

Do we both agree that getting married is a choice?

Do we also believe that getting married is a right?

Do we both believe that being a lying asshole is a choice?

I'm fairly sure the answer to all three is "yes". So why can a business owner discriminate against someone for making one kind of choice, but not for making a different kind of choice?

I'm not suggesting that these are morally equivalent choices. They aren't. I'm interested in why they are not legally equivalent choices. We aren't a "nation of morals" (no matter what the Christian right would like to believe), we're a nation of laws.

[SCVDem]

5. No Bernie, they can't eat in peace!

Where are the babies?
We have concentration camps and kidnapped children in America!
Kidnapping is a felony! Taking the child across state lines is a capital offense with the death penalty option.

Piss off Bernie! Where are the kids and what are you doing to find them?

[heaven05]

7. its a shame

a goddamn shame that the RWers can be uncivil and downright aggressive, liars and cons that need their ass kicked, yet others, not quite democrats and outright repthugs like the liar s. Sanders are supposed to get a pass. Nah, I don't give a damn what bernie says. Sit down to eat and expect people to respect you sanders, you better start respecting human beings. Fuck tump, sarah s and all calling for her to be respected.

[Red Mountain]

8. The Right to Eat Dinner

is enshrined in the Constitution.

Damn these country-hating Liberals.

[haydukelives]

9. Yes she does

And the restaurant has the right to kick her sorry ass out.

[Tumbulu]

10. Yes, Bernie keeps destroying us

Attacking Hilary wasn't enough. I hate him.

[NurseJackie]

20. I assure you with a great deal of certainty that you are NOT alone in that.

[Chemisse]

39. I liked him (not loved) and voted for him, but I am starting to despise him.

He just keeps on acting in a way that divides us. Russia freaking loves him.

[dflprincess]

13. And the restaurant has a right not to serve her

Sarah will just have to find a place where they like her lying.

[Honeycombe8]

14. Actually, no, she doesn't. Owners reserve the right to refuse service....

as long as the person is not a protected class. These signs are all over America. You familiar with democracy, Bernie? Did you really say that? I hope that was a misprint.

[SFnomad]

22. Actually, they have the right to refuse service to someone even if they're a protected class ....

as long as the reason they're refusing service isn't because of that protected class.

If the person they're refusing service to is a lying tRump sychophant, but they also happen to be Jewish and black ... as long as you're not denying them service because of their race and religion and ONLY because of their lying tRump sycophantry (is that a word?) you can STILL deny them service.

[Honeycombe8]

23. True. But that'd be a hard one to prove, unless they're not wearing shoes or something. nt

[metalbot]

32. So you then support the baker and florist who refused to bake/arrange for gay weddings?

Because this entire thread is a complete bizarro-world read for me, in which the same people who argue vehemently about the government's right to force a baker to create a work of art for a gay wedding are arguing that businesses have a right to refuse service to anyone for nearly any reason if the person isn't a protected class.

(*) Wait, you argue! In many states, sexual orientation _is_ a protected class, so that discrimination by the baker was entirely illegal! Except that the baker didn't refuse to do business with people who are gay because they are gay, he did so because it was for a gay wedding and he's a "Christian" bigot. But I'd run with the analogy a little further - could a black baker be forced to bake an artistic cake for a white power rally or would he be discriminating based on race if he refused?

[Honeycombe8]

47. Gays are a protected class, like blacks, old people, etc.

The answer to your question is that the baker, whatever his race, cannot refuse to serve certain groups of selected members of the public who are in the protected classes under the law. He CAN choose not to serve INDIVIDUALS for most reasons...as long as the reason is not because of the person's protected class.

The policy is that individual business owners are not allowed to dictate which citizens are real "public" members. All citizens are members of the "public." But a business can refuse service to individuals for certain reasons. He can refuse service if, for example, someone is dressed improperly, or is behaving badly, or the like. .

We have a history in this country of owners refusing service to GROUPS of members of the public, thereby hindering those members' right to live as full members of our society. Such as when owners refused to serve black people, or Native Americans.

So a black baker cannot refuse to serve a person or group of people because they are white. That's just the flip sign of the "No Coloreds allowed" that owners used to use in this country. But he CAN refuse to serve a white person that is based not on his race, but some other reason...like he knows him personally and just doesn't like him. That is legal. He is not discriminating based on race.

[Stonepounder]

15. Question to Mr. Sanders:

If a business "Has the right to refuse service to anyone" (with the exception of refusing to serve an entire protected class) then why doesn't that same business have the right to refuse service to a politician they vehemently disagree with?

Or have, perhaps, Rethugs become a 'protected class"??

[dogman]

16. Perhaps Bernie has class.

Doesn't he have the right to believe this tactic is not productive? It gives some satisfaction and helps others GOTV.

