On 2015-07-27 9:30 AM, sf wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Jul 2015 07:24:59 -0400, Nancy Young
> > wrote:
>
>> In the paper yesterday, they had a bunch of people commenting about
>> that recent incident where a diner owner got fed up with a noisy kid and
>> yelled at him/her to shut up. I was kind of surprised that most
>> people sided with the restaurant owner, even the ones who disagreed
>> did say they would have taken the child out before it got to that point.
>
> Did you see that it took 45 minutes to be served and the child was a
> hungry 2 YO? I wouldn't want to wait 45 minutes for food, no matter
> what the circumstance.


There are times of the day not to take toddlers to restaurants. Kids
tend to be grumpy at nap time and when they are hungry. Fast food
restaurants are a more appropriate venue for someone with a kid who
needs to be fed fast. However, this is another case of credibility. The
owner said they had ordered pancakes for the kid. The pancakes had been
served but the parents had not fed them to the child. The hungry kid
would have been sitting there looking at her food.

On Mon, 27 Jul 2015 09:39:50 -0400, Dave Smith
> wrote:

> On 2015-07-27 9:22 AM, sf wrote:
>
> >
> >> True: if they have booster seats or high chairs, you're not talking fine
> >> dining.
> >
> > Yet clueless oldsters seem to think it is from all the complaints I
> > see on rfc about children acting normally. I eat at child friendly
> > restaurants often enough to observe if out of control behavior happens
> > as a general rule vs a rarity. The complainers are just old grouches
> > who should either stay home or use their head and choose a different
> > style restaurant. The world isn't going to change just for them.
> >
>
> The old grouches may be paying good money for a nice meal in a nice
> restaurant and don't want it to be disturbed by children. Some of them
> have paid babysitters to look after their kids while they have a nice
> quiet night out. That is why there are family restaurants and those
> which choose not to have high chairs.

It sounds to me like the old grouches wouldn't know what fine dining
is if it bit them in the ass.

--

sf

On Mon, 27 Jul 2015 09:43:39 -0400, Dave Smith
> wrote:

> On 2015-07-27 9:30 AM, sf wrote:
> > On Mon, 27 Jul 2015 07:24:59 -0400, Nancy Young
> > > wrote:
> >
> >> In the paper yesterday, they had a bunch of people commenting about
> >> that recent incident where a diner owner got fed up with a noisy kid and
> >> yelled at him/her to shut up. I was kind of surprised that most
> >> people sided with the restaurant owner, even the ones who disagreed
> >> did say they would have taken the child out before it got to that point.
> >
> > Did you see that it took 45 minutes to be served and the child was a
> > hungry 2 YO? I wouldn't want to wait 45 minutes for food, no matter
> > what the circumstance.
>
>
> There are times of the day not to take toddlers to restaurants. Kids
> tend to be grumpy at nap time and when they are hungry. Fast food
> restaurants are a more appropriate venue for someone with a kid who
> needs to be fed fast.

Agree.

> However, this is another case of credibility. The
> owner said they had ordered pancakes for the kid. The pancakes had been
> served but the parents had not fed them to the child. The hungry kid
> would have been sitting there looking at her food.
>
As if that's a believable story. I didn't read that version and I've
read both sides. Are you saying there's a third version now?

--

sf

On 7/27/2015 9:14 AM, graham wrote:
> On 26/07/2015 10:40 PM, MaryL wrote:
>> On 7/26/2015 4:58 PM, Dave Smith wrote:
>>> I caught a small portion of a radio show about kids in restaurants. One
>>> women, who seemed to have some expertise on manners and training kids,
>>> suggest that if the place does not have high chairs..... maybe it's a
>>> place you should not be taking small children.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Many years ago, I was on family vacation with my parents, aunt and
>> uncle, younger brother and sister. It was a "family-style" restaurant
>> (nothing fancy), but the booths were not large enough to hold all of us.
>> So, my parents shared a booth with my aunt and uncle, and they had the
>> three of us (siblings) share a booth across the room. We got
>> hamburgers, and my father told us we could order hot fudge sundaes. We
>> enjoyed the food and sat there talking and enjoying ourselves.
>> Afterward, my father was very proud and told us that someone had stopped
>> by their booth to tell them "what nice children they had." I did not
>> understand it at the time because all we did was eat and talk. I was 12
>> years old at the time and my brother and sister were younger. Years
>> later, I understood why those people thought we were being so nice...the
>> fact that we were only eating and talking and enjoying ourselves was
>> exactly what they appreciated. I think people today would not find it
>> unpleasant to have children seated in a restaurant if parents would only
>> teach them to act as we did that day--something that was perfectly
>> natural to us.
>>
>> MaryL
>>
> I may have told this here before but about 3 years ago, I was dining
> with a friend in the hotel "family restaurant" attached to Calgary
> airport. At the next table was a family of 4, the kids of elementary
> school age. They were quiet and perfectly behaved.
> The father called the waiter for the bill only to be told that another
> diner had been so impressed by the children's behaviour, he had paid for
> their meal. The father was dumbstruck.
> Graham
>
The father was probably thinking, I should have ordered the steak!

