Jeff Ruby thanks Louisville.

John- i wasn't challenging you at all, just pointing out that we know one place is willing to serve him and hasn't lost any business....I was just adding to the dialogue

So if we have reservations for Jeff Ruby's, will we now be required to bring in a background check clearing ourselves of any possible convictions or dismissals on our records? If we have clear records do we get free dessert? Its kinda like taking your report card to the ice cream parlor when I was little, only this if for big kids.

I am with you there and he needs to watch for the microscopes that now say "Jeff Ruby" on them. Brings to mind something about glass houses and rocks and how you don't do something or other with them. Plus all the other patrons that are not known to be criminals but absolutely are.

I can also point out that he is being very brash. In the same line as some advice I received from Robin, is he competent enough to weigh evidence and make a fair and unbias judgement concerning OJ Simpsons case? Is it the stigma that surrounds OJ that bothers him or does he think like many of us do that OJ is guilty? There are a lot of ways to spin. I honestly don't have much of an opinion on the subject either way. I dont care if he turned away OJ just as much as I dont care if he served him.

This type of action does present a multi-sided dilemma.

On the one hand, I know beyond a shadow of a doubt (as do many others in the biz) that we collectively welcome and serve unsavory, morally bankrupt customers every single day. A crooked politician here, a defense attorney that makes a lliving keeping schoolyard drug-dealers off the street there. Throw in the occasional perpetually drunk parent(s) that embarass their kids and theirselves. Garnish liberally with out of control socialites, blueblooded racists, and garden-variety crass vulgarians of all sorts and you have a recipe for the minute percentage of people that we maybe aren't as enthused to serve as the other 99.7% of the guests that make us love what we do.

On the other hand, the stance that Mr. Ruby took is ironclad. It is his restaurant and he carries the authority to turn away anyone he sees fit for any reason he sees fit. Public opinion makes for good conersation and fodder for gossip, but ultimately and absolutely, the ball, the court, the refs and their whistles all belong to Mr. Ruby alone. The same rules apply to anyone who owns their own restaurant and I will neither applaud nor denounce anyone for whatever decision they make in this sort of situation.
A wise man once told me, in regard to the human element involved with restaurants....'It ain't show-friends, baby....it's show-BUSINESS.'
Sometimes the wrong personal decision is the right thing to do and vice-versa.

Different people have have very different, and equally valid, reasons for making different decisions in similar situations.

Personally, I can't say that I disagree with Mr. Ruby's actions at all. At the same time, I don't disagree with a business owner that welcomes and serves someone like M

[Robin Garr]

HE WENT TO BASA!

Correctamundo. My wife had lunch at Zen Garden today, and Coco was telling everyone the same story.

This type of action does present a multi-sided dilemma.

On the one hand, I know beyond a shadow of a doubt (as do many others in the biz) that we collectively welcome and serve unsavory, morally bankrupt customers every single day. A crooked politician here, a defense attorney that makes a lliving keeping schoolyard drug-dealers off the street there. Throw in the occasional perpetually drunk parent(s) that embarass their kids and theirselves. Garnish liberally with out of control socialites, blueblooded racists, and garden-variety crass vulgarians of all sorts and you have a recipe for the minute percentage of people that we maybe aren't as enthused to serve as the other 99.9% of the guests that make us love what we do.

On the other hand, the stance that Mr. Ruby took is ironclad. It is his restaurant and he carries the authority to turn away anyone he sees fit for any reason he sees fit. Public opinion makes for good conversation and fodder for gossip, but ultimately and absolutely, the ball, the court, the refs and their whistles all belong to Mr. Ruby alone. The same rules apply to anyone who owns their own restaurant and I will neither applaud nor denounce anyone for whatever decision they make in this sort of situation.
A wise man once told me, in regard to the human element involved with restaurants....'It ain't show-friends, baby....it's show-BUSINESS.'
Sometimes the wrong personal decision is the right thing to do at the time and vice-versa.

Different people have very different, and equally valid, reasons for making different decisions in similar situations.

Personally, I can't say that I disagree with Mr. Ruby's actions at all. At the same time, I don't disagree with a business owner that welcomes and serves someone like Mr. Simpson either.
It takes integrity and strength to show kindness to someone that does not deserve it whether the dollar spent matters or not.
The same goes for turning that same person away.


...also...LOLLERSKATES @ O.J. suing ANYone.


..my $.02

John- i wasn't challenging you at all, just pointing out that we know one place is willing to serve him and hasn't lost any business....I was just adding to the dialogue

Ah, I understand. They may or may not? I hope not. OJ being free has nothing to do with OJ so to deny him makes it obvious your opinion on our judicial system. It only works 98 to 99 percent of the time....let's get rid of it. ha! I'm sure there are some people who would not go to a place based on them serving OJ, would complain and then make their way to Churchill every derby and have a good time not even wondering why OJ was even in Louisville. I guess Churchill has a lot more to lose and a lot less to gain than others.

On the other hand, the stance that Mr. Ruby took is ironclad.

From what I have heard, so was the evidence against OJ.

A really interesting question would be, would Jeff Ruby serve OJ's lawyers?

On the other hand, the stance that Mr. Ruby took is ironclad.

From what I have heard, so was the evidence against OJ.

touche', sir....touche'

So if we have reservations for Jeff Ruby's, will we now be required to bring in a background check clearing ourselves of any possible convictions or dismissals on our records? If we have clear records do we get free dessert? Its kinda like taking your report card to the ice cream parlor when I was little, only this if for big kids.

I can only assume that you are joking as there is no evidence that Mr. Ruby has engaged in such a course of conduct. He refused to serve ONE person, who just happens to be one of the most notorious husbands acquitted of the brutal murder of his wife and a waiter in the history of our country. I don't see any indication that Mr. Ruby intends to extend this course of action to less well-known murderers.

Let's try and go in there with Mel Ignato!

So if we have reservations for Jeff Ruby's, will we now be required to bring in a background check clearing ourselves of any possible convictions or dismissals on our records? If we have clear records do we get free dessert? Its kinda like taking your report card to the ice cream parlor when I was little, only this if for big kids.

I can only assume that you are joking as there is no evidence that Mr. Ruby has engaged in such a course of conduct. He refused to serve ONE person, who just happens to be one of the most notorious husbands acquitted of the brutal murder of his wife and a waiter in the history of our country. I don't see any indication that Mr. Ruby intends to extend this course of action to less well-known murderers.

I can't speak for the person but I was thinking a hyperbole.

I don't see any indication that Mr. Ruby intends to extend this course of action to less well-known murderers.

You think the prosecution could use that as their discriminatory argument? I guess you would have to produce acquitted killers as witnesses? That would actually be quite hilarious. And your honor my next witness that has eaten at Mr. Jeff (I keep wanting to call him Jack) Ruby's establishment is Robert Blake. So Mr. Blake, how was the food?

Okay, this is going way to far. Now it's a cover story on cnn.com.

Story on CNN. Click on the Video

Correct me if I am wrong Ron, but I don't think murderers or found-not-guilty murderers are a "protected class"! The person representing Mr. Simpson will have to file discrimination charges based on race, gender, religion or national origin.