Steven Singer explains a paradox: Shunning Sarah Huckabee Sanders is actually a sign of respect. He calls it “the height of respect.”
He writes:
Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders went to the Red Hen restaurant and was refused service because she works for the Trump administration.
But while many far right and mainstream media outlets are decrying the restaurateur’s decision as discourteous, they seem to have missed the point.
Discourteous?
It was exactly the opposite.
There was no greater way to show Sanders respect than to deny her service.
After all, she defended the Supreme Court’s recent ruling for a conservative baker’s right to refuse to make a cake for a gay couple’s wedding.
If Sanders thinks it’s a good thing for this baker to be able to deny service to someone because this potential customer’s lifestyle violates his moral convictions, then she should also support the owner of the Red Hen denying her service because her lifestyle violates the owner’s moral convictions.
And make no mistake – this isn’t a rebuke of Sanders. It’s a celebration.
Twice in the New Testament Jesus, himself, is quoted prescribing what has come to be called The Golden Rule.
In Matthew 7:12:
“Do to others what you want them to do to you. This is the meaning of the law of Moses and the teaching of the prophets.”
In Luke 6:31:
“Do to others what you would want them to do to you.”
Sanders and other Trump Republicans have done onto others in just this manner. Therefore, that is how they must also want to be treated.
Isn’t that exactly what the owner of the Red Hen did?
She knew Sanders was in favor of business owners refusing service based on their own personal religious convictions.
Sanders life violates the owner’s religious convictions.
Therefore, she should deny Sanders service.
Got that?
I actually tweeted exactly these sentiments right after the Red Hen honored Sanders by evicting her, doing to her what the baker did to two gay men in Colorado. Biblical.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
So I understand your point. And many progressives noted that denying her service was similar to the supreme court ruling. EXCEPT – go back and look at the ruling – the justices didn’t say that the baker should have denied services based on his religious beliefs. Rather, it was thrown back down because the commissioners who were involved in the decisions openly mocked religion before the decision. From the NY Times, “Kennedy’s majority opinion turned on the argument that the Colorado Civil Rights Commission, which originally ruled against the baker, had been shown to be hostile to religion because of the remarks of one of its members.”
The justices ruled that the commission was discriminatory against religion because of the comments he/she made.
If we are to want to make change, I am not sure if playing by the same rules of those in power (rules we disagree with) is the best way.
LikeLike
Whoa! One commissioner on the Colorado Human Rights Commission said that religious extremism had been used to justify horrible things like slavery and the Holocaust, which is true.
In the Muslim Ban case, the Supreme Court turned around and said that Trump’s highly bigoted anti-Muslim comments were irrelevant.
Which is it, JLSteach?
LikeLike
I admit I haven’t looked into the specifics (well I just glanced them). First this case was 7-2 which means that liberal leaning justices Kagan and Souter agreed that the commission went too far in its open discussion about religious beliefs and how they impacted the decision.
While one could say trump was judge and jury with his executive order it’s still different than the role of the Colorado commissioners
LikeLike
The objectionable quote was historically accurate. Trump’s quotes were expressions of religious bigotry.
LikeLike
Find the “hostile” quote and you will find it was historically accurate.
Then compare it to Trump’s repeated pledge to totally ban all Muslims from America and explain how the Supreme Court decided that his “travel ban” was not a “Muslim ban.” Remind me how many North Korean immigrants entered the US in the past five years.
LikeLike
The Muslim ban was camoflagued by the addition of additional, mostly irrelevant components and the removal of others that gave the lie to the claims. The giant umbrella, interpreted fast and loose, of the “national security priviledges” of the presidents was also used as a cover story.
LikeLike
First, I would want to know whether that commissioner spoke for the entire Civil Rights Commission or just for him or herself. Second, I would want to know whether the vote of that one commissioner determined the decision of the commission. Disagreement among the justices on the Supreme Court is often a feature of discussion. I don’t see their decisions being disqualified because of that disagreement that might possibly have swayed the vote of other justices. One could make a case for many of their recent decisions being openly hostile, however diplomatically worded, to some group. Granted the commissioner’s speech may have been clearly prejudicial, but whether it made a difference in the decision should have been front and center. If hate speech is a disqualifier, one would think Trump’s travel ban would not have withstood the smell test.
I’m not sure I disagree with you on how we should play the game when those in power play dirty. Michele Obama sounded very noble as did MLK, but the “high road” somehow seems to have a higher cost. I’m not sure I could live with myself if I played dirty; unfortunately, I have no doubt LaDonald has no such scruples.
LikeLike
The irony is excruciating, but the irony of her behavior does not infiltrate her mind. The gang in the White House, the Senate and the Supreme court have no affiliation with the values of this nation. They operate in an echo chamber where their perspective is the ONLY one.