Jill

On 2015-07-27 9:49 AM, sf wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Jul 2015 09:43:39 -0400, Dave Smith
> > wrote:
>
>> On 2015-07-27 9:30 AM, sf wrote:
>>> On Mon, 27 Jul 2015 07:24:59 -0400, Nancy Young
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> In the paper yesterday, they had a bunch of people commenting about
>>>> that recent incident where a diner owner got fed up with a noisy kid and
>>>> yelled at him/her to shut up. I was kind of surprised that most
>>>> people sided with the restaurant owner, even the ones who disagreed
>>>> did say they would have taken the child out before it got to that point.
>>>
>>> Did you see that it took 45 minutes to be served and the child was a
>>> hungry 2 YO? I wouldn't want to wait 45 minutes for food, no matter
>>> what the circumstance.
>>
>>
>> There are times of the day not to take toddlers to restaurants. Kids
>> tend to be grumpy at nap time and when they are hungry. Fast food
>> restaurants are a more appropriate venue for someone with a kid who
>> needs to be fed fast.
>
> Agree.
>
>> However, this is another case of credibility. The
>> owner said they had ordered pancakes for the kid. The pancakes had been
>> served but the parents had not fed them to the child. The hungry kid
>> would have been sitting there looking at her food.
>>
> As if that's a believable story. I didn't read that version and I've
> read both sides. Are you saying there's a third version now?
>

I don't know if it is a third version or if it is the one that was
selectively edited for news bites, but in the article and interview
linked below the owner said she served the kid three huge pancakes and
the parents would not let her eat them, and that she had asked them to
leave or to take the kid outside.
http://www.wcsh6.com/story/news/loca...post/30391407/

"Dave Smith" > wrote in message
...
>I caught a small portion of a radio show about kids in restaurants. One
>women, who seemed to have some expertise on manners and training kids,
>suggest that if the place does not have high chairs..... maybe it's a place
>you should not be taking small children.
>

People who take infants and toddlers to restaurants are assholes and should
be put to death.



---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

On 27/07/2015 7:22 AM, sf wrote:
> On Sun, 26 Jul 2015 20:39:57 -0400, jmcquown >
> wrote:
>
>> True: if they have booster seats or high chairs, you're not talking fine
>> dining.
>
> Yet clueless oldsters seem to think it is from all the complaints I
> see on rfc about children acting normally. I eat at child friendly
> restaurants often enough to observe if out of control behavior happens
> as a general rule vs a rarity. The complainers are just old grouches
> who should either stay home or use their head and choose a different
> style restaurant. The world isn't going to change just for them.
>
I don't know what the old farts thought of me when I took my
grandchildren to restaurants when they were younger (they are now 11 &
13). We discussed all sorts of things, including religion. I also
encouraged them to argue with me so that they could learn to think for
themselves and question everything:-)
Graham
--

On 27/07/2015 6:49 AM, Dave Smith wrote:
> On 2015-07-27 7:24 AM, Nancy Young wrote:
>
>> We didn't go out to restaurants very often, but the idea that we'd
>> run around raising a ruckus is laughable. I don't remember being
>> taught restaurant manners, but my brothers and I knew we'd better
>> behave.
>
> Nor did we. It was for special occasions only. We weren't angels, but at
> home we always ate in the dining room and we expected to behave at the
> table.
>
>
>> In the paper yesterday, they had a bunch of people commenting about
>> that recent incident where a diner owner got fed up with a noisy kid and
>> yelled at him/her to shut up. I was kind of surprised that most
>> people sided with the restaurant owner, even the ones who disagreed
>> did say they would have taken the child out before it got to that point.
>
>
> I am not at all surprised that the comments sided with the owner. The
> parents should have dealt with it.The self entitled twit went to social
> media to smear the restaurant and it backfired.
>
> There was a sort of similar incident in a small town in Ontario around
> the same time. A woman claimed that she got kicked out of a restaurant
> for breast feeding. The restaurant claimed she was kicked out for being
> rowdy and arguing with other diners. She started a social media
> campaign to blackball the restaurant and indignant commenters claimed
> they were going to boycott the restaurant.
>
> It was interesting to note how the story kept changing. First it was her
> and a friend who got kicked out. Later on it was just her and her friend
> showed up later and went in to verify that she had been kicked out for
> breast feeding. One person commenting claimed to have been there and
> backed the mother's initial story, though that one changed.
>
> The nursing mother was not even really a customer. She was sitting at a
> table in the middle of the patio nursing her child. She had been offered
> a menu, declined to order food or beverages, even turned down an offer
> of a free bottle of water.
>
> Seriously. Who takes a nursing baby into an Irish pub and expects to sit
> there breast feeding? Fer fryin out loud.... it is a bar. The whole
> story stinks.
>
>
>
>
>
Dave, did you hear the interview with that singer who had been turfed
off the aircraft because of the behaviour of her 2 yr old? Talk about
spin! She left out the bit about not putting the seatbelt on the little
blighter!
Graham

