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.

On 7/26/2015 3:58 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.
>
>
+1

On Sun, 26 Jul 2015 17:58:11 -0400, 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.

If it's a restaurant that has high chairs then I'm not going.

On 7/26/2015 4:26 PM, wrote:
> On Sun, 26 Jul 2015 17:58:11 -0400, 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.
>>
> Too true. There are fast food places and family/chain type
> restaurants where you can take smaller kids and start socialising them
> so you don't inflict their tantrums on other customers. If you're not
> prepared to civilise them, don't take them to restaurants.

You have that one RIGHT!

On Sun, 26 Jul 2015 18:07:07 -0400, Brooklyn1
> wrote:

>On Sun, 26 Jul 2015 17:58:11 -0400, 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.
>
>If it's a restaurant that has high chairs then I'm not going.

That would be reason enough for me!

John Kuthe...

On Sun, 26 Jul 2015 19:26:00 -0300, wrote:

>On Sun, 26 Jul 2015 17:58:11 -0400, 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.
>>
>Too true. There are fast food places and family/chain type
>restaurants where you can take smaller kids and start socialising them
>so you don't inflict their tantrums on other customers. If you're not
>prepared to civilise them, don't take them to restaurants.
>
>---
>This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
>https://www.avast.com/antivirus

I taught my young son what I called "restaurant manners" before I took
him to a restaurant. We practiced at home.

John Kuthe...

On Sunday, July 26, 2015 at 5:58:13 PM UTC-4, 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.

So, how can you know a place doesn't supply high chairs and what's to stop someone from plopping a kid down on a booth bench?

On 7/26/2015 8:22 PM, Kalmia wrote:
> On Sunday, July 26, 2015 at 5:58:13 PM UTC-4, 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.
>
> So, how can you know a place doesn't supply high chairs and what's to stop someone from plopping a kid down on a booth bench?
>
Nothing stopping them but then they invariably ask for a booster seat.

If there's nothing the menu notating "Child" chances are they aren't
welcoming toddlers.

It's fairly easy to spot kid-friendly restaurants. They aren't usually
high priced places. Think Denny's or pretty much any chain restaurant.
Yeah, bring the kids. Because we want to have to control the children
you let run wild. No wonder you rarely let them out of the house.

True: if they have booster seats or high chairs, you're not talking fine
dining.

Jill

On 2015-07-26 20:22, Kalmia wrote:
> On Sunday, July 26, 2015 at 5:58:13 PM UTC-4, 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.
>
> So, how can you know a place doesn't supply high chairs

That is easy enough. The people who think they are entitled to take
their toddler out for fine dining ask for a high chair. Sorry.... we
don't have a high chair.

> and what's to stop someone from plopping a kid down on a booth bench?

Nothing really, but this reasonable person suggested that if there is no
high chair it is not a place to take young children.

On Sunday, July 26, 2015 at 8:55:43 PM UTC-4, Dave Smith wrote:
> On 2015-07-26 20:22, Kalmia wrote:
> > On Sunday, July 26, 2015 at 5:58:13 PM UTC-4, 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.
> >
> > So, how can you know a place doesn't supply high chairs
>
> That is easy enough. The people who think they are entitled to take
> their toddler out for fine dining ask for a high chair. Sorry.... we
> don't have a high chair.
>
> > and what's to stop someone from plopping a kid down on a booth bench?
>
> Nothing really, but this reasonable person suggested that if there is no
> high chair it is not a place to take young children.

But how can YOU as a patron know this - do you ask if they have highchairs when you enter the joint? If they don't see you with kids in tow, you might get a strange look.

On Sun, 26 Jul 2015 17:58:11 -0400, 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.
>
Hello.
Do you have high chairs?
Can you name a couple of nearby restaurants that don't?

On 7/26/2015 8:22 PM, Kalmia wrote:

>
> So, how can you know a place doesn't supply high chairs and what's to stop someone from plopping a kid down on a booth bench?
>

If it has booths it is not fine dining so I'd expect kids could be there.

