For The Love Of Port

Moses is probably still too hung over to participate here yet about the MA ruling and what the local wine folks are saying there. Look forward to hearing him opine.

Roy Hersh wrote:Bush Sr?

I was thinking that. I was under the impression he was quite smart, at least in terms of IQ and the like; not necessarily political smarts or common sense. But try to research this and there are more spoofs than facts, so who knows. He was a member of Phi Beta Kappa at Yale, not to be confused with other organizations at Yale which pulled in his son.

Awright. I thought the bright one was Carter. Frankly, of all the prexies over the past several decades, I thought he might have been the smartest. And I don't think it did him much good as a president.

He did a bunch of good things AFTER he was president, but I didn't think he was effective AS a president.

I remember the tests it took to pass to get into the navy nuclear program (I came in #2 of all time*; they begged me to join the navy nuclear program) and if they accepted Carter for that program, he must have been fairly intelligent. I think smart people often make good decisions that don't work out because they tend to assume that other people are equally intelligent and will respond intelligently to a given situation. It ain't so; there are plenty of people in this world who will confound you by making bad decisions, making your "good" decisions unworkable.

For presidents, it makes more sense to be a person who reflects the general mood of the country. Don't over-think situations -- ACT! Trust your sense of how the people feel and act on it. "Tear down that wall!" Reagan wasn't especially bright, but he did fairly well as a president. IMHO
-----
*BTW, over-indulgence in alcohol will make you dumber -- forever. I know. I have evidence of what I used to be able to do. I spent a couple of (bad) years drinking 30+ drinks a day. After I sobered up, I tested myself on the same criteria and found I had lost 30-40% of my ability to solve problems. It's been over 25 years now, and the smarts still haven't come back; I don't think they ever will. I miss being able to do the things I used to be able to do. I'm still sharper than most, but I used to be DAMN smart. I burned up nearly half my intelligence -- permanently. What a waste!

As I recally, Jimmy Carter was supposed to have been a reasonably intelligent man. Then he became President.

Roy Hersh wrote:
Bush Sr?
I was thinking that. I was under the impression he was quite smart, at least in terms of IQ and the like; not necessarily political smarts or common sense. But try to research this and there are more spoofs than facts, so who knows. He was a member of Phi Beta Kappa at Yale, not to be confused with other organizations at Yale which pulled in his son.

I recall that Bush Sr. is considered one of the most underrated Presidents in the past few decades by historians. Yes it's early to write history on the era, but most feel he did a good job with Kuwait and an excellent job during the fall of the Warsaw Pact. The second event could have been much worse than it turned out.

1st Circuit US Court of Appeals: Capacity Caps Unconstitutional
Family Winemakers of California, Coalition for Free Trade Toast Massachusetts Victory for Wineries, Consumers

January 15, 2010 -- A 2006 Massachusetts statute banning winery-to-consumer shipments from wineries producing more than 30,000 gallons per year, and who retain Massachusetts wholesalers, was ruled unconstitutional yesterday by the US Circuit Court of Appeals for the First Circuit. Attorneys anticipate that the next step is for the state legislature to consider implementing the model direct shipping bill, language that is working successfully in the majority of U.S. states.

The announcement affirmed previous U.S. District Court rulings in November 2008 by Judge Rya Zobel, who later enjoined the state from enforcing Sections 2, 18 and 19(F) of MA General Law Chapter 138. The decision was then appealed to the 1st Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals.

"The capacity cap idea is now dead," said Jeremy Benson, executive director of Free the Grapes! "Capacity caps were a lightning rod for consumer anger. The idea has been introduced unsuccessfully for four consecutive years in Florida, was argued before the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit last September, angrily opposed by consumers in Ohio, and finally ruled unconstitutional in Massachusetts," he added.

The Massachusetts lawsuit was funded in large part by the Coalition for Free Trade with Family Winemakers of California as lead plaintiff -- it promises to significantly expand consumer choice in wine for Massachusetts wine lovers. Wineries affected by the ban account for 98% of all of the wine produced in the U.S. each year, according to the plaintiff's filing in Family Winemakers v. Jenkins. Massachusetts is the seventh largest wine consumption state in the U.S. (source: Adams Wine Handbook, 2007, figures from 2006 data).