LikeLike
I think that’s a pretty gross misreading of the Golden Rule. Its “do unto others what you’d have them do unto you.” It’s not “do unto others what they did to you on the assumption that they were following the Golden Rule and therefore that’s what they want done to them.” You can’t use the Bible (at least not the words of Jesus) to justify shunning Sanders. Jesus is very clear how we should treat our enemies.
In any case, I have a lot more to say about this issue, which I did in the comments to Steven’s post. I realize my position is extremely unpopular, which is one of the reasons why our country is so polarized. I’m sure I’m going to be accused of all kinds of lovely things like being a Trump supporter, but whatever. I’d encourage people to read the words of Martin Luther King, Jr. Hate, anger and returning wrong for wrong (even if one wrong is less wrong than another) are not going to improve anything. Talking to people might not either, but it has a much better chance.
LikeLike
I agree with you….God would not have shunned her. Dienne is correct- This is not what the Bible says: Do onto others the way they did Boble says you…What was done was un Christian. Luke:6:29
Love Your Enemies
bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you.
If someone strikes you on one cheek, turn to him the other also. And if someone takes your cloak, do not withhold your tunic as well.
Give to everyone who asks you, and if anyone takes what is yours, do not demand it back.…
LikeLike
“If someone strikes you on one cheek, turn to him the other also. And if someone takes your cloak, do not withhold your tunic as well.”
There is some evidence that this particular passage was not as benign as is assumed. Individual’s who were beneath you, were slapped backhanded. By turning the other cheek, someone with authority over you was forced to strike you as if you were an equal. The cloak bit had to do with what a Roman soldier could demand of you as subject to Roman rule. It shamed him for you to give him more than he could claim by his status. The same applies to the passage about carrying his pack. You could only be made to carry it so far. Again, it shamed him to go beyond the legal limits. I find this interpretation a far more satisfying way of passive resistance. A little bit like spitting in his soup.
LikeLike
sprawler47: Doesn’t silence mean consent? I’m not supporting restaurants start putting up signs, “No Republicans allowed here” vs “No Democrats allowed inside” but I applaud someone standing up for what is right.
I’ve written many protest letters and sometimes get a vaguely worded form letter reply. How much does my protest mean? In red Indiana, probably nothing.
LikeLike
Actually, the Supreme Court approved a baker saying “no gays welcome here”.
What the restaurant owner did was NOT refuse to serve Republicans. She reserved the right to serve a woman who had publicly attacked illegal immigrants and called them nasty names and said her boss was right to take away their children and put them into detention centers. The fact that she was a Republican was irrelevant. The fact that she herself was helping to directly harm children was not.
The proper analogy would be if the baker refused to bake a cake for a specific gay couple who were publicly saying that all white heterosexual Christians were evil and nasty and immoral and needed to be locked up.
In one case, the fact that the person was Republican wasn’t why she wasn’t served. It was her own actions in which she intentionally lied to smear families and get people to hate those families because her lies gave her something she wanted and she didn’t care at all about the children whose lives her lies were destroying.
How dare anyone make the false equivalencey that she wasn’t served because she was a Republican. She wasn’t served because she lied intentionally to harm children.
The gay couple did nothing to hurt anyone. Sarah Huckabee Sanders did. Herself. By her own reprehensible actions.
LikeLike
If Sanders and Trump had stood up for the gay couple in Colorado,I’d be onher Side. Apparently it’s only Hays who can be refused service. Who’s next, Muslims? Hispanics? Blacks? What was outrageous was that she used her position to dox the restaurant and subject it to harassment. Walter Schaub, former head of Feferal Ethics Office, says that she engaged in unethical behavior. Like Ivanka selling her product line while serving as a federal employee.
LikeLike
Sigh. Diane, where did I say gays can be refused service? The whole point is that what Masterpiece Cake Shop did was wrong. Why compound that wrong by doing it back?
I’m really not sure how to communicate this because it seems so obvious to me. I know it sounds otherwise, but I’m really not trying to be condescending. The thing is, you only have control over yourself and your actions. It doesn’t matter what other people do to you. What they do reflects on them. We know what kind of people Trump and Sanders are. The question is, what kind of people are we? Our behavior reflects on us. The Red Hen restaurant had the opportunity to be the better, more gracious people. While I can’t judge them, I do wish they had seized that opportunity.
As I posted on Steven’s blog, during the height of the Westboro days, there was a time when one of the cars of the Westboro people blew a tire on the way back from the protest. A bunch of counter-protesters drove by them, stranded by the side of the road. Some jeered and made fun, some just drove on. Finally two young guys stopped and changed the tire for them. The Westboro people assumed they must be like-minded folk and so started with their anti-gay talk. Turns out the guys were gay. But they had simply seen people who needed help and stopped to help them. So who did the greater good that day? The counter-protesters who drove by and jeered? Or the two gay guys that stopped and helped?