OTOH, we had dinner here today and there were two tables that had young
children (about 7 to 10yo) and they were perfectly behaved.
http://bellarestaurantandbanquet.com/

On 7/27/2015 11:03 AM, Kalmia wrote:
most seriously, the Bush family pioneered the practice which has now
become commonplace of collaboration between corporate and organized
criminals. Prescott Bush, uncle of the current President and brother of
the former President, played a key role in helping the Japanese Yakuza
extend their financial and real estate holdings to the United States. In
1989, Prescott Bush made arrangements for a front company for Japanese
organized crime groups to buy into two U.S. corporations and to make a
sizeable real investment in the U.S. (Helm, 1991a: 1; Isikoff, 1992:
A1). West Tsusho, a Japanese corporation, was identified by Japanese
police officials as a front company for one of that country’s largest
organized crime syndicates. Prescott Bush was paid a fee of $500,000 for
his help in negotiating West Tsusho’s purchase of controlling interest
in Assets Management, a U.S. corporation (Helm, 1991a: 1; Isikoff, 1992:
A1). Bush also assisted the Japanese mob in investing in Quantam Access,
a U.S. software company, which was ultimately taken over by the Japanese
(Helm, 1991b: 10; Isikoff, 1992: A1). Both companies ultimately went
into bankruptcy (Isikoff, 1992: A1; Moses, 1992).

On 7/27/2015 1:00 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
Jeb Bush is a presidential candidate.

But Jeb is not only the brother of George W. and the son of George H. W.
Bush.

Jeb Bush also had close personal ties to Raul Salinas de Gortari,
brother of Mexico’s former president Carlos Salinas de Gortari. In the
1990s, Raul the “drug kingpin”, according to Switzerland’s federal
prosecutor Carla del Ponte, was one of the main figures of the Mexican
Drug Cartel.

On 7/27/2015 10:55 AM, Dave Smith wrote:
Former president George H. W. Bush and Raul Salinas Lozano were “intimo
amigos”. According to former DEA official Michael Levine, the Mexican
drug Cartel was a “family affair”. Both Carlos and Raul were prominent
members of the Cartel. And this was known to then US Attorney General
Edward Meese in 1987 one year prior to Carlos Salinas’ inauguration as
the country’s president.

When Carlos Salinas was inaugurated as President, the entire Mexican
State apparatus became criminalised with key government positions
occupied by members of the Cartel. The Minister of Commerce in charge of
trade negotiations leading up to the signing of NAFTA was Raul Salinas
Lozano, father of Raul Junior the Drug kingpin and of Carlos the president.

And it is precisely during this period that the Salinas government
launched a sweeping privatisation program under advice from the IMF.

The privatisation program subsequently evolved into a multibillion
dollar money laundering operation. Narco-dollars were channelled towards
the acquisition of State property and public utilities.

On 7/27/2015 10:39 AM, jmcquown wrote:
From FDR to today, the Bush Crime Family and their fixated core of
corporate fascists have, using unbridled corporate power, been
tightening their grip on the throats of the American political, legal,
economic and media systems -- as the following excerpt from the
Democratic Underground so well outlines:

"A Pocket History of the Bush Organized Crime Family Crime Line

Hitler's "Angel" -- Prescott Bush and his Wall Street cronies helped
finance and arm the Third Reich.* Some continued trading with the enemy
even after Germany declared war on America.

Bay of Pigs -- Bush the Oilman and his Cuban and Mafia friends raise
hell in Miami, New Orleans and Houston. Nice fellahs. LBJ called their
organization "A regular Murder Inc in the Caribbean."

22 November 1963, Dallas* -- George DeMohrenschildt the "White Russian
geologist" is friends with both Lee Harvey Oswald and George Herbert
Walker Bush. Small world, as the coincidences get bigger. Almost 40
years later, FBI memos surface that detail how George Herbert Walker
Bush fingered a young conservative the day of the assassination and "Mr.
George Bush of the Central Intelligence Agency" cleared the anti-Castro
Cubans in Miami days later.