[Stonepounder]

18. Certainly he has the right to his opinion.

But he didn't say that. He said that SHS had a "right" to be served in a restaurant. My point is while refusing her service might not be a productive tactic, I have the right, as a business owner, to employ the tactic, as opposed to her having the "right" not to have it used against HER,

[dogman]

21. What he said:

' “Look, as I’ve said before, yeah, I think people have the right to go into a restaurant and have dinner," he said.'
You and I may think she is not a person (by our standards), but I don't think any politician other than tRump would go there. When you look at the Democratic Senators who voted to confirm Gorsuch, do tou really think this is a major concern today?

[Cha]

73. BS was Wrong.. Yeah, people have a right to go out

to a restaurant for dinner.. but Owners also have a right to refuse service to anyone. SHS can go find another chicken place to eat.

"Bernie Sanders Defends Sarah Sanders: People Have a Right To Go to a Restaurant for Dinner"

snip//

On MSNBC on Wednesday, former democrat presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders defended White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders on the currently dominant political topic of civility in politics.

“Look, as I’ve said before, yeah, I think people have the right to go into a restaurant and have dinner,” said Sanders (Bernie) about Saunders (Sarah) being kicked out of a restaurant with her family over political differences.

Host Kristen Welker was asking the Vermont senator about the lack of civility in general at first, and he said he’s “not a great fan of shouting down people or being rude to people,” but that people have a right to be angry.

https://www.mediaite.com/tv/bernie-sanders-defends-sarah-sanders-people-have-a-right-to-go-to-a-restaurant-for-dinner/

Stephanie Wilkinson was protesting the draconian policies of the Fraud. Not "political differences" She asked her employees to vote on it.

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

BS was sticking up for the trump LYING Propagandist government official not for the people.

[dogman]

80. Bernie was standing up for the people.

Just because you and I may think she is less than human, Bernie is hardly in a position to adopt that attitude. He expressed an opinion about public access, he did not stand up for her. I really don't understand how constant attacks on Bernie advances this cause. You cite MSM headlines as evidence even though they are editorial opinions, not factually supported when reading the actual text. IMHO don't fall for the click-bait.

[Cha]

82. No he wasn't.. he was standing up for stupid

politeness. Which he never did before.

[radical noodle]

25. He only "praised" the fact that she didn't

make a scene at the restaurant. Then he said there had been a lot of poison poured down our throats by this administration and they should expect some of it to bubble back up. Not much on the praise side there.

[Power 2 the People]

27. He said she was very dignified and praised the way she handled it

Immediately upon leaving the restaurant she set out to destroy the woman's business and unleash a million pizzagate wackos on the Red Hen. If she was really dignified we would have never heard about it. Instead, she weaponized Twitter to settle a personal score.

That Despicable act was part of how she handled it. That is not dignified or worthy of praise. He should not be praising her for anything.

[Chemisse]

40. Must we stoop to criticisms of her body? Her behavior and character are abhorrent enough.

And that is what really counts.

[ehrnst]

42. That description of of a woman is worthy of a MAGA fan.

The misogyny on the Left is really showing it's head again lately.

[ehrnst]

41. He talked about how she was at the restaurant, not her use of twitter

He also talked about the GOP not being able to complain about "lack of civility" when they are the ones fomenting hate.

Perhaps you missed that in your anger at a Clinton....

[ehrnst]

44. Bernie thinks she shouldn't have been confronted or thrown out.

What are your thoughts on that?

That is the OP, after all. Or are you trying to deflect from the fact that Bernie went a step further than Bill in defending her?

[Cha]

76. I agree.. but at least he put the blame on the Fraud's policies.

Link to tweet

[SunSeeker]

24. You're not helping, Bernie.

[murielm99]

28. When does he ever?

[SunSeeker]

29. ...

[True Blue American]

61. Never

And I am tired of the Media and Blogs pretending like he is.

[Sophia4]

26. Sorry guys.

Our Constitution protects our rights from the government's heavy hand, but not from the massive hands of our fellow private citizens when it comes to eating dinner.

California has a provision called the Unruh Act that guarantees an individual a certain degree of equal treatment in certain private settings, but . . . . .

(b) All persons within the jurisdiction of this state are free and equal, and no matter what their sex, race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, disability, medical condition, genetic information, marital status, sexual orientation, citizenship, primary language, or immigration status are entitled to the full and equal accommodations, advantages, facilities, privileges, or services in all business establishments of every kind whatsoever.

(c) This section shall not be construed to confer any right or privilege on a person that is conditioned or limited by law or that is applicable alike to persons of every sex, color, race, religion, ancestry, national origin, disability, medical condition, marital status, sexual orientation, citizenship, primary language, or immigration status, or to persons regardless of their genetic information.