LikeLike
Do you think the Westboro motorists decided they were wrong after two gay guys helped them? Or did they drive away to the next insane demonstration to claim that all servicemen who died on the battlefield were gay?
My synagogue in NYC, CBST, has found a different, positive way to express it’s views. It’s members demonstrate every Friday in front of the NYU Islamic Center with banners supporting “our Islamic neighbors.” They want to show fellowship to those targetedby Trump. Rabbi Sharon KlEinbaum believes that if Germans had defended synagogues in the 1930s in Germany, it might have deterred Hitler. Or not. I don’t judge the Red Hen. Sarah Sanders lies for a living.
LikeLike
No, one encounter is probably not going to change anyone’s mind. But enough encounters just might. For example,there are at least some actual cases of white supremacists turning over a new leaf after being imprisoned with black people. After years of exposure and realizing that those black people are just human beings trapped in the same toxic system, it’s hard to keep up the hatred. Granted, it doesn’t always happen and when it does it takes a long time. But even if the other person doesn’t change, you have the satisfaction of knowing you put your best self forward.
LikeLike
Come on, dienne! Tell me honestly that you wouldn’t at least take the “spit in his soup” route. Perhaps you are more benign with those who you consider the enemy. Not judging, just sayin’. I know I would struggle not to cross the line. I think the key really does lie in something you said: the ability to not take attacks personally, however personally they might have been intended and, going beyond that, not responding in kind.
LikeLike
It’s weird that the same person insisting that we should give white supremicists the benefit of the doubt insists that someone like Hillary Clinton is pure evil.
LikeLike
But it’s not weird at all that you’re putting words in my mouth again, NYCPSP. In fact, it’s par for the course.
I suppose you missed the part where I said, “We know what kind of people Trump and Sanders are”. I’ll try to type this slowly for you. It’s not about giving anyone the “benefit of the doubt”. It’s about putting our own best selves forward regardless of what other people do.
LikeLike
Saying “we know what kind of people Trump and Sanders is” is exactly how far you go when it comes to calling out Trump.
It’s like saying “we know what kind of person Hitler is so let’s not focus any criticism on him or treat him and the Nazi party leaders with anything but kindness. Meanwhile let me tell you about how awful and corrupt and evil the other political parties in Germany are.”
You really don’t see the hypocrisy?
You NEVER criticize Trump with anywhere near the vehement anger you reserve for Democrats. Calling him “oranged haired” isn’t the same as calling him an evil murderer of children.
But how many times did you post this and even worse in 2016:
“the Obama administration went so far as to assassinate a 16 year old (and his cousin) due-process free by drone due to the sins of his father. ”
I didn’t see any kindness there, but hey, you have your “standards'”, right?
LikeLike
What on earth could you possibly want me to say about Trump that isn’t perfectly clear? Should I shout from the rooftops that he “grabs women by the “p*ssy”? Should I mention that he’s an arrogant liar? Should I scream about how he’s full of himself? That he enjoys hurting people? That he lacks empathy?
Consider it said, shouted, belted from the rooftops! All that and more! But, seriously, I need to say it? It’s not obvious enough for you to see it on your own? Who doesn’t see Trump for who he is?
But, yes, I do feel it necessary when someone like Barack Obama constantly gets credit for being wise and statesmanlike and diplomatic and presidential and all the other hagiographic rhetoric that is spilled about him, yet he set the precedent for assassinating U.S. citizens (including sixteen year old ones)!
LikeLike
dienne77,
Glad you are finally acknowledging the truth.
You think people don’t hate Democrats enough and don’t believe they are evil so you feel the need to tell everyone that Obama intentionally murdered innocent children so they can understand that Democrats are as evil as Trump.
And you have decided that because people know that Trump says obnoxious things, there is no need to talk about the rest of the great evil he does like tearing children from their families and holding them hostage and telling Democrats that they can ransom those children if they just let Trump do whatever evil thing he wants.
You are just helping to ‘educate’ us about how the Democrats are as evil as Trump and since you claim everyone already knows Trump is evil, you have no need to criticize him and attack those who are mean to his cabinet.
LikeLike
“And you have decided that because people know that Trump says obnoxious things, there is no need to talk about the rest of the great evil he does like tearing children from their families and holding them hostage and telling Democrats that they can ransom those children if they just let Trump do whatever evil thing he wants.”
Yer so funny. Unlike you, I’ve done a lot more than talk. I’ve called and emailed (repeatedly) my representatives, the media and representatives of businesses that profit off this awful situation. I’ve joined one protest already and will be joining the big one tomorrow. I’ve spent quite a bit of time actually working to end “zero tolerance” (and not just turn “caged babies” into “caged families).