Access the Court's ruling at http://www.leagle.com/unsecure/page.htm ... 0100114093

Access the Family Winemakers of California press release at www.familywinemakers.org

Massachusetts Background
In 2005 Massachusetts House Bill 4498 was introduced and passed both the House and Senate. The bill was condemned for seeking to place conditions on out-of-state wineries that did not exist for Massachusetts' wineries. No in-state wineries produced more than the 30,000 gallons, and they could sell directly to Massachusetts consumers as well as through state wholesalers. Out-of-state wineries over the 30,000 gallon cap would not have this option - they would have to either sell directly to consumers or through a Massachusetts wholesaler, if a wholesaler chose to represent them. Wineries that retained a Massachusetts wholesaler and produced more than 30,000 gallons were prohibited from direct-to-consumer shipping.

Governor Mitt Romney vetoed HB 4498 in November 2005 - commenting on its "anti-consumer effect, as well as its dubious constitutionality" - but the veto was overridden. In January 2006, Governor Romney introduced, but failed to pass, a separate bill similar to legislation working successfully in many other states, commenting that "It's time we end the monopoly that wholesalers have over wine sales..."

Instead of passing the Governor's new bill, the wholesaler-supported bill, HB 4498, became law in 2006. On September 18, 2006, Family Winemakers of California v. Jenkins was filed, stating that current Massachusetts law violated the nondiscrimination principle of the Commerce Clause, which prohibits "laws that burden out-of-state producers or shippers simply to give a competitive advantage to in-state businesses." (U.S. Supreme Court, Granholm v. Heald, May 2005).

Media Contacts:

Paul Kronenberg, Family Winemakers of California, (916) 498-7500
Jeremy Benson, Free the Grapes!, (707) 254-1107

-----
*BTW, over-indulgence in alcohol will make you dumber -- forever. I know. I have evidence of what I used to be able to do. I spent a couple of (bad) years drinking 30+ drinks a day. After I sobered up, I tested myself on the same criteria and found I had lost 30-40% of my ability to solve problems. It's been over 25 years now, and the smarts still haven't come back; I don't think they ever will. I miss being able to do the things I used to be able to do. I'm still sharper than most, but I used to be DAMN smart. I burned up nearly half my intelligence -- permanently. What a waste![/quote]


Peter ,I guess we can't say " The Meek shall inherit the earth " anymore

Luc Gauthier wrote:

pwmeek wrote: -----
*BTW, over-indulgence in alcohol will make you dumber -- forever. I know. I have evidence of what I used to be able to do. I spent a couple of (bad) years drinking 30+ drinks a day. After I sobered up, I tested myself on the same criteria and found I had lost 30-40% of my ability to solve problems. It's been over 25 years now, and the smarts still haven't come back; I don't think they ever will. I miss being able to do the things I used to be able to do. I'm still sharper than most, but I used to be DAMN smart. I burned up nearly half my intelligence -- permanently. What a waste!

----------

Peter ,I guess we can't say " The Meek shall inherit the earth " anymore

The thing I miss most is recreational: doing mathematical puzzles and mechanical puzzles. This is what I tested. My solving times for mechanical puzzles in my collection has more than doubled. Some puzzles I simply cannot solve anymore. I can't "juggle" enough shapes in my head these days.

This sort of thing:

That took me 170 minutes to solve in 2006; starting with loose pieces, no picture, and knowing only that it would end up a hollow 5" cube. I probably could have done it in an hour 30 years ago. The guy who made it has since made some that I have not yet been able to solve.

Peter W. Meek wrote:I can't "juggle" enough shapes in my head these days.

3D space is a weird thing. We live in it our entire lives, but most people can't picture it very well.

There also appear to be many different ways to perceive 3D space. I cannot solve a Rubik's Cube - I even find it difficult with the instructions - but if you ever need to fill a 3D space with 3D objects (like packing a box or the trunk of a car) I'm your man. I can also fit more dishes into a dishwasher than you'd believe was possible, but I have a hard time with puzzles (granted, only 2D).

I guess I'm more of a "volume" 3D person while a Rubik's Cube requires surface manipulation.

Glenn E. wrote:... while a Rubik's Cube requires surface manipulation.