(d) Nothing in this section shall be construed to require any construction, alteration, repair, structural or otherwise, or modification of any sort whatsoever, beyond that construction, alteration, repair, or modification that is otherwise required by other provisions of law, to any new or existing establishment, facility, building, improvement, or any other structure, nor shall anything in this section be construed to augment, restrict, or alter in any way the authority of the State Architect to require construction, alteration, repair, or modifications that the State Architect otherwise possesses pursuant to other laws.

. . . .

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=CIV&sectionNum=51

That's pretty good, but not perfect, believe me. Better than some other states.

[Cha]

83. "Sorry" BS got it All Wrong.. jumped on the civility bandwagnon

without knowing anything about Stephanie Wilkinson and her crew.

[tavernier]

35. And human beings have the right to seek asylum in the USA

without having their children taken from them. Which one do you think deserves more attention, Bernie? Or are you allowing them to distract you as well?

[WhoWoodaKnew]

36. I agree with Bernie and this is gonna backfire and maybe give Trump

and other Republicans four/six more years. We need to start being smart and get those Republicans out of office. Doing crap like kicking them out of restaurants GAINS THEM SYMPATHY. It's STUPID.

So, you guys want Trump to appoint more SC Justices or do you wanna be smart and take them down??

[melm00se]

37. Businesses have to adhere to the laws

of their locality, state and country.

In the District of Columbia:

https://code.dccouncil.us/dc/council/code/sections/2-1402.31.html

§ 2–1402.31. Prohibitions.
(a) General. — It shall be an unlawful discriminatory practice to do any of the following acts, wholly or partially for a discriminatory reason based on the actual or perceived: race, color, religion, national origin, sex, age, marital status, personal appearance, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, familial status, family responsibilities, genetic information, disability, matriculation, political affiliation, source of income, or place of residence or business of any individual:

(1) To deny, directly or indirectly, any person the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, and accommodations of any place of public accommodations;

[Snellius]

43. This is NOT discrimination based on "political affiliation". On who someone IS, but on what they DO.

This was not discrimination based on who someone IS. It is discrimination based on a moral objection to what someone DOES. Red Hen was not prohibiting all Republicans but only those who actively abet the abuse of others.

[melm00se]

46. substitute

a prominent Democratic figure for Sanders.

I will to bet that you and many here would have torches, pitch forks and marching villagers converge upon the offending establishment.

[Snellius]

48. Sanders was not shown the door because she was a Republican or Democrat

It was politely directed at a specific person whose specific actions were morally offensive to the owner of her private business. May not be good for business but she was perfectly within her legal rights to refuse serve to anyone whose owner, patrons or employees judge offensive. This is not a violation of anyone's civil rights. The illegal mobs seem to be the ones who are picketing outside, blocking the door to prohibit anyone, no matter who they are, from getting in.

[Paladin]

54. And for-real Democrats have a right to be pissed at you, Bernie.

Thanks for nothing.

[Squinch]

55. Did he make a special statement to say Biden should not have been

denied service at that bakery? Didn't think so.

[riverwalker]

56. Go away Bernie

Just go away.

[Blue_Tires]

62. That's very "Establishment" of you, Bernard....

Bravo, well done...

[niyad]

63. and we have the right to make her (and all other members of this maladministrtion0 so

damned uncomfortable that they dare not show their faces in public.

[niyad]

64. as long as I can reenact the "pecan pie" scene from "The Help"

ohhhh, I HOPE she orders pecan pie!!

[Nitram]

65. Well isn't that nice. The revolutionary thinks we were too rude to the Huckster.

[Cold War Spook]

66. If restaurants can refuse service to someone because of their political beliefs,

then all restaurants should be able to refuse service to anyone without giving a reason.

[7wo7rees]

69. If Bernie was in the restaurant I was serving in...

I would sit down with him and share his entree. Because socialism.

I remember when Bush retired to Dallas, and he got a standing O from the patrons of the Mexican restaurant he ate in.
I would have sucker punched him. I still would.

If Sarah walked in where I was serving, I will spill the soup on her. Bullies only understand violence.

[betsuni]

71. It is a polite revolution now.

Someone should remind him the next time he insults Democrats and calls them names.

[truthisfreedom]

72. Yes, please, dear and glorious leader's sycophants

Go eat the food you deserve. I’m sure it’s clean.

[Mike Nelson]

77. Obvioulsy...

… he eats out frequently with all sorts of politicians... and they probably have fun talking about food. Maybe Bernie doesn't understand this particular issue and the stated reasons why the staff could not serve her...

[Delphinus]

79. I don't get this.

Is it white male privilege talking?