What have you done? I mean, besides rant about what a horrible person Trump is?
LikeLike
dienne77,
“Hate, anger and returning wrong for wrong (even if one wrong is less wrong than another) are not going to improve anything.”
Maybe you should heed your own words when it comes to Democrats.
I just don’t understand why this concern of yours about being polite and kind to people whose ideas are quite hateful only extends to Republicans.
LikeLike
Dienne, if I may, I’d like to point out a crucial difference. The baker refused service to the men because of who they were and how they behaved in their private lives. What’s more, he’d do the same to others because they belong to a category of people of whom he disapproves, The restaurant owner refused service to Sarah Sanders because of her reprehensible actions as an individual, actions she performs in public. On a nearly daily basis she stands in front of reporters, bullies them, and lies through her teeth. No repercussions whatsoever? We all just nod and say “okay”? Civility isn’t acquiescence.
To your larger point that we simply shouldn’t be cruel or unkind to others, despite their behavior. Yes, in some larger sense that is true, and it is always worth keeping in mind, but it only goes so far. The hard fact of the matter, the thing that always prevents Jesus’ admonition to love your enemies alone from providing useful guidance, is that some people simply have dark hearts. There are those out there who will slap that other cheek until their arms get tired. Some people read kindness as weakness will abuse it to no end. That is who we are dealing with. Gross incivility is a cheat. People like Trump and Sanders knowingly, gleefully violate social norms and then suddenly invoke them when convenient. They need to be called out on that. We can do so firmly, gently, and briefly. Because they cheat, there is no getting anywhere with them. Anyone thinking a talk with SHS would accomplish anything must have never seen her bully her way through a press briefing with schoolyard logic. I think Mr. Singer has the better point. Sometimes loving your enemy means calling them out on their garbage.
LikeLike
FYI, I have never once seen dienne77 post that we shouldn’t be mean to Hillary Clinton.
Her concern for people being treated poorly seems to be focused on right wing Republicans.
LikeLike
“The restaurant owner refused service to Sarah Sanders because of her reprehensible actions as an individual, actions she performs in public.”
I get that, and I’ve acknowledged that Red Hen’s wrong was less than Masterpiece Cake’s wrong. But there’s a slippery slope here that liberals would be wise to consider. If we can refuse service to people based on their having done “reprehensible actions”, where is the dividing line?
I’ve already noted that more businesses are owned by conservatives than by liberals. Most conservatives are strongly anti-abortion, believing it to be baby murder – most definitely a “reprehensible action”. So if someone who works in an abortion facility comes into a conservative establishment, is it okay for the owner to deny that person service because of their “reprehensible” actions?
How are we going to define what constitutes “reprehensible behavior”? Each individual business owner’s decision? Liberals would be in a world of hurt because many conservatives think pretty much everything liberals do is “reprehensible”.
“Gross incivility is a cheat.”
Yes, it is, and it’s been used throughout history. Siccing dogs and fire hoses on peaceful protesters was certainly a cheat. Beating protesters and throwing them in jail was certainly a cheat. Denying jobs was a cheat. And all of those were tactics used against “uppity” blacks who dared to go against whites. But how did MLK say that blacks (and white allies) should respond to such attacks? Endure it calmly with your head held high and even love your persecutors. The concept is called agape and there is nothing subservient or acquiescent about it.
LikeLike
“FYI, I have never once seen dienne77 post that we shouldn’t be mean to Hillary Clinton.”
Oy vey. Seriously? When have I ever said we should be mean to her? Where have I ever said she shouldn’t be served in a restaurant? If Hillary walked into my restaurant (if I had a restaurant for her to walk into that is), I’d serve her the best the house had to offer, with a heaping dessert thrown in for free, I’d sit across from her and I’d say, “My dear, can we talk?” Just as I’d do to Sanders.
I’m sorry you see telling the truth about someone as being “mean”. For the record, I think we should tell the truth about Sanders and Trump too. It’s not being “mean” to state facts. I’m sorry you don’t see that. Or, rather, I’m sorry you only see it when it comes to the “other side” and not “your own side”.
LikeLike
You weren’t civil to Hillary Clinton. You characterized her as someone who intentionally murdered civilian children and who was entirely owned by Wall Street and others who hated the working man and wanted to keep him down. Your “truth” was that she had done nothing but evil and you said over and over again that she was no better than Trump.
You are far more civil to Trump and Sarah Huckabee Sanders than you have ever been to Hillary Clinton. That’s why I find your need to remind everyone that Obama intentionally killed innocent teens in order to “prove” that Democrats are just as evil to be very revealing of your real motives.
