Red Hen Case Backfires on Democrats, Leftists

When White House press secretary Sarah Sanders was asked by a liberal restaurant owner to leave a Lexington, Virginia eatery because Sanders worked for the Trump administration, the Trump haters overreacted in a typical way.

“We’ll show ‘em!” said the haters. “We’ll ban these damned Republicans from every liberal business in America!”

And of course we pictured signs in restaurant windows all over in the US saying ‘Republicans not welcome’. Or ‘Democrats stay out’ of conservative-owned businesses.

Well, the whole thing has backfired. Not only have Republicans and the public in general reacted negatively to the Red Hen restaurant owner (who is alleged to be a cousin of actress Meryl Streep) but top Democrats have too. The only support that she is getting comes from the extremist left.

We can tell that a political situation has gone awry when top Democrats like Chuck Schumer and Tim Kaine criticize an act by someone who might be considered on “their side” of the political aisle.

Nikitas3.com even predicts that the anger among the people of Lexington at the restaurant owner for bringing so much negative publicity to their town is going to force the restaurant to close and perhaps even will force her to move away.

Friends, this is yet another example of the massive backfire that is plaguing the Democrats and the political left in the Era of Trump. President Trump has made these people so angry that they are acting in radical and crazy ways and are going to extremes.

Another major backfire came in the same week when black Democrat congresswoman Maxine Waters told a crowd of her supporters to “absolutely harass” Republican and conservative office-holders if they see them in the grocery store, at the gas station, etc. High officials in the Democrat party have denounced Waters and she may be censured by the House.

Her command came after two well-publicized cases of mob harassment of Republican officials, both women by the way.

Republicans are getting the message very quickly. Elaine Chao, the wife of Republican US Senate leader Mitch McConnell told a small group of protesters who sought to harass her husband to “leave my husband alone!” Meanwhile public opinion has risen up swiftly against the harassers, and Democrats know that the tactic is hurting them.

Thus you may wonder: What is the difference between a liberal restaurant owner asking conservative Sarah Sanders to leave her establishment, while two conservative Christian bakers in two separate states refused to make wedding cakes for liberal gay couples? Don’t we see hypocrisy on both sides for opposing one and supporting the other?

The difference is this: So-called ‘public accommodations’ like stores, bakeries, restaurants and hotels cannot generally discriminate. If the gays were well behaved and had gone into the Christian bakeries in question in Oregon and Colorado and sought to buy cupcakes being sold at the counter, the owner would not be allowed to casually throw them out since the business is open to the public and the gay couple is part of the public.

If the gays went into the bakeries and started acting up, however, like kissing and being obnoxious or causing a disruption, the owner could ask them to leave or even call the police.

On the other hand we can rest assured that Sarah Sanders and her family were not being disruptive in the restaurant. They are well-mannered people. And thus the owner was wrong to so casually expel them without good cause.

But the bakery case was not really so innocent in the first place. It is important to remember that the Christian bakers were intentionally targeted while the homosexuals were not simply random walk-in customers looking to buy cookies.

They intentionally asked for special cakes to be made for their weddings, in order to ‘make a case’ against the bakers if refused. And when the bakers refused to make the cakes on religious grounds the gays reported it, the states of Oregon and Colorado acted against the bakers and they became national stories.

But there is a 1st Amendment Constitutional principle that shields the bakers – that local, state and federal laws may not “prohibit the free exercise” of religion, in this case the Christian bakers’ opposition to gay marriage. And thus that the states, with all of their government power, may not force the bakers to make the cakes.

Indeed the bakers were not being asked to simply accommodate customers in their stores but to do a special task – make a special cake for a specific occasion. And businesses are allowed to decline such customers for myriad reasons. For instance a caterer could decline to serve a wedding that is 200 miles away or cater a party for a motorcycle gang that has been terrorizing their town. These are extreme examples but they explain the principle at work.

It gets worse. The Christian bakers in both Oregon and Colorado are said to have politely declined to make the cakes. But the Red Hen owner angrily pursued Sanders and her party to another restaurant to harass them after ejecting them from the Red Hen. This demonstrates a heightened sense of malice that makes this case all the more reprehensible.

On the other hand the conservative activist Stephen Crowder went to a muslim-owned bakery, acted like he was gay and asked them to make him a cake for his wedding. The owner said “no”. Yet there has been no uproar over the muslim bakery owner.

No, only Christians and conservatives are targeted just as Republicans only seem to be targeted for expulsion from restaurants and bars, like the gentleman who was tossed out of a New York City saloon for wearing a Trump MAGA hat.

Or what about the young black male in a MAGA hat who was harassed and taunted with racial slurs by employees at a Cheesecake Factory store? Why was that not a national story? Why have top Cheesecake Factory officials not forced sensitivity training on their employees like Starbucks has?

Answer: Because the victim supported president Trump.

It is also important to note the technique that Democrats use to make their case. They claim that you cannot discriminate against blacks since blacks are born black and cannot do anything about their skin color. Or against gays because they are “born gay”.

On the other hand they claim that you can discriminate against Trump supporters as “viewpoint discrimination” since their political position is a choice, not something that they are born with. But this approach can certainly be viewed skeptically, as in the Red Hen case and as applied to “public accommodations” laws.

(Please bookmark this website and send this article by e-mail to your friends. Please recommend this site to all of your friends via Facebook and any other means. Let’s make Nikitas3.com the #1 conservative site by word of mouth. And if you would like to contribute to Nikitas3.com, please click the link at the upper right where it says “support this site”. Thank you, Nikitas)

This entry was posted in Current Events (More than 1,500 previous editorials!) and tagged , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.