--

On 7/27/2015 10:25 AM, Dave Smith wrote:
> On 2015-07-27 9:49 AM, sf wrote:
>> On Mon, 27 Jul 2015 09:43:39 -0400, Dave Smith
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> On 2015-07-27 9:30 AM, sf wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 27 Jul 2015 07:24:59 -0400, Nancy Young
>>>> > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> In the paper yesterday, they had a bunch of people commenting about
>>>>> that recent incident where a diner owner got fed up with a noisy
>>>>> kid and
>>>>> yelled at him/her to shut up. I was kind of surprised that most
>>>>> people sided with the restaurant owner, even the ones who disagreed
>>>>> did say they would have taken the child out before it got to that
>>>>> point.
>>>>
>>>> Did you see that it took 45 minutes to be served and the child was a
>>>> hungry 2 YO? I wouldn't want to wait 45 minutes for food, no matter
>>>> what the circumstance.
>>>
>>>
>>> There are times of the day not to take toddlers to restaurants. Kids
>>> tend to be grumpy at nap time and when they are hungry. Fast food
>>> restaurants are a more appropriate venue for someone with a kid who
>>> needs to be fed fast.
>>
>> Agree.
>>
>>> However, this is another case of credibility. The
>>> owner said they had ordered pancakes for the kid. The pancakes had been
>>> served but the parents had not fed them to the child. The hungry kid
>>> would have been sitting there looking at her food.
>>>
>> As if that's a believable story. I didn't read that version and I've
>> read both sides. Are you saying there's a third version now?
>>
>
> I don't know if it is a third version or if it is the one that was
> selectively edited for news bites, but in the article and interview
> linked below the owner said she served the kid three huge pancakes and
> the parents would not let her eat them, and that she had asked them to
> leave or to take the kid outside.
> http://www.wcsh6.com/story/news/loca...post/30391407/
>
>
>
Apparently the parents think it's normal for a kid to sit and scream.
Some parents seem to don invisible earplugs. Maybe that's the norm in
your house but in public, nope.

The owner said they ordered three pancakes - three! Bigger than the
child's head! And they didn't even feed them to her. They were out of
her reach.

The kid was hungry, what's wrong with you people? Along with those
invisible earplugs they are also apparently blind. The kid can't reach
the pancakes! She's hungry! What are you trying to do, torture her?!

Yeah, I'm a grouchy old fart. Guess what? If I'd behaved that way on
the rare occasions we went out to eat that would have been the last time.

Same thing with going with her to the store. No whining, "I want this!
I want that!" Going shopping with Mom was a privilege, not a right. A
privilege easily taken away, and we knew it.

Jill

On Monday, July 27, 2015 at 4:25:07 AM UTC-7, Nancy Young wrote:
> On 7/27/2015 7:00 AM, wrote:
> > On Sun, 26 Jul 2015 23:40:09 -0500, MaryL
> > > wrote:
>
> >> Afterward, my father was very proud and told us that someone had stopped
> >> by their booth to tell them "what nice children they had." I did not
> >> understand it at the time because all we did was eat and talk. I was 12
> >> years old at the time and my brother and sister were younger. Years
> >> later, I understood why those people thought we were being so nice...the
> >> fact that we were only eating and talking and enjoying ourselves was
> >> exactly what they appreciated. I think people today would not find it
> >> unpleasant to have children seated in a restaurant if parents would only
> >> teach them to act as we did that day--something that was perfectly
> >> natural to us.
>
> We didn't go out to restaurants very often, but the idea that we'd
> run around raising a ruckus is laughable. I don't remember being
> taught restaurant manners, but my brothers and I knew we'd better
> behave.

My sister and I seem to have been tolerably behaved, but my brother
was subject to tantrums. He would work himself into states where
NOTHING would make him happy. My mother would take him (or all of us)
out of the store, restaurant, church, etc. Finally he grew out of it,
but he has always been a self-willed person.

I remember him once shrieking at our grandparents house, because we
were taking family photos in the front yard, and for some reason,
he REALLY didn't feel like posing.

Many times my mother clearly seemed to be hoping the earth would
open and swallow us up.

On 7/27/2015 11:16 AM, wrote:
> I was sitting next to a young man going over to uni in the UK. When
> we were leaving, the kid had started up again, I said to him she might
> be the biggest commercial for condoms. He agreed.

That's funny!

Jill

On 7/27/2015 10:16 AM, wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Jul 2015 08:43:08 -0600, graham > wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> Dave, did you hear the interview with that singer who had been turfed
>> off the aircraft because of the behaviour of her 2 yr old? Talk about
>> spin! She left out the bit about not putting the seatbelt on the little
>> blighter!
>> Graham
>
> I thought it was hilarious, I hoped she learned a lesson that if she
> won't control her kid it may end up being very inconvenient for her.
>
> Aircraft are another bad place. One time going to the UK there was a
> kid behind me. Parents looked to be about 40 and kid around 2. She
> clearly had never been told no and when the crew said to her parents
> she must sit down and not run up and down the aisles, she started to
> shriek. It was unbelievable. She kept it up for a couple of hours
> when the crew asked the father to pick her up and walk her around and
> thankfully she then went to sleep.
>
> I was sitting next to a young man going over to uni in the UK. When
> we were leaving, the kid had started up again, I said to him she might
> be the biggest commercial for condoms. He agreed.
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>
My sister's niece has four very young children, and she and her
husband take them on a great many airplane trips. She said they get
some "dirty looks" from other passengers when they board the plane with
four youngsters, but they often get grateful comments when they exit.
Each parent sits with two children, and they take great care to keep the
children entertained and quiet.