Actually Rubik's Cube requires memorizing some sequences (7-30+ steps) to swap certain face squares. In that sense, it wasn't much of a puzzle, although it was very popular with people who enjoyed memorizing the sequences and amazing their friends.

I try not to memorize puzzles; all that does is spoil the puzzle the next time I pick it up. The point of a puzzle is solving it, not just taking it apart/putting it back together. I suppose that amazing your friends is something of an ego-boost, but it doesn't give me much satisfaction. Now -- when I can impress myself, that is real satisfaction.

There is a whole class of puzzles called "packing problems". You might enjoy these quite a bit. The classic modern puzzle of that type is the Soma Cube, invented by Danish mathematician/philosopher Piet Hein. You can get a copy on the internet for a few bucks. Or you could make one yourself: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soma_cube

I'm a fairly good packer myself. In the late 1950s I was the older child in a family of four that took week-long vacations in a VW bug. Now there is a packing problem. You learn to buy suitcases that fit available space exactly!

I had a job during college as a bell hop at a resort hotel and you learn to fit things into a trunk that even shock the owners. I need to have a dishwasher packing contest with Glenn. I have seen the contests on TV where they load the entire thing in under 2 minutes, but I am not the speed guy, just the fill every square inch maestro. Some talent we have.

Peter W. Meek wrote:Actually Rubik's Cube requires memorizing some sequences (7-30+ steps) to swap certain face squares. In that sense, it wasn't much of a puzzle, although it was very popular with people who enjoyed memorizing the sequences and amazing their friends.

The puzzle was coming up with those sequences. I'm proud to say I solved the Rubik's Cube the first time without ever consulting a book. After that there was one sequence I had trouble getting repeatedly, and I did look it up in a book--it was a double corner rotation. While optimization and perfection is something that usually drives me, I never went further to come up with better sequences. I was recently given a Rubik's Cube and now I'm a little afraid to try solving it again from scratch. Can I still do what I did 30+ years ago?

I remember the Soma cube, but I never knew it by that name until today. Reminds me of packing away the holiday decorations. The took less boxes this year than last, so we either broke something, forgot something, or I got better at the packing.

Peter W. Meek wrote:In the late 1950s I was the older child in a family of four that took week-long vacations in a VW bug.

I go to Costco in a smart car, how's that?

Glenn E. wrote:I go to Costco in a smart car, how's that?

Smart if you want to save money by not buying lots of stuff.

Glenn E. wrote:

Peter W. Meek wrote:In the late 1950s I was the older child in a family of four that took week-long vacations in a VW bug.

I go to Costco in a smart car, how's that?

Is that a smart car or a Smart Car(tm)? Either way, I expect packing can be an issue.

I looked at the Smart Cars. Pretty cool, but I'm not sure about them when I am an expressway distance from most places.

Ok, time for the Masshole response on this: I do not think we'll see direct shipping of alcohol to MA, Supreme Court or not. Lobbiests will block this one way or another. We'll be able to buy marijuana at a liquor store before we'll be legal to have wine shipped to our home. The liqour distributors are really really powerful in this state and corruption is rampant.

Moses Botbol wrote:...We'll be able to buy marijuana at a liquor store before we'll be legal to have wine shipped to our home....

Do you think that will get a 3-tier distribution system as well?

Let's see , direct shipping in MA or the SAQ coming to reality . . .
My money is on the folks in Beantown

Glenn E. wrote:

Peter W. Meek wrote:In the late 1950s I was the older child in a family of four that took week-long vacations in a VW bug.

I go to Costco in a smart car, how's that?

You guys in Sammamish are too much

Glenn E. wrote:

Peter W. Meek wrote:I can't "juggle" enough shapes in my head these days.

3D space is a weird thing. We live in it our entire lives, but most people can't picture it very well.

There also appear to be many different ways to perceive 3D space. I cannot solve a Rubik's Cube - I even find it difficult with the instructions - but if you ever need to fill a 3D space with 3D objects (like packing a box or the trunk of a car) I'm your man. I can also fit more dishes into a dishwasher than you'd believe was possible, but I have a hard time with puzzles (granted, only 2D).

I guess I'm more of a "volume" 3D person while a Rubik's Cube requires surface manipulation.

I'm the same way. When it comes to packing things in a given space I am a master. but I can't solve the Rubik's cube if I tried. Well, at least without taking it apart and putting it back together