You constantly trash Democrats as murderous thugs with absolutely no redeeming qualities, and then turn around and tell us we shouldn’t be so mean to the Republicans like Trump and Sanders.
LikeLike
Good for Steven Singer. Agree. Funny how the religious far right folks defame the teaching of Jesus and quote the Bible selectively.
Guess they think those 7 Deadly Sins don’t apply to them.
Thanks for posting this article, Diane.
I don’t know if anyone has noticed the host of outright wrong information is on TV these DAZE. I was watching a program about the weather. The BLATANT ERROR was: The simulation of the Earth’s rotation was WRONG. Here’s what is wrong: The Earth was going in a West to East rotation rather than the correct East to West rotation. Good grief, the sun rises in the East, thus the East to West rotation.
There are so many errors (wrong information) on TV. Guess it takes brains and money to revise and edit. Sad 😢 and scary.
LikeLike
From wikipedia: Earth’s rotation is the rotation of Planet Earth around its own axis. Earth rotates eastward, in prograde motion. As viewed from the north pole star Polaris, Earth turns counter clockwise.
But the Earth rotates eastward when the Earth is presented with the North Pole on the top. This is an arbitrary orientation because most of the map makers were in the northern hemisphere, I’m guessing?
As regards the shunning of SHS; part of me says whoopee but then the other part says, let her eat in peace because she’s off duty. However, she gives air support, aids and abets a wannabe Idi Amin, shame on her.
LikeLike
Trump is a singularly despicable and vile human being and he was that way long before he became president. As president, he’s a dire threat to what democracy and democratic institutions that we do have, as flawed as they are. Spare me the “but whataboutism.” “But what about Obama and the drones” type of misdirections and deflections which cloud the seriousness of a Trump, aided and abetted by a GOP that has gone off the rails and become an extremist cult. The Democratic party is no where near as horrible as the GOP at this juncture in history. Are we going to condemn Ocasio-Cortez for running as a Democrat and for praising her defeated opponent? Oh wait, Chris Hedges did condemn Bernie Sanders for being a sell out. There is no perfect candidate, even good progressives and REAL liberals have to make some compromises with the political system that we have inherited. My advice, vote Democratic in November and in 2020. Please, please, let’s avoid the circular firing squad that we had in 2016.
LikeLike
The Democratic Party is not corrupt. It’s far from perfect but that’s life.
The GOP is a supine group of quislings enabling a grifter and traitor.
Take your choice. Or retreat to a desert island.
LikeLike
Once again, well stated, Joe.
LikeLike
“Please, please, let’s avoid the circular firing squad that we had in 2016.”
Amen. I heard Ocasio-Cortez speak on “The View” this morning. Wow!
LikeLike
And I cannot repeat this enough:
The fact that Ocasio-Cortez defeated one of the most powerful Democrats in the House tells us that nothing is stopping the progressive agenda except the will of the voters. So quit helping the fascists win by blaming “evil and corrupt Democrats”. There are some districts where voters want a more moderate Democrat. And helping the fascists win because more voters wanted the moderate is helping evil win.
LikeLike
I think it’s a personal thing and depends on how you do it. When I see people I don’t like politically in person, I don’t say anything. But I do make a point of briefly thanking others. First I apologize for intruding and then I briefly let them know that their efforts are appreciated. I’ve done that in the past with Luis Gutierrez, Maxine Waters, and Rosa DeLauro. I’ve also let some Dems know that I don’t appreciate their support for undermining public education. But if Sanders came into the restaurant I was in, I wouldn’t ask management to remove her or confront her, I’d request my bill immediately and leave.
LikeLike
A perfect response! You made my day! Thanks! Kas Winters
LikeLike
Expressions of moral outrage such as this, without political organizing and mobilization to back them up, are a sign of weakness, not strength.
We should be talking about the tactical utility and political optics of this kind of thing (which is very poor, imnsho) rather that the morality of it.
Don’t we have more than enough evidence that trying to shame the shameless doesn’t work, and is probably counterproductive, with Trump’s rising poll numbers (to say nothing of his very election) testifying to that?
The answer, if there is one, is to ignore Trump (isn’t that one way to get under a narcissist’s skin?) and make the fight not about him (which is a proven loser), but for universal concrete material benefits, with emphasis on benefits for the working class. It’s the only hope, especially now that the illusion that the courts are a vehicle for justice has been dashed for the foreseeable future.
Forget the courts (or at least forget depending on them) and Mueller, and fantasies of impeachment; it’s on us, as it always has been.
LikeLike
Michael,
Ignoring Trump is not an option. He is president. He controls both houses of Congress. He controls the Supreme Court.
He sanctioned ripping babies out of their mothers’ arms. He insults our allies and praises our enemies. He wants to gut Obamacare, Medicare, Social Security, civil rights, abortion.
