Comments by virtuallynothing
Page 1 of 2 | Next
Posted on November 17 at 2:11 p.m.
Congratulations and thanks to Mitchell and Amy and the entire Perez family for helping to keep 'culinary travelers' coming to Santa Barbara and for giving those of us who live here "icing on the cake."
Posted on August 17 at 4:26 p.m.
>Andrea: sorry for the late response...of course the votes were purchased - follow the trail of money of the 40 state attorneys general who "brought this to the attention" of Congress. The WASHINGTON POST reported information such as the following obtained from the Federal Election Commission: $45,000 to the campaign account of Rep. John Conyers, Jr. (D-Mich) who chairs the committee considering the bill; $300,000 from the beer wholesalers to the 100 plus House members who agreed to co-sponsor the bill.; $2,500 to Rep. Mike Quigley (D-Ill) three days before the bill was introduced; $8,000 to Rep. Pete Olson (R-Texas), including $2,500 after pledging his support. Since January 1, according to the POST, campaign contributions on this issue to both Chambers exceeded $900,000.
Many House members supporting the bill, as were many state attorneys-general, were snookered into believing the bill would help prevent underage drinking. Nothing could be further from the truth. They have also been snookered into believing that HR 5034 would not affect winery rights to ship directly to their consumers. The bill would allow states to discriminate between in-state and out-of-state wineries in establishing shipping regulations. It would also make it all but impossible for legal actions to be taken against state regulations, actually overriding both the Commerce Clause governing interstate commerce and the 2005 Supreme Court Decision (Granholm v Heald) upholding the Commerce Clause concerning direct shipping. Write a letter to Lois and Elton.
>binky: are you a big fan of J.J Rousseau? Your anti-Libertarian comment shows a complete lack of understanding of religion, government, and, Libertarianism. Try reading Frederic Bastiat.
>Bill: let's stick with brother for now.
Posted on August 3 at 3:43 p.m.
Thank you, Bill. For once, you and I are united. How about that? There's a libertarian hiding deep inside you, son.
Posted on May 27 at 9:54 p.m.
Oh, and Bill, the MADD events to which I referred were in the 'mid to late '80s. Do ask Mr. Silas Miers exactly what MADD's policy was in Santa Barbara between 1985 and 1988, if he knows. I have had nothing to do with them since. Nor has MADD's founder Candy Lightner. Since you seem to be fond of links, here's one for you:
http://alcoholfacts.org/CrashCourseOn...
Usted hace mucho ruido, Bill. Un tambor vacío es el más fuerte.
A Dios.
Posted on May 27 at 8:22 p.m.
Muy bueno, Guillermito. Pero era latino, no español. Sin embargo, su uso de la palabra 'temar' es confuso. ¿Quiso usted 'temer' 'o timando'?
Posted on May 27 at 12:06 p.m.
C'mon, Bill. Other than correcting one typo, how were your exact quotes distorted? Speaking of which, from another of your comments to me:
"VN: Most of your above post isn't worth commenting on since most of it is a personal put down (God forbid if one questions the way people behave)"
You might look at your line in parentheses for a moment. And, as the policeman/prosecutor/judge/and jury, ask God exactly where you should stand for the best angle to get that first stone out of your hands and hit your target.
"Because denial is a main component of alcoholism--even if the alcoholism involved is dry co-dependency." No accusatory or judgmental tone here, Bill, right? Need another stone?
If I may quote Holly:
..."people MUST get along with others, whether they like them or not...Don't like kids, dogs or cars? My message to the folks who don't want anyone else to live or have freedom of movement in "their' community is simple: Too bad..deal with it; this is the grown-up real world...it's NOT all about you, sweetheart...."
It's not all about you, sweetheart.
It's not about ammo, Bill.
It's about amar.
Posted on May 26 at 11:05 a.m.
Not at 2:55 AM, I wouldn't. Get some sleep, Bill.
...though I have "told MADD off" as you phrase it. When they've sponsored 'benefits' which serve considerable amounts of alcoholic beverages MADD requested from and was donated by the very profit mongers you abhor and castigate.
I don't drink - but that's my choice, not yours. Do you and MADD drive only on ONE WAY streets?
Perhaps there will be room to put your money where your mouth is if your foot is put back on the ground.
That having been said, there is absolutely no doubt where you stand, which is a commendable thing, whether or not I agree with you. Thank you.
Page 1 of 2 | Next
Previous Month
Posted on November 29 at 12:06 p.m.
As long as the burial in AG land has the appropriate EIR and approval from the neighborhoods established on AG land. I think it is covered in Obamacare, on page 2468, that residential use of AG land is granted Nature Conservancy status...at taxpayer expense.
And why not?
Might think about moving Thomas Paine's remains there as well.
On As Wine Harvest Ends, County Talks Ramp Up