MaryL

"sf" > wrote in message
...

> Old farts who don't want to see children in the room should keep that
> in mind and choose their restaurants wisely.
>
> --
>
> sf

I don't mind seeing them at all, it's the *hearing* them screaming and
raising hell that I object to, but I do avoid places like McDonald's, Burger
King, etc. LOL

Cheri

On 7/27/2015 8:09 AM, wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Jul 2015 09:39:50 -0400, Dave Smith
> > wrote:
>
>> On 2015-07-27 9:22 AM, sf wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>> True: if they have booster seats or high chairs, you're not talking fine
>>>> dining.
>>>
>>> Yet clueless oldsters seem to think it is from all the complaints I
>>> see on rfc about children acting normally. I eat at child friendly
>>> restaurants often enough to observe if out of control behavior happens
>>> as a general rule vs a rarity. The complainers are just old grouches
>>> who should either stay home or use their head and choose a different
>>> style restaurant. The world isn't going to change just for them.
>>>
>>
>> The old grouches may be paying good money for a nice meal in a nice
>> restaurant and don't want it to be disturbed by children. Some of them
>> have paid babysitters to look after their kids while they have a nice
>> quiet night out. That is why there are family restaurants and those
>> which choose not to have high chairs.
>
> Correct and I am glad sf is in SF so I will not come across her with
> grandchildren somewhere. She is so defensive and rude to others I
> think it is clear to see how her lot behave!!

She's a school teacher who KNOWS hot to get children to behave.

> Wicked Witch of Eastern Canada!

That nym works - keep using it.

On 7/27/2015 8:26 AM, Paul M. Cook wrote:
> "Dave Smith" > wrote in message
> ...
>> I caught a small portion of a radio show about kids in restaurants. One
>> women, who seemed to have some expertise on manners and training kids,
>> suggest that if the place does not have high chairs..... maybe it's a place
>> you should not be taking small children.
>>
>
> People who take infants and toddlers to restaurants are assholes and should
> be put to death.

Aren't you just suffuse with the milk of human kindness...you ASSHOLE!

Drop damned dead.

On 2015-07-27 10:43 AM, graham wrote:

>>
> Dave, did you hear the interview with that singer who had been turfed
> off the aircraft because of the behaviour of her 2 yr old? Talk about
> spin! She left out the bit about not putting the seatbelt on the little
> blighter!
>


Of course. It suits their sense of entitlement if they can stretch the
truth to make themselves appear to be innocent victims. Meanwhile, a
woman in a northern community is pushing for regulations to require
special restraints for children after her child was killed in an
incident on a plane.

On Monday, July 27, 2015 at 7:22:14 AM UTC-6, sf wrote:
> On Sun, 26 Jul 2015 20:39:57 -0400, jmcquown >
> wrote:
>
> > True: if they have booster seats or high chairs, you're not talking fine
> > dining.
>
> Yet clueless oldsters seem to think it is from all the complaints I
> see on rfc about children acting normally. I eat at child friendly
> restaurants often enough to observe if out of control behavior happens
> as a general rule vs a rarity. The complainers are just old grouches
> who should either stay home or use their head and choose a different
> style restaurant. The world isn't going to change just for them.
>
> --
>
> sf

Mostly problems arise from poor parental training at home. The
children are not taught how to behave in public or in private.
Kids rule the roost in North America. Watch any comedy show and
you will see the child-oriented society in all of its disgusting
ways.
===========

On 7/27/2015 11:44 AM, MaryL wrote:
> On 7/27/2015 10:16 AM, wrote:
>> On Mon, 27 Jul 2015 08:43:08 -0600, graham > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Dave, did you hear the interview with that singer who had been turfed
>>> off the aircraft because of the behaviour of her 2 yr old? Talk about
>>> spin! She left out the bit about not putting the seatbelt on the little
>>> blighter!
>>> Graham
>>
>> I thought it was hilarious, I hoped she learned a lesson that if she
>> won't control her kid it may end up being very inconvenient for her.
>>
>> Aircraft are another bad place. One time going to the UK there was a
>> kid behind me. Parents looked to be about 40 and kid around 2. She
>> clearly had never been told no and when the crew said to her parents
>> she must sit down and not run up and down the aisles, she started to
>> shriek. It was unbelievable. She kept it up for a couple of hours
>> when the crew asked the father to pick her up and walk her around and
>> thankfully she then went to sleep.
>>
>> I was sitting next to a young man going over to uni in the UK. When
>> we were leaving, the kid had started up again, I said to him she might
>> be the biggest commercial for condoms. He agreed.
>>
>> ---
> My sister's niece has four very young children, and she and her
> husband take them on a great many airplane trips. She said they get
> some "dirty looks" from other passengers when they board the plane with
> four youngsters, but they often get grateful comments when they exit.
> Each parent sits with two children, and they take great care to keep the
> children entertained and quiet.
>
> MaryL
>
It was years ago but I was flying to SC to visit my parents. Likely
around 1990. There was a young boy seated behind me and he kept kicking
the back of the seat. Annoyed backward glances didn't register with the
parents. I was about to say something to them when the young man
sitting next to me said, "I see you're having a problem. I'll gladly
trade trade seats with you." The minute the boy started kicking the
seat again he turned around and said loudly to the boy, STOP! The child
stopped kicking the back of the plane seat.

