Comments on: Three cask monte, Bordeaux 2010, Bosnia – sipped & spit

By: 1winedude

1winedude — Sat, 23 Apr 2011 18:53:24 +0000

Not sure what’s happened to the other comments I tried to publish on this post, so trying one more time…

If Hardy’s a clown, then sign me up for the big shoes & funny car, please!

By: Wino

Wino — Sat, 23 Apr 2011 01:47:16 +0000

Every village needs an idiot.

By: 1WineDude

1WineDude — Mon, 18 Apr 2011 12:24:35 +0000

Aaron – I’m no lawyer, but if HR 1161 results in states treating inter- and intra-state commerce differently for the same product (alcohol) to the advantage of in-state, then I think it could be argued it is unconstitutional.

Wino – If you’re talking about Hardy, then you need to take a chill-pill, I think. Wine needs more people like him, not less.

By: Hardy

Hardy — Sun, 17 Apr 2011 00:38:41 +0000

Wino- http://bit.ly/BLYW …

Lars- I’m printing some new ones in the next week. If you want one and are in the US- dirtysouthwine at mac com (I’ll put more info on dirtysouthwine.com when ready to ship)

By: Wino

Wino — Sun, 17 Apr 2011 00:08:09 +0000

The guy made some videos of his trip in Bordeaux and he is, indeed, a clown. If that’s his mission in life he seems to be accomplishing it. Congratulations, I guess.

By: Wino

Wino — Sat, 16 Apr 2011 13:37:59 +0000

Wearing a t-shirt in Bordeaux? Classy. And the glasses. He looks like a clown, and that’s the worst thing to be considered by people.

By: Lars

Lars — Thu, 14 Apr 2011 07:29:17 +0000

Where do I buy that shirt???

By: Aaron

Aaron — Thu, 14 Apr 2011 03:25:39 +0000

Dr. V,
I did read the post. What I saw was a great argument against the passage of HR 1161, and an argument that the law is against the spirit of free interstate commerce, but nothing that suggests the law is unconstitutional or contrary to the commerce clause. Congress wants to pass a law that essentially says ‘turn off the dormant commerce clause when it comes to alcohol’. Congress has the power to regulate interstate commerce and the power to relinquish that regulation to the states if they choose. A bad idea? Yes, if you ask me. Unconstitutional? Doesn’t seem like it, but I’m not a lawyer.

By: Dr. Vino

Dr. Vino — Thu, 14 Apr 2011 02:11:17 +0000

Hi Aaron,

Did you read the post from Wendell Lee?

By: Aaron

Aaron — Wed, 13 Apr 2011 20:14:52 +0000

I’m no fan of HR 1161 but I think a lot of wine bloggers and writers seem to be misinterpreting what the Commerce Clause actually says.

The Clause gives the Federal Government the power to regulate commerce among the states. If the Federal Government passes a bill, like HR 1161, that says they wish to return that regulation to the states, that does not seem to be a violation. The state’s regulation cannot supersede the Federal Government’s, but in HR 1161 the Federal Government is basically saying, “While we have the power to regulate interstate commerce, we relinquish that power in the case of alcohol to the states.”

Maybe I’m off base, but that is the way I read it. Tyler, you’re the political science PhD here, what say you?