Vietnam -- OK for poor kids to fight an illegal war started over the
phony Gulf of Tonkin Incident, just as long as "W," the drunken
coke-whore dim son, "destined" to become preznit some day, or the rest
of his rich frat brothers don't have to go. Meanwhile Poppy's rich
friends became very, very, very rich.

Watergate -- Nixon was willing to throw anyone and everyone to the
wolves -- except George Herbert Walker Bush and "The Texans" because
"They'll do anything for our side." Gee. Would "murder" qualify as
"anything." Think so, especially seeing how Nixon got the ziggy and Bush
ended up in the clear.

October Surprise -- Carter probably would've beat Reagan, but Bush and
his buddies in INTEL and the military-industrial complex cut a deal with
the Ayatollah to hold the hostages clear through the election. On
inauguration day, they got to leave Tehran. A couple of weeks later,
Israel starts sending US-supplied weapons. It proves so "profitable,"
that Ollie North cuts out the Israelis and decides to sell them US-direct.

Reagan survives assassination attempt --Just a couple of months after
Reagan is sworn in, Reagan is ALMOST taken out and Bush stood ready to
take charge. His son Neil was ready to have dinner that night with John
Hinckley's brother, Scott. Odd how these "One Degree of Separation"
coincidences always happen to Poppy.

On 7/27/2015 10:22 AM, Kalmia wrote:
BUSH SR. must wonder how his son, George W. Bush, did it--the idiot son
who followed his father's footsteps into the White House. Dubya spent
many years under the influence. This included the use of influence to
avoid the Vietnam-era draft and get into the Texas Air National
Guard--where Bush got himself transferred to Mississippi, and eventually
chose not to show up at all.

Then Bush Jr. tried to use his family influence to make a fortune in
oil. He should have been a colossal failure. His company
Arbusto--nicknamed Ar-Busto in the industry--lost $3 million.

Fortunately for him, a Cincinnati group that included a Yale classmate
bought him out. The son of the then-vice president became chair of the
newly constituted Spectrum 7 Energy Corp. Yet once again, no success for
Dubya.

But as Britian's Observer newspaper put it, "Whenever he struck a dry
well, someone was always willing to fill it with money for him." Harken
Energy bought out Spectrum 7, and Bush was put on the board of directors
and given 16 percent of the stock.

On 7/27/2015 9:45 AM, John Kuthe wrote:
After killing as many as 200,000 people during the seven-week war, Bush
urged the Iraqi people to rise up against the regime. But when Kurds and
Shiites did rebel, the Bush White House decided they were better off
with Saddam's Ba'ath Party in power--and allowed the regime to repress
the rebellions. Thus, Bush Sr. bears direct responsibility for the
recently discovered "mass graves of Iraqi Shiites" discovered by U.S.
forces after Bush Jr.'s invasion.

On 7/26/2015 9:23 PM, Sqwertz wrote:
> They have a "Funeral Coalition Menu"?!?!
No one cares.

Get OUT!


_,..._
/__ \
>< `. \
/_ \ |
\-_ /:|
,--'..'. :
,' `.
_,' \
_.._,--'' , |
, ,',, _| _,.'| | |
\\||/,'(,' '--'' | | |
_ ||| | /-' |
| | (- -)<`._ | / /
| | \_\O/_/`-.(<< |____/ /
| | / \ / -'| `--.'|
| | \___/ / /
| | H H / | |
|_|_..-H-H--.._ / ,| |
|-.._"_"__..-| | _-/ | |
| | | | \_ |
| Sqwerty | | | | |
| & | |____| | |
| Marty | _..' | |____|
jrei | |_(____..._' _.' |
`-..______..-'"" (___..--'

Troll Disposal Service wrote:
> But as Britian's Observer newspaper


Bodine fraud.

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

On 7/27/2015 2:40 PM, MaryL wrote:
n the history of the American Republic, perhaps no political family has
been more protected from scandal than the Bushes.