When do we Say NO! Never? Silence=complicity and consent.
LikeLike
You’re gong to a protest this weekend, right, Diane? You’ve contacted your elected officials and registered your opposition to these policies? You’ve contacted businesses that are profiting from the transportation and detention of these families and children to register your outrage, right? You’ve done absolutely everything you can to stop Trump’s actual policies?
LikeLike
dienne, are you joking. Diane has done more to combat Trumpism, the privatization of our schools and the commons than anyone. I would say that Diane has done everything and then some by a huge mile.
LikeLike
dienne77,
Diane VOTED to stop Trump. And she will again. All the protests won’t help if you insist that stopping Trump is not as important as keeping the evil and corrupt Democrats from power.
LikeLike
Diane, either I didn’t express myself clearly, or you misconstrued my message.
Obviously, Trump is the President and cannot be ignored. My point is that much of the so-called “resistance” continues with the failed “strategy” of substituting moral outrage for actual politics, which also happened to be Hillary’s failed strategy.
Running around with our hair on fire, cursing Trump while giving awards to a stage productions where the tickets cost a thousand dollars, thinking that Robert Mueller will find a letter from Trump to Putin thanking him for giving him the election, impeaching Trump, are all proven losers, and evidence of failed politics and magical thinking.
They are in fact unintended gifts to Trump and the Republicans, gifts that will continue giving (to them, and taking from the Rest Of Us).
Instead of responding with outrage to every vicious, deranged tweet Trump and his writers send out (which is precisely what they want), it’s time to creatively parry/neutralize their rhetoric, but more importantly to organize against them by struggling for actual policies within the Democratic Party that will attract The Many to vote for their interests.
LikeLike
Dienne is right in the sense that showing opprobrium for Trump and the GOP is not enough. Radically reinventing the Democrats, who once upon a time represented labor and wealth redistribution, is critical. It’s okay and necessary to be critical of both parties….of Hillary, the DNC, of McConnell, Ryan, etc. Criticize both for somewhat different reasons. Replace most establishment Democrats with true progressives.
When you’re fighting a war, you have to address the enemy, but you equally have to address how your allies are addressing the enemy as well. If you don’t analye and address your allies, or are not willing to, then you’re incompetent to fight.
LikeLike
One is only allowed to express moral outrage against Hillary Clinton. One is only allowed to express moral outrage against the Democratic party for being completely corrupt and owned by Wall Street to keep the working man down. One is only allowed to express moral outrage against the “Democrats” foreign policy of intentionally bombing babies with abandon to please their billionaire funders.
Ignore Trump and the Republicans, and save all your moral outrage for all those co-opted Democrats that will be running for Congress in 2018 because they belong to that corrupt Democratic party which must be defeated.
I find it ironic that it is the two people who spent all of 2016 expressing non-stop moral outrage against the Democrats who are the ones insisting that we shouldn’t say anything too mean about Trump or his cabinet.
LikeLike
^^sorry, I have no idea if Michael Fiorillo ever expressed moral outrage toward Hillary Clinton. I will assume he did not since his post makes clear he doesn’t believe that is proper. So I apologize for assuming you ever posted anything negative about her and didn’t just ignore her candidacy and remain silent.
LikeLike
So many falsities and fallacies, so little time!
Suffice to say, NYCpsp, your intellectual dishonesty is only exceeded by your foolishness.
Or is it the other way around?
LikeLike
When people reserve most of their moral outrage for the Democrats, then that reveals a lot.
Those people have done a fantastic job convincing voters in the middle that the Democrats are more corrupt than the Republicans. After all, if the people who claim to be progressive reserve all their moral outrage for their own party while demanding that we either ignore or be kind to the Republicans, what else can those people think?
LikeLike
Michael Fiorillo,
Thanks for showing the courtesy toward me that you insist that we should all show to a Trump White House official who spews lies, hatred and contempt for non-white Christians.
I find it interesting that you have no problem yourself spewing hatred and contempt when it comes to anyone who defends the Democrats as not being completely morally corrupt and no better than Republicans.
Only hatred spewing Republicans deserve kindness and courtesy.
Why don’t you spend some of that courtesy on Democrats?
LikeLike
“I find it interesting that you have no problem yourself spewing hatred and contempt….”
I know I sound like a broken record, but seriously, Diane, it is not good for your blog to allow this. Where has Michael ever “spew[ed] hatred and contempt”? Michael has always been unfailingly polite around here.
LikeLike
Dienne, with rare exceptions, I do not censor comments. We are all grown ups.
LikeLike
“We are all grown ups.”
Weelllll…..
You would, BTW, censor something like that coming from Charles (rightly so).
LikeLike
I delete comments by Charles when he has said exactly the same thing before. That happens often.
