The snark could have been almost witty by contrasting the claim of a “right” to a peaceful dinner with a right to an abortion, except for one detail. It wasn’t Justice Brett Kavanaugh who claimed a dinner “right,” but a spokesman for Morton’s Steak House. Contrary to popular belief, the Morton’s guy was neither the justice’s official spokesmodel nor legally qualified to assert whether dinner at a corporate steak house was a legal “right.”
Was it merely fortuitous that a group of protesters happened to be at Morton’s the evening Kavanaugh was there to dine? That’s hard to say, given that there’s a bounty for food service workers to give ready protesters a half hour to show up. Regardless, the question remains whether protesting people in official government positions at dinner, or their home, or anywhere else like their children’s schools, as opposed to their governmental office where they perform the governmental function with which others take issue, is a norm that should not be violated.
But forget Kavanaugh, for the moment, and consider Morton’s.
Honorable Supreme Court Justice Kavanaugh and all of our other patrons at the restaurant were unduly harassed by unruly protestors while eating dinner at our Morton’s restaurant. Politics, regardless of your side or views, should not trample the freedom at play of the right to congregate and eat dinner. There is a time and place for everything. Disturbing the dinner of all of our customers was an act of selfishness and void of decency.
Not that anyone cares, but buried in the Morton’s rep’s statement is a tidbit that rarely seems to make the radar, that the protests against Kavanaugh affect the other patrons of the restaurant as well. Do they not get to enjoy their dinner in peace? Was it their fault Kavanaugh was eating there too? Or are they merely collateral damage, an unfortunate sacrifice to the cause? But I digress.
The gist of the Morton’s rep’s statement was neither to take a position on abortion or the “Honorable Supreme Court Justice Kavanaugh,” which might have been a bit more imperial sounding than necessary. Rather, it was about letting patrons eat in peace. Protest them all you want. Just not at a restaurant during dinner. Fair? Don’t be silly.
NEW: thousands of people are booking “fake reservations” for Morton’s Steakhouse, after the steakhouse served Brett Kavanaugh & publicly berated pro-choice protestors
Morton’s Steakhouse DC is now “fully booked” for tonight… they have dozens of other locations across the country which are rapidly being booked by pro-choice protestors
And the snark just kept coming.
Others on Twitter began to mock the restaurant and the Supreme Court justice. One user wrote, “Hate to argue with the esteemed constitutional scholars at Morton’s Steakhouse, but the protesters also have the ‘right to congregate’ or, you know, freedom of assembly.”
Another user wrote, “Brett Kavanaugh’s right to enjoy a quiet dinner at a pricey steakhouse does not supersede my right to bodily autonomy.”
But when Morton’s started canceling out the Open Table reservations made by protesters in order to prevent the steakhouse from doing business, the tables were turned on the bold and brave app warriors.
Morton’s is reportedly cancelling reservations & filing false reports with OpenTable, claiming no-shows for reservations which haven’t occurred yet
These false reports by Morton’s are against OpenTable’s TOS & could lead to Morton’s being booted from the platform for abuse
And it spiraled out of control from there.
https://twitter.com/williamlegate/status/1545483380426526721
No, this is hardly the first time people have been harassed in their homes, restaurants or on the street, and no, it’s not just the “high and mighty” like Supreme Court justices, but pretty much anyone who is the target at the moment, or even random people who have neither power nor connection to whatever issue has the unduly passionate worked up.
1) In a scene that played out several times Monday, a Black Lives Matter protest that began in Columbia Heights confronted White diners outside D.C. restaurants, chanting “White silence is violence!” and demanding White diners show their solidarity. #DCProtests pic.twitter.com/fJbPM76vb0
— Fredrick Kunkle (@KunkleFredrick) August 25, 2020
That people truly hate Justice Kavanaugh is understandable, regardless of the fact that justices are intentionally insulated from popular opinion in our governmental structure. That they want desperately to make their feelings known is a core right, and contrary to the legal scholars of Morton’s, there is no “right” to eat dinner in peace and protesters, assuming they are otherwise acting lawfully, are entitled to protest at a steakhouse just as they are at government buildings.