The parents were apparently oblivious. How you can tune that behaviour
out is a mystery.

Jill

On 7/27/2015 10:56 AM, Roy wrote:
> On Monday, July 27, 2015 at 7:22:14 AM UTC-6, sf wrote:
>> On Sun, 26 Jul 2015 20:39:57 -0400, jmcquown >
>> wrote:
>>
>>> True: if they have booster seats or high chairs, you're not talking fine
>>> dining.
>>
>> Yet clueless oldsters seem to think it is from all the complaints I
>> see on rfc about children acting normally. I eat at child friendly
>> restaurants often enough to observe if out of control behavior happens
>> as a general rule vs a rarity. The complainers are just old grouches
>> who should either stay home or use their head and choose a different
>> style restaurant. The world isn't going to change just for them.
>>
>> --
>>
>> sf
>
> Mostly problems arise from poor parental training at home. The
> children are not taught how to behave in public or in private.
> Kids rule the roost in North America. Watch any comedy show and
> you will see the child-oriented society in all of its disgusting
> ways.
> ===========
>
+ 1

On 7/28/2015 3:11 AM, Troll Disposal Service wrote:
Barbara J. Llorente FRAUD!

Barbara J Llorente 71 Cerritos Ave San Francisco, CA 94127.
Age 65 (Born 1950) (415) 239-7248. Background Check - Available. Record
ID: 47846596.

Your ass has more mass than Jupiter!

No one cares about you.

Get OUT!


_,..._
/__ \
>< `. \
/_ \ |
\-_ /:|
,--'..'. :
,' `.
_,' \
_.._,--'' , |
, ,',, _| _,.'| | |
\\||/,'(,' '--'' | | |
_ ||| | /-' |
| | (- -)<`._ | / /
| | \_\O/_/`-.(<< |____/ /
| | / \ / -'| `--.'|
| | \___/ / /
| | H H / | |
|_|_..-H-H--.._ / ,| |
|-.._"_"__..-| | _-/ | |
| | | | \_ |
Barbara Llorente | | | | |
| The | |____| | |
|Troll Enabler | _..' | |____|
jrei | |_(____..._' _.' |
`-..______..-'"" (___..--'

On 7/28/2015 2:32 AM, Troll Disposal Service wrote:
Barbara J. Llorente FRAUD!

Barbara J Llorente 71 Cerritos Ave San Francisco, CA 94127.
Age 65 (Born 1950) (415) 239-7248. Background Check - Available. Record
ID: 47846596.

Your ass has more mass than Jupiter!

No one cares about you.

Get OUT!


_,..._
/__ \
>< `. \
/_ \ |
\-_ /:|
,--'..'. :
,' `.
_,' \
_.._,--'' , |
, ,',, _| _,.'| | |
\\||/,'(,' '--'' | | |
_ ||| | /-' |
| | (- -)<`._ | / /
| | \_\O/_/`-.(<< |____/ /
| | / \ / -'| `--.'|
| | \___/ / /
| | H H / | |
|_|_..-H-H--.._ / ,| |
|-.._"_"__..-| | _-/ | |
| | | | \_ |
Barbara Llorente | | | | |
| The | |____| | |
|Troll Enabler | _..' | |____|
jrei | |_(____..._' _.' |
`-..______..-'"" (___..--'

On 7/27/2015 11:13 AM, Troll Disposal Service wrote:
> On 7/28/2015 3:11 AM, Troll Disposal Service wrote:
> Barbara J. Llorente FRAUD!
>
> Barbara J Llorente 71

So...we know that Marty is active online now.

JeBus is not.

Bruce is not.

Paul M. Cook was 2 hours or so ago.

Stalker, criminal stalker, who's the stalker???

On 7/28/2015 2:31 AM, Troll Disposal Service wrote:
Barbara J. Llorente FRAUD!

Barbara J Llorente 71 Cerritos Ave San Francisco, CA 94127.
Age 65 (Born 1950) (415) 239-7248. Background Check - Available. Record
ID: 47846596.

Your ass has more mass than Jupiter!

No one cares about you.

Get OUT!