LikeLike
Let me correct myself. I don’t know that you would censor Charles for something like that. But I do know you would call him out on it.
LikeLike
No, I call out Charles when he says stupid things about history or court rulings. Today, he insisted that Trump’s Muslim Ban was not a Muslim Ban. He didn’t read Sotomayor’s dissent, where she proved otherwise. He asked me to read it for him.
LikeLike
Michael Fiorillo writes: “Suffice to say, NYCpsp, your intellectual dishonesty is only exceeded by your foolishness.”
dienne77: “Michael has always been unfailingly polite around here.”
dienne77: ” I’d encourage people to read the words of Martin Luther King, Jr. Hate, anger and returning wrong for wrong (even if one wrong is less wrong than another) are not going to improve anything….
The Red Hen restaurant had the opportunity to be the better, more gracious people. While I can’t judge them, I do wish they had seized that opportunity.”
dienne77: ” the Obama administration went so far as to assassinate a 16 year old (and his cousin) due-process free by drone due to the sins of his father.”
FYI, this is a page right out of the Trump right-wing playbook. You say all kinds of nasty things and then when you are called out on them, you attack your critics for being mean and inappropriate.
LikeLike
NYCpsp,
You consistently put words in other people’s mouths; you consistently make false analogies and non sequiturs; you consistently demonstrate a refusal or inability to reason.
Relaying those facts here is not “spewing hatred and contempt,” it’s pointing out the obvious.
LikeLike
“FYI, this is a page right out of the Trump right-wing playbook. You say all kinds of nasty things and then when you are called out on them, you attack your critics for being mean and inappropriate.”
Here’s what you are saying in cartoon (see lower left pic, in particular)
LikeLike
I LOVE this great thinking. “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.” Sanders twists herself into knots defending everything the Orange IDIOT says. She got a little payback.
LikeLike
Maybe I misread it, but an article about the Red Hen incident (don’t remember which news site….) gave a very detailed account of what happened in Wilkinson’s words. What this article said was that when Wilkinson arrived at the restaurant after having been called in by an employee, Sanders’ party was already seated and was eating cheese boards. Wilkinson then gathered her staff and asked them if they wanted her to boot Sanders – they said yes. Wilkinson then made sure that the entire party had been served and then discreetly asked Sanders to talk with her outside and asked her to leave. Sanders’ bill for a party of 8 was then put on the house.
So… maybe I’m missing something or so sleep-deprived that I’m not reading this right, but it seems that Sanders was NOT refused service. She, and only she, was asked to leave. After enjoying a free meal at a high-end restaurant. I think that Wilkinson showed an enormous amount of respect, courage, and dignity as she acted to stand up for her employees.
Maybe restaurants will start to show signs on their doors that say “no shirt, no shoes, no respect for human rights – no service.”
LikeLike
Let’s remember something:
The restaurant owner responded to a PERSON. She did not say “no Republicans wanted”. She said that the very person working hard to help convince people that illegal immigrants were rapists and murderers and why shouldn’t their children be taken away and held hostage was – by her presence – upsetting her employees and should leave.
If you choose to spew racist and xenophobic statements non-stop, you can get called out on your spewing hate. It’s ironic to hear the same people who insisted Donald Trump was no worse than Hillary Clinton telling us to be kind and welcoming to the very individuals who have spewed hatred.
And that is NOTHING like a bakery refusing to serve someone because he is gay, or Republican or Muslim.
Sarah Huckabee Sanders was asked to leave because of the nasty hatred and lies she spews. Not because she is a Republican.
LikeLike
Ay ay ay, I know I’m wandering into a snake pit even to say this because I know it’s going to get twisted all out of recognition, but Masterpiece Cake did not refuse to serve the couple because they were gay. Had they requested a birthday cake or graduation cake or happy retirement cake, he would have baked it for them even had they been making out in the store as they asked. He refused that particular cake (a wedding cake) because it violated his religious beliefs because he considers gay marriage an abomination to his God.
I am NOT, repeat NOT condoning the baker’s refusal. In fact, I supported gay marriage long before most of you, I’d imagine (my best friend married his husband in 2004 soon after Massachusetts legalized it). I’m simply pointing out that he didn’t discriminate based on who the couple was but rather what they wanted him to do. They wanted him to support something he felt he couldn’t support in good conscience. Sort of like how Red Hen restaurant didn’t feel like they could serve Sanders in good conscience because they felt like that would be condoning actions which they couldn’t in good conscience condone. Again, although I know it will do no good, let me repeat again: I. DO. NOT. CONDONE. MASTERPIECE. CAKE’S. ACTION.
Are we clear?
Nah, I didn’t think so.