When the Bushes are involved in dirty deals or even criminal activity,
standards of evidence change. Instead of proof "beyond a reasonable
doubt" that would lock up an average citizen, the evidence must be perfect.

If there's any doubt at all, the Bushes must be presumed innocent. Even
when their guilt is obvious to anyone with an ounce of common sense,
it's their accusers and those who dare investigate who get the worst of
it. Their motives are challenged and their own shortcomings are cast in
the harshest possible light.

For decades -- arguably going back generations -- the Bushes have been
protected by their unique position straddling two centers of national
power, the family's blueblood Eastern Establishment ties and the Texas
oil crowd with strong links to the Republican Right. [For details on
this family phenomenon, see Robert Parry's Secrecy & Privilege.]

On 7/27/2015 2:36 PM, Fraud Trap wrote:
> Troll Disposal Service wrote:
>> But as Britian's Observer newspaper
>
>
> Bodine fraud.
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, Ed Pawlowski > wrote:

> OTOH, we had dinner here today and there were two tables that had young
> children (about 7 to 10yo) and they were perfectly behaved.

Lord have mercy!

I don't get the surprise. All the kids I saw --as a kid-- were well
behaved. My brother and I always behaved. It's probably due to our
parents imposing "social graces" on us. What a concept!! Not like it
was some kinda torture to go out for dinner.

Let's see: Good food. Nice surroundings. Parents not inclined to
chastise you in public. What's not to like? One catch. Gotta
"behave". Piece of cake! Sign me up! Is this weekly?

nb

On 7/27/2015 3:00 PM, notbob wrote:
ONE BUSH after another has attended Yale University, and each one has
been a member of the elite and highly secretive Skull and Bones society.
Fifteen Yale students--overwhelmingly men--are chosen every year. They
come from "the best families" and are meant to stay connected in
business and social circles throughout their lives.

Skull and Bones is fodder for conspiracy theorists alarmed that a
"secret society" could claim so many of the country's elite. Look at the
society's creepy practices, and you can understand why.

Initiates into Skull and Bones are brought into the "tomb," a dark,
windowless crypt in New Haven, with a roof that serves as a landing pad
for the society's private helicopter. They are sworn to silence and told
that they must forever deny that they are members.

During initiation, the juniors wrestle in mud and are physically
beaten--to represent their "death" to the world as they have known it.
Then the initiates are given a new name as a member of "The Order." At
this point, the new members are introduced to the artifacts kept in the
tomb--which include Nazi memorabilia, such as a set of Hitler's
silverware, dozens of skulls, and an assortment of coffins and skeletons.

Skull and Bones was the foundation of the OSS spy agency. There were so
many secrety society members in the OSS that Yale's drinking tune--the
"Whiffenpoof Song," --became the agency's "unofficial" song as well.

"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.

Yep.

On Sunday, July 26, 2015 at 8:23:17 PM UTC-7, Sqwertz wrote:
> On Sun, 26 Jul 2015 23:00:40 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>
> > On 7/26/2015 8:22 PM, Kalmia wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> So, how can you know a place doesn't supply high chairs and what's to stop someone from plopping a kid down on a booth bench?
> >>
> >
> > If it has booths it is not fine dining so I'd expect kids could be there.
> >
> > OTOH, we had dinner here today and there were two tables that had young
> > children (about 7 to 10yo) and they were perfectly behaved.
> > http://bellarestaurantandbanquet.com/
>
> They have a "Funeral Coalition Menu"?!?! Is that for when the patrons
> band together and kill all the obnoxious kids in the restaurant?

Colazione, or Collation

On Sunday, July 26, 2015 at 11:23:17 PM UTC-4, Sqwertz wrote:

> They have a "Funeral Coalition Menu"?!?! Is that for when the patrons
> band together and kill all the obnoxious kids in the restaurant?

Nice one.

Although I'm afraid the mundane answer probably is that their
spellchecker couldn't make any sense of someone's attempt to spell
"collation", and the typist just took the suggested correction.

