"Sanctuary Restaurants" - an idea for Louisville?

Maybe if they had them in some Middle Eastern countries and were true bomb-proof safe zones, all those Muslim men, women and children wouldn't have been killed by the drone strikes during President Obama's terms.

As an Obama voter, I completely agree that I carry some responsibility for all the good and the bad that he did, including drone strikes. Likewise, by voting for a race-baiting, xenophobic demagogue, you Trump voters carry some responsibility for Trump's incitement of internal hatreds and encouragement of white nationalism. Personal responsibility cuts both ways. (Don't worry, FOX will provide talking points that'll let you off the hook.)

Rick, I think your political opinion matters, but you can't expect not to get pushback. I don't see Robin banning people simply for being Trump supporters the way the major conservative subreddits and forums ban people who don't march in lockstep. And someone saying "I don't care" doesn't make you a victim -- hell, Steve glossed over the way Louisville immigrants, refugees, women, non-whites, and LGBT have gotten publicly abused by feral conservatives like five times in this thread. So consider getting a little tougher before retreating to a safe space.

For the record, I am not against the sanctuary concept, I just don't know if there is an actual need, at least here, but the whole topic got sidetracked and hijacked.

Why would you know if there's a need? If people of color, women, immigrants, refugees, LGBT don't need this idea, then it'll die out, and Steve won't even have time to set his hair on fire about how "all people welcome" signs are offensive to his notions of who should and shouldn't be welcome in public.

I am an irredeemable deplorable because I supported the non politician this cycle who has a business resume that even the most pompous intellectual superior elitest would embrace had they had the opportunity or capacity to pull it off. I supported him for his hedgehog positions, secure the borders, shore up our trade agreements, and encourage and support the return of manufacturing back to the US by addressing our heavy taxation and regulatory burdens. I liked him because he stayed out of women's wombs and people's bedrooms. Plus, he looked the liberal media straight in the eye and didn't blink. He is not perfect but I wasn't voting for a pope.

Now, having said that this is the thread that broke the camels back for me respective to my continued interest in this site. I've read as the morally and intellectually superior have openly demeaned anyone with an opposing viewpoint to theirs since I joined this forum almost seven years ago and I have finally seen and read enough.

As representatives of the party of tolerence and inclusiveness many on this forum are an abysmal failure at walking the talk.

Robin please remove me from this site as I have no further interest in contributing to this forum although, admittedly, I never did contribute much. (Thought I would at least take that one out of your snarky arsenal)

Nice try Ed, Rick, and others at trying to bring some civil discourse to this thread. Unfortunately, it fell upon blind eyes and closed minds.

Michael - As closed minded as Robin is, I'd fear a negative review coming your way soon.

In my opinion, Robin is so far over the top, I believe there is zero chance he could write a fair review for a Trump supporting chief or restuarant owner.

Do you suppose that a deplorable Trump voter seeking refuge from an avalanche of leftist hate would be welcome?


Or would this be a movement for gentry liberals to virtue signal to their peers by spending money in fine dining establishments that they were gonna spend anyway?

You know, the time for sophomoric libertarianism is past. We're basically effed as a nation, and anyone who helped make it happen via inaction is partly culpable.

Robin,

I am glad you put your crown on and deemed all who voted for Trump as "partly culpable" for "effing up the nation". I don't even know what that is supposed to mean. Maybe, just maybe, President Trump (go ahead, you can say it, I have faith in you) was elected simply because the alternative, in many people's minds would have been catastrophic. I don't know who you voted for and I personally don't care, but to single out a voting bloc and basically ridicule them because you think your way of thinking is superior, well, it just really looks bad on you.

Moderate, don't dictate...

Waking up to see this thread turn into conservative men whining about being demagogued and demanding sanctuary is the best way you could have possibly proved your point. Robin, you are a genius.

Now imagine their reaction if Robin had used Trump rhetoric and called them snakes, rapists and murderers. Or if Robin said they couldn't do their job because of where their parents were born. Or if Robin "joked" that he could sexually assault them any time he wants. This is too much.

[Robin Garr]

Waking up to see this thread turn into conservative men whining about being demagogued and demanding sanctuary is the best way you could have possibly proved your point. ...

Thanks, Iggy. I'm done here. And for the record, I never let personal opinion about chefs or owners influence my reviews. I've done good reviews for chefs I'm not impressed by as human beings. I've done negative reviews for chefs I like. I'm afraid this is an ethos that your average Tea Party/Trumpite is simply incapable of understanding, but that's all right. I'm done here.

has a business resume that even the most pompous intellectual superior elitest would embrace had they had the opportunity or capacity to pull it off.