It’s not a matter of law, or right, but a matter of whether the eradication of these norms of behavior are producing a society that will serve no useful purpose (does anyone think Kavanaugh left Morton’s saying to himself the he really ought to reconsider his judicial philosophy?) and will produce ever greater antagonism and division.
For protesters, the argument that they are made “miserable” by governmental actions and decisions translates into their need and justification for making the people who took those actions miserable in turn. And then those who enabled those whom they desire to be miserable, like Morton’s steakhouse, as well. And destroy them all.
Forget Kavanaugh. Even forget Morton’s, even though it’s just a restaurant and not a powerful government force for evil. Think of every unduly passionate nutjob playing out their political fantasies of hatred. Think of the targets of the hatred of the moment losing their job when thousands of people swarm on their employer. While the unduly passionate will argue the righteousness of their idiocy to the death, this is not going to end well for anyone. And there is likely little point in saying this as it won’t prevent them from having no decency.
Discover more from Simple Justice
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Can one hope Kavanaugh (and Alito, Barrett, Gorsuch, and Thomas) did learn that the very presence of any of them will for some time disrupt wherever they go and stay away out of concern for the venues and their other patrons?
Well, when you have such staunch civil rights personages like Maxine Waters exhorting her followers to “get in their faces wherever they are, whether it’s at the grocery store, the gas station or restaurants and tell them they’re not welcome here”, those people feel like they have carte blanche to act however they want to, civilized norms be damned.
When civilized norms are discarded, all we will be left with will be uncivilized norms. Which might be interesting and amusing to watch, but decidedly unpleasant to experience directly.
Is this really a right though? On private property? Can I go down to the local Morton’s this evening and stand in the middle of it screaming at the diners for spending $80 on a steak while children are starving everywhere?
As discussed before, these petulant babies have no concept of how effective protest works. Their antics here both in the restaurant and related to open table are very offputting. I’ve been apathetic toward abortion and the abortion decision because honestly I can appreciate the arguments of both sides. But their behavior has pretty much turned me happy that their side lost. And makes me hope that they continue to lose. Is that wrong?
If deciding your stance based on purely emotive considerations is “wrong” then you’re wrong.
Think of it like a glass half full situation instead.
Alienating voters one filet mignon at a time.
Bone-in ribeye, you barbarian.
I’m slightly surprised that the protesters could get that close to a steakhouse…cause ya know, “YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO TELL US NOT TO KILL OUR BABIES!!!” seems to spew from the same brain dead mouths that yell, “EATING ANIMALS IS MURDER!!!”
This is what happens when human bodies develop without a proper diet…
This may be crass and morbid, but the only thing this video is missing is the “thump thump” sound of those idiots being run over by the trailer tires of that truck. Do stupid stuff, win stupid prizes.
Rarely is “play stupid games, win stupid prizes” better demonstrated, but let’s not wish harm on anyone. Remember, stupidity is not a crime in America.
Anti-vegan prejudice. You should be forced to eat nothing but asparagus tonight. But only with Hollandaise.
In the swamp, Skink says roadkill is preferred. Hollandaise is optional.
Sadly, we can’t all be lucky enough to live in the swamp.
NOOOOO!
I forgot to mention why I’m slightly surprised…back when I did gigs and interacted with a lot more people, I heard many vegs say that the smell of meat cooking made them retch…(my thought was always, ‘good, more steak for me’)
We need to develop and market a BBQ scented cologne. If it keeps those idiots at least 20 feet away it would be worth it.
Good ‘ole boy DIY version…grow a big beard, eat BBQ for breakfast, and don’t wash your face.
I found the picture of my brother, overalls hanging down to his waist, nipple rings in full view, bloody, propping up the head of the elk he just shot, hanging on the wall, kept the vegans out of my office. Fancy cologne not needed.
During divisive times, it’s a comfort to see that the law (of physics) remains empirical.
At some point the adults are going to get tired of the temper tantrums and give the children a spanking their parents should have given them.
The results won’t be pretty.