_,..._
/__ \
>< `. \
/_ \ |
\-_ /:|
,--'..'. :
,' `.
_,' \
_.._,--'' , |
, ,',, _| _,.'| | |
\\||/,'(,' '--'' | | |
_ ||| | /-' |
| | (- -)<`._ | / /
| | \_\O/_/`-.(<< |____/ /
| | / \ / -'| `--.'|
| | \___/ / /
| | H H / | |
|_|_..-H-H--.._ / ,| |
|-.._"_"__..-| | _-/ | |
| | | | \_ |
Barbara Llorente | | | | |
| The | |____| | |
|Troll Enabler | _..' | |____|
jrei | |_(____..._' _.' |
`-..______..-'"" (___..--'

On 2015-07-27 9:07 AM, sf wrote:

> Old farts who don't want to see children in the room should keep that
> in mind and choose their restaurants wisely.


How wise are the required to be when the go to a place that is obviously
designed for adult diners and someone shows up with a toddler.

It is curious that some of this conversation has been widened to include
older children. An older kid would have to be behaving pretty badly to
be disruptive in a restaurant. Toddlers and infants can be disruptive
just by doing what kids that age do.... crying.


Just thinking about a family sitting in a nearby booth at a restaurant
we ate in about a year ago. The teenage kids weren't loud or
disruptive, but they were a study in bad manners. The mother looked like
she had just come from work that likely involved a brass pole. The
teenage daughter was texting or talking on her cell phone all through
dinner. Father and son both had ball caps on... backwards. Gym rat
father was always posed in some position to flex and show off his
muscles. None of them knew how to hold a knife and fork. At least they
weren't rowdy and disruptive.

On 7/28/2015 3:16 AM, Directorate of Troll Removal and Disposal wrote:
> On 7/27/2015 11:13 AM, Troll Disposal Service wrote:
Barbara J. Llorente FRAUD!

Barbara J Llorente 71 Cerritos Ave San Francisco, CA 94127.
Age 65 (Born 1950) (415) 239-7248. Background Check - Available. Record
ID: 47846596.

Your ass has more mass than Jupiter!

No one cares about you.

Get OUT!


_,..._
/__ \
>< `. \
/_ \ |
\-_ /:|
,--'..'. :
,' `.
_,' \
_.._,--'' , |
, ,',, _| _,.'| | |
\\||/,'(,' '--'' | | |
_ ||| | /-' |
| | (- -)<`._ | / /
| | \_\O/_/`-.(<< |____/ /
| | / \ / -'| `--.'|
| | \___/ / /
| | H H / | |
|_|_..-H-H--.._ / ,| |
|-.._"_"__..-| | _-/ | |
| | | | \_ |
Barbara Llorente | | | | |
| The | |____| | |
|Troll Enabler | _..' | |____|
jrei | |_(____..._' _.' |
`-..______..-'"" (___..--'

On 2015-07-27 12:59 PM, jmcquown wrote:

> It was years ago but I was flying to SC to visit my parents. Likely
> around 1990. There was a young boy seated behind me and he kept kicking
> the back of the seat. Annoyed backward glances didn't register with the
> parents. I was about to say something to them when the young man
> sitting next to me said, "I see you're having a problem. I'll gladly
> trade trade seats with you." The minute the boy started kicking the
> seat again he turned around and said loudly to the boy, STOP! The child
> stopped kicking the back of the plane seat.
>
> The parents were apparently oblivious. How you can tune that behaviour
> out is a mystery.


The parents probably got upset that someone dared to deal with their
kid. I wonder about the reaction of a mother whose kid I spoke at a few
years ago. A mother was having a hard time dealing with her kid. He was
jumping up and town and crying and screaming. It would have been bad
enough from a three year old but this kid was about 12. I spoke in a
very loud voice "Stop whining". He stopped and looked a little stunned.
The mother should have been grateful, but you know what some parents
are like these days. I was probably the bully who verbally assaulted her
child and who has ADHD. autiism, PTSD or something that they use as an
excuse for him being a childish brat.

On 7/28/2015 2:56 AM, Roy wrote:
Since the New Deal, Republicans have been on the wrong side of every
issue of concern to ordinary Americans; Social Security, the war in
Vietnam, equal rights, civil liberties, church- state separation,
consumer issues, public education, reproductive freedom, national health
care, labor issues, gun policy, campaign-finance reform, the environment
and tax fairness. No political party could remain so consistently wrong
by accident.
The only rational conclusion is that, despite their cynical "family
values" propaganda, the Republican Party is a criminal conspiracy to
betray the interests of the American people
in favor of plutocratic and corporate interests, and absolutist
religious groups.