Failed casino, failed steak business, failed school, failed vodka, failed airline, failed magazine, failed football team, etc. etc. He's a terrible business man but a good con artist.

Silence is dangerous.

This is want the right/Drumpf lovers want you to do. Lay down, "wait and see", support our guy. It sickens me these people are demanding respect for a deplorable sub-human. Steve, keep on with your love of your unregistered sexual offender of a president. Money over people, right??

Steve, you keep coming back to this absurd fallacy that "if all are welcome, then I am not welcome." Why do you think this? What social boundaries suddenly pop up at an "all-welcome" restaurant that aren't already in effect everywhere else? How can you make this illogic comprehensible to people outside your head?

And it's a mystery how you can believe the thoughts 'all are welcome' and 'make them uncomfortable' in your head at the same time. Now, I've heard that holding two contradicting thoughts at the same time is a mark of intelligence, but I'm not sure what it says if you actually believe both. Some call that cognitive dissonance. Maybe you should start by explaining the illogic inside your head.

You occupy many points on the spectrum, from smug to condescending to contemptuous. If you want to split hairs between those concepts, have at it.

Deplorable too! Don't forget deplorable!

Nope. It is perfectly possible to be welcomed as well as to be informed about who your hosts are.

Well as you so kindly informed us, by 'informed about who your hosts are' you really mean 'make the deplorables uncomfortable'.

Just like those in this thread directed toward Donald Trump who has a Jewish daughter and jewish grandchildren.

Huh? I never called Trump anti-Semitic. But Trump has certainly emboldened all kinds of Nazis like the alt-right, which is rotten to the core with anti-semitic scum.

I didn't say that you called Trump anti semitic. Review the thread. I'm sure you can find who did.

And yet here you are saying that Trump has intentionally emboldened all of these awful people against his own family. Why would he do that? But you go ahead and keep living in the fever swamps of your own mind.

So, you run with that and tar a whole class of people.

Cite? Which class is that, O mind reader? Beyond that, what's your argument here -- that categories of people can't vote for something evil, backwards, or oppressive? Because that happens all the time, in all countries, everywhere. It is not special at all.

Once again, self refuting sentences, back to back.

So, their are some Trump voters who are not deplorable nativists?

Sure.

Progress?

But there are no Trump voters who don't bear some responsibility for empowering and rewarding nativism, no. Trump voters aren't children. Personal responsibility applies to their choice, and they are susceptible to human weaknesses, such as falling for a conman demagogue's lies about scapegoats and easy answers, the same as everyone is. But since I take their concerns seriously, I am not going to patronizingly pretend all they care about is "economic insecurity," either, the way rightwing PC orthodoxy euphemizes it.

Nope. No progress. Again, two contradictory sentences back to back.

First you feint with 'not all deplorable nativists', but then you are back implying they're all deplorable. It must be an interesting place inside your head.

Do you mean like the nativists that you condemn. You actually believe that consensus is reached by not including the people you disagree with. Your hypocrisy astounds.

Nah. I think we can seek policy consensus, but not on the subject of demagoguing ethnic groups and refugees. Evil is non-negotiable.

And the mask comes off.

Yes it is broken. But you only want to consider the solutions that you like, and not even listen to the concerns of the contemptible "nativists".

Spare me your mind-reading, and I'll spare you my speculation about why you're only comfortable in restaurants that aren't welcoming to all. I'll listen to solutions and concerns if they are good, but again, ethnic demagoguery is evil and non-negotiable. If Ryan/McConnell/Trump have good ideas, great. Hey, speaking of conservatives feigning sanctimony about giving the other side fair consideration, did you vote for Mitch McConnell?

I don't have to read your mind. Anything you agree with is acceptable. Anything you disagree with is evil ethnic demagoguery and non negotiable. And you get to decide which is which.

Except that the sanctuary restaurant movement isn't saying that all are welcome. Their message is one of division and exclusion. As is yours, with all the pushing back against those nativist meanies. You want to exclude some and welcome others, but you don't want to own that position.

You're glitching again, Steve. Everyone is welcome. But all customers will walk in informed that their hosts are not passive in the face of evil. Being welcomed is not the same thing as being coddled.

You do realize that we are talking about restaurants which constitute a huge portion of the hospitality industry, right? Only in your head does hospitality equal making certain guests uncomfortable.