LikeLike
Dienne, you know I disagree with this tortured analysis. The baker refused to sell his cake to the men because they are gay and his religion does not sanction gay marriage even though the Supreme Court did. That’s discrimination. On the same ground, a hotel could refuse to rent a room to an interracial couple because the hotel owner has sincere religious beliefs. The remark by the member of the Colorado Human Rights Commission was a pretext for allowing anti-gay discrimination. What he said was true.
LikeLike
I don’t want to put words in your mouth, dienne77, so please correct me if I am misunderstanding all your posts on here.
Not condoning gay marriage and thinking it is an abomination is no different than not condoning lies to justify why it is fine to tear babies and children from their parents and send them to detention centers.
So therefore a baker who refuses to bake a cake for any of those gay people who want to get married is similar to a restauranteur who doesn’t want to serve the woman who famously defends the most racist and xenophobic lies. And if you believe that a baker shouldn’t refuse to bake a cake for a gay wedding, you should believe that a restaurant should serve a woman who spews hatred and lies about vulnerable people and helps justify why their children should be sent to detention centers.
LikeLike
Good quote:
Rep. Maxine Waters says if you “want to talk about civility,” you should start with President Donald J. Trump: “I think every reasonable person has concluded that the President of the United States of America has advocated violence,” she says and reads Trump quotes. abcn.ws/2MpI7XX
LikeLike
Maxine Walters has had death threats after this Tweet by the Orange Buffoon. What a great person to call a member of Congress ‘an extraordinarily low IQ person’.
He is actually threatening her. We have to do something when our president is this vile.
…………….
Donald J. Trump
✔
@realDonaldTrump
Congresswoman Maxine Waters, an extraordinarily low IQ person, has become, together with Nancy Pelosi, the Face of the Democrat Party. She has just called for harm to supporters, of which there are many, of the Make America Great Again movement. Be careful what you wish for Max!
12:11 PM – Jun 25, 2018
LikeLike
This is satire. Shunning is bullying. Period.
LikeLike
As NYC parent said above, comparing the Sanders case with refusing serving gays is a typical case of false equivalence. Sanders, a public figure, was privately asked to leave. Her group she arrived with (though presumably having similar political views) was not asked to leave. The other case is discrimination against a group of people based on their (private) sexual preference.
Equivalent case might be refusing all republicans to eat at a restaurant.
So I am not sure Jesus’ sentiment is applicable here at all in this apples and oranges case. Instead, we should consistently refuse accepting the Trumpists’ framing of events.
Trumpists love to make progressives feel guilty and then even the Nation gets confused about the correct stand
Virginia restaurant’s decision over the weekend to refuse to serve Sarah Huckabee Sanders has many conservatives rightly riled up. To turn away a paying customer because she is Donald Trump’s press secretary flouts not only rules of civility, but an essential premise of an open society: that public spaces and public businesses should be open to all.
https://www.thenation.com/article/refusing-serve-sarah-sanders-wrong/
LikeLike
What a mistake to call the Sanders case in the restaurant an act of hate. How so? How is it wrong to tell a jerk when she acts jerkish? Sanders is not a student in our class where showing a “good example of behavior” maybe effective. Sanders is a non-listener adult who needs stronger criticism than what we provide in a classroom.
Yeah, we should be good, moral, etc, but not stupid. Accepting the Trumpists’ framing of the issues is not smart, to say the least.
Here is a Nation article on a pretty good assessment of what degree of civility is appropriate and effective in today’s climate. The last sentence says it all.
To cling to civility is to allow the powerful to commit crimes, as long as they do so with a smile and a handshake.
https://www.thenation.com/article/against-civility/
LikeLike
Máté Wierdl: Good article.
LikeLike
Is it okay to publicly shun or discipline our students or teachers, too?
“Speak truth to bullshit. Be civil.” Brene Brown, Braving the Wilderness.
LikeLike
First, teachers and students are not public figures, second, there was no public shaming. The restaurant owner asked Sanders to leave in private using civil language. The public shaming was done by Sanders, Trump and their disciples.
Third: one liners sound great but they contain nothing universal. Issues need to be thought over issue by issue, and see if they really fit the case the one liner is supposed to remind us of.
Here is a one liner from a thoughtful article I already cited in this thread just a few inches above from here.
To cling to civility is to allow the powerful to commit crimes, as long as they do so with a smile and a handshake.
https://www.thenation.com/article/against-civility/
LikeLike
On second thought, Sanders did call BS and was civil. Maybe that’s what you are saying, Mary.
LikeLike
Michael Moore: We Have to ‘Put Our Bodies on the Line’ to Stop Trump…The Beast
‘Trump is not going to leave,’ Moore predicted to Stephen Colbert, urging Democrats to do everything they can to get him out.
https://thebea.st/2KvsrSC?source=email&via=desktop
LikeLike