Skip to main content

Who knew you couldn't buy Guinness in Alabama? We got to help those folks....

I recognize that the posts often come fast and furious around here, but if you think we're prolific you should check out Third Party Watch. Mostly it's good coverage of all the minor parties around the country, but occasionally Stephen slips in something really hilarious and biting at the same time.

In this case it's a video from "Save the Hops," a grassroots Alabama group that has been lobbying the General Assembly to change restrictions on alcohol content in beer so that imported beers can legally be sold in the state.

Who knew?

The video is about six and one-half minutes long, and cuts in pieces of the actual House debate along with not-so-subliminal messages from STH about the issue.

For no other reason it is worth watching for what happens around 5:33....



If you don't watch it now, it will be in his (and my) archives before you know it....

Comments

tom said…
I don't know the situation now, but a few years ago when I was briefly living in Tulsa, OK they still had some vestiges of the 3.2 nonsense.

You could buy real beer, but only at places with a more expensive license, and if the brewer made a watered down version, you couldn't get the full strength variety.

Imagine my amusement when they told me that Rolling Rock was an imported beer (and they were serious too--it cost the same as Guinness).

If I remember correctly from an Economist article I read back then, it was Mississippi that took the prize for dumbest alcohol laws though. Among other things, you could only buy liquor in one ounce "Airplane Bottles".

Popular posts from this blog

A Libertarian Martin Luther King Jr. Day post

In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here:  chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society  [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.”   The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...

Libertarian National Committee Deathwatch Part 1

As the LNC continues to lurch towards collapse, with the latest news of mass layoffs at HQ, I've decided to begin tracking those things leading the national party to irrelevance, even as state and local parties gain power. As news, rumors and rhetoric break out, I shall chronicle them in this ongoing series at Delaware Libertarian. Organizations approaching failure have a number of characteristics. One of the most striking is renunciation of their purpose and effort to reinvent themselves as a "me-too" provider of services in the marketplace. In this, the LNC has been on a collision course with destiny for a while now. Recently, for example, it hired Republican Party web site developer TerraEclipse to redesign the LNC web site . Terra created a web site very similar to those of the clients it brags most about -- far-right Republican conservatives like Tom McClintock and BJ Lawson. A quick look at the web site they built for the LNC is instructive. The tagline on the ...

Soda tax debate reveals fundamental progressive assertions about your lack of individual rights and the "responsiblities" of the State

I thought it would be at least amusing to use the Delawareliberal comments as sub-headings regarding each category of what is wrong with the proposed tax on sodas and juice drinks. But there are so many different little strands of each comment that it would be impossible to pull them all out. So, instead, I'm going to let you read them in more or less the order they appeared, and note the assumptions. pandora: I’m perfectly okay with taxing sodas and juice drinks. Mainly because they’re total crap, and one of the main reasons our country’s children are overweight. They are also dirt cheap. Assumptions here: (1) Because "I" am perfectly okay with a new tax it should be imposed on everybody; (2) it is the government's responsibility to keep children from being obese; (3) the cheapness of the product to be taxed justifies charging people more for it. John Manifold: Soda fattens your kids [and you and your husband], shortens their lives, costs more than water [a...