Why? Because they're evil GOP *******s

On Mon, 27 Jul 2015 09:12:01 -0700, "Cheri" >
wrote:

>
> "sf" > wrote in message
> ...
>
> > Old farts who don't want to see children in the room should keep that
> > in mind and choose their restaurants wisely.
> >
>
> I don't mind seeing them at all, it's the *hearing* them screaming and
> raising hell that I object to, but I do avoid places like McDonald's, Burger
> King, etc. LOL
>

I don't avoid places like that. In fact I was in one last week and
the truth is: kids don't scream. Maybe the complainers can't tell
play on the playground equipment in the play area a lot of fast food
franchises seem to have from sitting and eating. Only oldsters or the
permanently child free with some kind of chip on their shoulder who
venture into family friendly restaurants anyway seem to have the
complaints. Basically, everything is a problem for them.


--

sf

On Mon, 27 Jul 2015 10:44:06 -0500, MaryL
> wrote:
> >
> My sister's niece has four very young children, and she and her
> husband take them on a great many airplane trips. She said they get
> some "dirty looks" from other passengers when they board the plane with
> four youngsters, but they often get grateful comments when they exit.
> Each parent sits with two children, and they take great care to keep the
> children entertained and quiet.
>
The only time I've been on an airplane with a crying baby, the baby
obviously had an ear problem that was the cause. I was seated
directly across the aisle and barely heard the cries over all the
airplane noise, so AFAIC anyone who complains about that sort of thing
must *want* to be wound up about something... however small.

--

sf

On 7/28/2015 2:32 AM, Dave Smith wrote:
At the very least, as an ethical Presidential Candidate, Jeb Bush would
be expected to denounce pedophilia and ritual child sacrifice by his
father and brother and any other Bush family members.
All 2016 Presidential candidates should be questioned as to whether they
have ever participated in pedophilia, ritual child sacrifice, or child
trafficking, or in any of the networks that support such.
A new model of the actual planetary driver of pedophile and ritual
sacrifice networks

The Transhumanist Agenda model of pedophilia and child abuse networks is
more accurate and factual than a prior model of pedophilia that focuses
sole blame on Churches [such as the Vatican] or Monarchies [such as the
UK, Dutch, or Belgian Throne]. This prior model of pedophile networks
actually diverts attention away from Transhumanist Agenda, which is the
actual current planetary driver of pedophile and ritual sacrifice networks.

On 7/28/2015 3:40 AM, Directorate of Troll Removal and Disposal wrote:
Barbara J. Llorente FRAUD!

Barbara J Llorente 71 Cerritos Ave San Francisco, CA 94127.
Age 65 (Born 1950) (415) 239-7248. Background Check - Available. Record
ID: 47846596.

Your ass has more mass than Jupiter!

No one cares about you.

Get OUT!


_,..._
/__ \
>< `. \
/_ \ |
\-_ /:|
,--'..'. :
,' `.
_,' \
_.._,--'' , |
, ,',, _| _,.'| | |
\\||/,'(,' '--'' | | |
_ ||| | /-' |
| | (- -)<`._ | / /
| | \_\O/_/`-.(<< |____/ /
| | / \ / -'| `--.'|
| | \___/ / /
| | H H / | |
|_|_..-H-H--.._ / ,| |
|-.._"_"__..-| | _-/ | |
| | | | \_ |
Barbara Llorente | | | | |
| The | |____| | |
|Troll Enabler | _..' | |____|
jrei | |_(____..._' _.' |
`-..______..-'"" (___..--'

On 7/28/2015 3:40 AM, sf wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Jul 2015 10:44:06 -0500, MaryL
> > wrote:
>>>
>> My sister's niece has four very young children, and she and her
>> husband take them on a great many airplane trips. She said they get
>> some "dirty looks" from other passengers when they board the plane with
>> four youngsters, but they often get grateful comments when they exit.
>> Each parent sits with two children, and they take great care to keep the
>> children entertained and quiet.
>>
> The only time I've been on an airplane with a crying baby, the baby
> obviously had an ear problem that was the cause. I was seated
> directly across the aisle and barely heard the cries over all the
> airplane noise, so AFAIC anyone who complains about that sort of thing
> must *want* to be wound up about something... however small.

https://welcome.weigh****chers.com/

On Mon, 27 Jul 2015 13:25:44 -0400, Dave Smith
> wrote:

> None of them knew how to hold a knife and fork.

If I'm going to get ticked off, that will do it.

--

sf

wrote:
>
> Wicked Witch of Eastern Canada!

I wasn't going to mention that again unless you did. But since you
liked it you just HAD to mention it again. Anyway, that was what I
seemed to remember but I also said "or something like that." It's not
correct. sorry.

I did look it up so just for the official record, here's what you were
called and I think you might like this even better. heheh

"The Shrew who lives
East of the Canadian mainland"

That's the true quote. ;-D

"sf" > wrote in message
news
> On Mon, 27 Jul 2015 09:12:01 -0700, "Cheri" >
> wrote:
>
>>
>> "sf" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>
>> > Old farts who don't want to see children in the room should keep that
>> > in mind and choose their restaurants wisely.
>> >
>>
>> I don't mind seeing them at all, it's the *hearing* them screaming and
>> raising hell that I object to, but I do avoid places like McDonald's,
>> Burger
>> King, etc. LOL
>>
>
> I don't avoid places like that. In fact I was in one last week and
> the truth is: kids don't scream. Maybe the complainers can't tell
> play on the playground equipment in the play area a lot of fast food
> franchises seem to have from sitting and eating. Only oldsters or the
> permanently child free with some kind of chip on their shoulder who
> venture into family friendly restaurants anyway seem to have the
> complaints. Basically, everything is a problem for them.
>
>
> --
>
> sf

That's not true at all where I am, many do scream and raise hell INSIDE. You
might choose to go to those places, I don't. I spend a lot of time with many
grandchildren, so kids don't bother me at all, but...misbehaving kids do, so
I avoid them when possible.