Cindy Hamilton

On 7/27/2015 7:00 AM, wrote:

> I agree, sometimes it means you have to leave and go home when you
> didn't wish to, but I found I only had to do something like that once
> with each child and they got the message.
>
That's what we did with our kids - if they started to misbehave, we (no
matter how inconvenient to us) immediately removed them from the premises.
They learned quickly!
After that, simply raising an eyebrow and nodding toward the exit was
enough.

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.

> I agree, sometimes it means you have to leave and go home when you
> didn't wish to, but I found I only had to do something like that once
> with each child and they got the message. Since at heart they loved
> being out to eat, it affected a cure - young parents today do not seem
> to get the message of the old saw about 'this hurts me more than you'
> with regard to discipline and good manners.

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.

nancy

In article >,
says...
>
> On 7/27/2015 7:00 AM, wrote:
>
> > I agree, sometimes it means you have to leave and go home when you
> > didn't wish to, but I found I only had to do something like that once
> > with each child and they got the message.
> >
> That's what we did with our kids - if they started to misbehave, we (no
> matter how inconvenient to us) immediately removed them from the premises.
> They learned quickly!
> After that, simply raising an eyebrow and nodding toward the exit was
> enough.

Same here.

These days I hear parents repeatedly threatening their kids with
consequences ("Do that again and I'll take you outside/take it away"
etc), over and over again, without carrying through. No wonder their
kids ignore them and carry right on.

Janet UK

"Nancy Young" > wrote in message
...
> 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.

We went out all the time but were never allowed to be noisy or run around.
>
>> I agree, sometimes it means you have to leave and go home when you
>> didn't wish to, but I found I only had to do something like that once
>> with each child and they got the message. Since at heart they loved
>> being out to eat, it affected a cure - young parents today do not seem
>> to get the message of the old saw about 'this hurts me more than you'
>> with regard to discipline and good manners.
>
> 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 saw that.

We went out to eat at a Mexican place the other day. Not fancy. Big party
sitting near us and they let the little boy just run around and scream.
Drove me nuts!

In article >,
says...
>
> On Mon, 27 Jul 2015 07:22:30 -0400, S Viemeister
> > wrote:
>
> >On 7/27/2015 7:00 AM, wrote:
> >
> >> I agree, sometimes it means you have to leave and go home when you
> >> didn't wish to, but I found I only had to do something like that once
> >> with each child and they got the message.
> >>
> >That's what we did with our kids - if they started to misbehave, we (no
> >matter how inconvenient to us) immediately removed them from the premises.
> >They learned quickly!
> >After that, simply raising an eyebrow and nodding toward the exit was
> >enough.
>
> Lol my kids called it The Look

In my childhood, is was known as being given The Hard Eye.

Janet UK

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.

On Sun, 26 Jul 2015 17:22:09 -0700 (PDT), Kalmia
> wrote:

> On Sunday, July 26, 2015 at 5:58:13 PM UTC-4, 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.
>
> So, how can you know a place doesn't supply high chairs

That's what telephones are for - and if they are just walking past:
ask. You can bet money that a lack of bench seating + a lack of high
chairs is a clue to the clueless.

> and what's to stop someone from plopping a kid down on a booth bench?

If they have bench seating, children are obviously welcome - in spite
of what certain posters on rfc would like to dictate. Also style,
ethnicity and noise level make a big difference. A noisy restaurant
is usually more child friendly than a quiet one. As a general rule,
Mexican is more child friendly than French and a restaurant with paper
place mats (or none) and paper napkins in a dispenser on the table is
more child friendly than one with white tablecloths and real napkins.
Old farts who don't want to see children in the room should keep that
in mind and choose their restaurants wisely.

--

sf

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

--

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

On Sun, 26 Jul 2015 18:03:09 -0700 (PDT), Kalmia
> wrote:

> But how can YOU as a patron know this - do you ask if they have highchairs when you enter the joint? If they don't see you with kids in tow, you might get a strange look.

If the possible presence of children is that much of a problem, then
it's up to you to inquire.

--

sf

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.

--

sf

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.