So, now you acknowledge that the Sanctuary Restaurant movement is about making people you disagree with uncomfortable.

It is inevitable that a democratic, pluralistic, cosmopolitan society will make reactionaries uncomfortable. For example, there are definitely lots of conservative Americans who are not on board with the opening words of the Declaration of Independence. Those people are welcome like everyone else, but they certainly don't have an absolute right to be coddled in their white nationalist, reactionary Breitbart conservative bubble because again, being welcomed =/= being coddled.

After a few years of Trumpism, you may well be the reactionary. And your discomfort is already showing. The political pendulum always swings. Only leftists are surprised.

Silence is dangerous.

This is want the right/Drumpf lovers want you to do. Lay down, "wait and see", support our guy. It sickens me these people are demanding respect for a deplorable sub-human. Steve, keep on with your love of your unregistered sexual offender of a president. Money over people, right??

Fail. If you want to talk about sex offenders, I lived through the Clinton administration.

has a business resume that even the most pompous intellectual superior elitest would embrace had they had the opportunity or capacity to pull it off.

Failed casino, failed steak business, failed school, failed vodka, failed airline, failed magazine, failed football team, etc. etc. He's a terrible business man but a good con artist.

Forgetting about the six bankruptcies, you can look another way. He got $1M from his father when he graduated from college, and another $247M when his father died. Had he invested that in the Dow, he would be worth more than $10B today! By any objective measure, he's not a huge "success" in business.

He IS a truly brilliant marketing genius, which is not quite the same thing, but nothing to sneeze at!

Steve, I didn't see anything in your post that needs responding to except to clarify this:
"And it's a mystery how you can believe the thoughts 'all are welcome' and 'make them uncomfortable' in your head at the same time."

Easy. I, for example, have eaten dinner at the homes of conservatives who believe that gays should be inprisoned or put to death. We both understood each other's position, and yet I was still welcomed in their home. I did not require them to hide their evil beliefs, and they did not require me to recant mine. Back to the sanctuary scenario: when a conservative, who, for example, doesn't believe in interracial dating, sees a mixed-race couple in a restaurant that is welcome to all, he may be made uncomfortable, but he is not unwelcome.

So one last time: WELCOMED DOES NOT MEAN UNCHALLENGED.

Silence is dangerous.

This is want the right/Drumpf lovers want you to do. Lay down, "wait and see", support our guy. It sickens me these people are demanding respect for a deplorable sub-human. Steve, keep on with your love of your unregistered sexual offender of a president. Money over people, right??

Fail. If you want to talk about sex offenders, I lived through the Clinton administration.

Classic Trump tactic. Avoid and defer. Fucking fascist.

This is want the right/Drumpf lovers want you to do. Lay down, "wait and see", support our guy. It sickens me these people are demanding respect for a deplorable sub-human. Steve, keep on with your love of your unregistered sexual offender of a president. Money over people, right??

Fail. If you want to talk about sex offenders, I lived through the Clinton administration.

Classic Trump tactic. Avoid and defer. Fucking fascist.

Steve, I didn't see anything in your post that needs responding to except to clarify this:

And it's a mystery how you can believe the thoughts 'all are welcome' and 'make them uncomfortable' in your head at the same time.

Easy. I, for example, have eaten dinner at the homes of conservatives who believe that gays should be inprisoned or put to death. We both understood each other's position, and yet I was still welcomed in their home. I did not require them to hide their evil beliefs, and they did not require me to recant mine.

Wait, you had dinner. With conservatives. Who thought gays should be imprisoned or put to death? DEATH!?!?!?!

Give me a break.

Back to the sanctuary scenario: when a conservative, who, for example, doesn't believe in interracial dating, sees a mixed-race couple in a restaurant that is welcome to all, he may be made uncomfortable, but he is not unwelcome.

Yes, this is how normal restaurants operate. But we are talking about special Sanctuary restaurants. These are the ones that you propose to make Trump voters uncomfortable.

So one last time: WELCOMED DOES NOT MEAN UNCHALLENGED.

And this is where you lose it. The evil conservative gay killers, with whom you are welcome to dine, are not running a restaurant where they explicitly state that it is a Sanctuary for other misunderstood conservative gay killers. Would 'da gays' really be welcome to dine in such an establishment?

In the context of Sanctuary restaurants, there is no "all are welcome" for those from whom sanctuary is required. Otherwise, the definition of 'sanctuary' is meaningless.

You are trying to stake out a position that is logically impossible.