Cheri

On 27/07/2015 11:25 AM, Dave Smith wrote:
> On 2015-07-27 9:07 AM, sf wrote:
>
>> Old farts who don't want to see children in the room should keep that
>> in mind and choose their restaurants wisely.
>
>
> How wise are the required to be when the go to a place that is obviously
> designed for adult diners and someone shows up with a toddler.
>
> It is curious that some of this conversation has been widened to include
> older children. An older kid would have to be behaving pretty badly to
> be disruptive in a restaurant. Toddlers and infants can be disruptive
> just by doing what kids that age do.... crying.
>
>
> Just thinking about a family sitting in a nearby booth at a restaurant
> we ate in about a year ago. The teenage kids weren't loud or
> disruptive, but they were a study in bad manners. The mother looked like
> she had just come from work that likely involved a brass pole. The
> teenage daughter was texting or talking on her cell phone all through
> dinner. Father and son both had ball caps on... backwards. Gym rat
> father was always posed in some position to flex and show off his
> muscles. None of them knew how to hold a knife and fork. At least they
> weren't rowdy and disruptive.
>
>
I bet they ate with their mouths open as well!
Graham

--

On 7/27/2015 12:12 PM, sf wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Jul 2015 13:25:44 -0400, Dave Smith
> > wrote:
>
>> None of them knew how to hold a knife and fork.
>
> If I'm going to get ticked off, that will do it.
>
LOL!

On 7/28/2015 5:24 AM, Directorate of Troll Removal and Disposal wrote:
Barbara J. Llorente FRAUD!

Barbara J Llorente 71 Cerritos Ave San Francisco, CA 94127.
Age 65 (Born 1950) (415) 239-7248. Background Check - Available. Record
ID: 47846596.

Your ass has more mass than Jupiter!

No one cares about you.

Get OUT!


_,..._
/__ \
>< `. \
/_ \ |
\-_ /:|
,--'..'. :
,' `.
_,' \
_.._,--'' , |
, ,',, _| _,.'| | |
\\||/,'(,' '--'' | | |
_ ||| | /-' |
| | (- -)<`._ | / /
| | \_\O/_/`-.(<< |____/ /
| | / \ / -'| `--.'|
| | \___/ / /
| | H H / | |
|_|_..-H-H--.._ / ,| |
|-.._"_"__..-| | _-/ | |
| | | | \_ |
Barbara Llorente | | | | |
| The | |____| | |
|Troll Enabler | _..' | |____|
jrei | |_(____..._' _.' |
`-..______..-'"" (___..--'

On 7/28/2015 5:36 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
I have, on at least three prior occasions, written posts that delve into
the €œalleged€� lurid past of one of our former presidents, George Herbert
Walker Bush (GHWB), the current but ailing patriarch of the Bush Family
Dynasty €“ I refer to them as the Bush Family Crime Syndicate, certainly
not in terms of endearment €“ but rather more like the Mafia Godfather
who prepares his sons to take over the family business upon his death.
This particular post references an article by Stew Webb, a contributor
of Veterans Today.

In his life-time, George H. W. Bush (GHWB) has controlled every
clandestine (hidden from view) and secret organization/operation within
the arsenal of the United States government as either 1) Director of the
CIA, 2) Vice President to Ronald Reagan (who was an unwitting puppet to
the Bush controlled cabal €“ GHWB secretly gave Reagan poisons that
hastened his fall into Alzheimers Disease and evidence suggests he
helped plan Reagan attempted assassination by John Hinckley, whose
family were close friends of the Bush family €“ a coincidence?) and 3)
ultimately as President of the United States before Bill Clinton took
office.

On 7/28/2015 5:07 AM, graham wrote:
At the very least, as an ethical Presidential Candidate, Jeb Bush would
be expected to denounce pedophilia and ritual child sacrifice by his
father and brother and any other Bush family members.
All 2016 Presidential candidates should be questioned as to whether they
have ever participated in pedophilia, ritual child sacrifice, or child
trafficking, or in any of the networks that support such.
A new model of the actual planetary driver of pedophile and ritual
sacrifice networks

The Transhumanist Agenda model of pedophilia and child abuse networks is
more accurate and factual than a prior model of pedophilia that focuses
sole blame on Churches [such as the Vatican] or Monarchies [such as the
UK, Dutch, or Belgian Throne]. This prior model of pedophile networks
actually diverts attention away from Transhumanist Agenda, which is the
actual current planetary driver of pedophile and ritual sacrifice networks.