What are you advocating here? It seems to me you’re suggesting our government should administer some sort of ‘spanking’ to misbehaving adult citizens. Depending on what you are thinking of when you say ‘spanking’, it could be anything from a reasonable response to reign in obnoxious public behavior to creepily fascistic. I find this behavior deplorable, but I’m not sure what other people think would be a reasonable punishment. I guess I’m asking what do you consider to be the equivalent of a spanking, but not a beating for this situation.
I’m not advocating brown shirt beating.
But maybe if the police would be allowed to do their job things would change. Actually arrest them for, I don’t know, disturbing the peace, violating a noise ordinance, blocking a public sidewalk.
Hell, if it’s possible to indict a ham sandwich surely it’s possible to find something to charge them with. Then the DA will have to do what they are supposed to do and prosecute them.
Then the judges need to do their job and uphold the law. A few weekends in jail, a fine that isn’t a slap on the wrist but stiff enough to get their attention, a couple of hundred hours of community service. None of this ROR, dropped charges or never charged to begin with.
That would at least force out the dilettantes.
Bottom line, people that aren’t the targets of the protest shouldn’t be collateral damage. In a balancing act, their rights outweigh your right to protest.
Thanks for the explanation. I would agree with charging them for the laws they have violated.
I don’t think the act of allowing a hated person to pay for dinner transforms a restaurant into a public forum which protesters then have a constitutional right to occupy and shut down. As this continues, restaurants will likely strike back by requiring the staff to sign guarantees of diner privacy, and by hiring private security.
According to the Politico story linked to, the protesters were out front (i.e. outside, presumably on public sidewalk) and were not seen nor heard (while inside eating) by a diner who was a source.
That’s neither transforming the restaurant into a public forum nor occupying it.
What’s wrong about some protest with your steak? After all, meat is murder…tasty, tasty murder.
While I agree with you that this is not going to end well, I keep reflecting on this quote:
“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible make violent revolution inevitable.” – John F kennedy
Peaceful revolution has been made impossible in our country. Now we are on the path to violent revolution and I don’t see our leaders making the changes needed to allow for peaceful revolution.
Funny, but the only violence I see is coming from the “peaceful” protestors. Brings to mind Matthew 7:16-20.
And why should I let the craziest .0001% of the idiots dictate my actions and language?
I would be careful in wishing for revolution, you might not like how it turns out.
I see violence occurring in Uvalde and Highland Park and Akron, just to list three of the most profligate that occurred in the last three months. None of those were instigated by peaceful protestors.
I’m not wishing for revolution, I’m predicting it. Hence the JFK quote regarding it’s inevitable. I’m very sure I will not like how it turns out. I agree with our host about this is not a good sign regarding the future viability of our society.
The loss of ‘safe spaces’ for political actors thwarting public will to eat and otherwise exist in our society is happening because peaceful protestors can’t get the powerful to act otherwise. All avenues of peaceful effective protest have been either eliminated or neutered so they are no longer effective in bringing about change. I think violent revolution in America is inevitable at this point, unless our society is first disrupted by war or other natural disasters. Outcomes I like even less.
This is a cheap bit of rhetoric that could be used to justify anything. Why do we need a “revolution” of any kind? A revolution for who? For what? I think the groups that Timothy McVeigh was a part of were calling for the revolutionary overthrow of the U.S. government, should we have let them have their way 20-some-odd years ago in the hopes it would have prevented the OKC bombing?
“…the eradication of these norms of behavior are producing a society that will serve no useful purpose …”
That is the goal of all of these protests. To reduce all of the current society to a level that serves no useful purpose.
It doesn’t take special powers of insight to recognize how the promoting of intentional confrontations with high government officials might end badly. Like with the injury or death of said official. If this trend continues it is almost inevitable. Our culture has to value something and the right to be a public official without giving up all claims to any privacy whatsoever should be one of them. Dissent with respect seems like a very trite motto these days but it would serve us well to remember that descending on the private homes of authority figures en mass to “get in their face” is an act of aggression that every single one of us would find abhorrent if it was our residence.