Selling beer and wine in Morton—a response to my post on the mayor’s interview
My book—The Black Sword: The Secret U.S. Army in Vietnam—is available by mail (not yet in book stores). See post on August 31, 2008 entitled The Black Sword.
I suggest you check out the following website if you are a policy holder of Farmers Insurance Group or thinking about having them insure you in any capacity: www.farmersinsurancegroupsucks.com
.gif)
https://affiliates.visionforum.com/idevaffiliate.php?id=367
The above link is for a company—Vision Forum—that provides unique products for the family. I am an affiliate for the company and receive a small commission whenever someone uses this link and then makes an unreturned purchase while using the link. Check it out. I think you might like the products offered. I do. See my more complete explanation on my post of February 1, 2008 entitled “Affiliate program with Vision Forum.”
Based upon past historical data: 3,287+ UNBORN BABY MURDERS have occurred in the last 24 hours in the United States. See my post “BABY HOLOCAUST” posted January 22, 2008.
I’ve been involved in a problem one of my clients has with Farmers Insurance Group. My previous posts in relation to this problem were:
September 10, 2007 post: “Beware of Farmers Insurance Group”
September 11, 2007 post: “Farmers Insurance Group’s response”
September 18, 2007 post: “Farmers Insurance Company received the requested list”
September 19, 2007 post: “Farmers Insurance Company’s response to the list”
October 16, 2007 post: “Farmers Insurance Group and my request for information”
November 27, 2007 post: “Farmers Insurance Group does not respond to my request”
January 11, 2008 post: “Farmers Insurance Group latest stall”
January 12, 2008 post: “Farmers Insurance Group is sent a response”
January 14, 2008 post: “Farmers Insurance Group pays some money”
January 19, 2008 post: “Farmers Insurance Group continues to be obstinate”
January 26, 2008 post: “Farmers Insurance Group receives another request”
February 11, 2008 post: “Farmers Insurance Group shows how low they will go?”
February 12, 2008 post: “Farmers Insurance Group: If I were going to respond to the final letter”
February 13, 2008 post: “Farmers Insurance Group and associated companies”
February 14, 2008 post: “Farmers Insurance Group and how others rate the company”
I will not be continuing my Creationism posts today. I do plan to return to them soon.
Then, I plan to answer the response about Iraq. I am sorry for the change in plans. Plans, in reality, often are altered for one reason or another. “The best laid plans … often go astray.” Thank you for your understanding and patience.
How many unborn toddlers were murdered today because of the humanistic, paganish, barbaric decisions of the United States Supreme Court?
Stop the
Murder of
Unborn
Toddlers
“Anyone, then, who knows the good he ought to do and doesn’t do it, sins.” James 4: 17 (NIV)
www.farmersinsurancegroupsucks.com
www.childpredators.com
www.lifedynamics.com
www.libertylegal.org
www.alliancedefensefund.org
www.searchtv.org
In a previous post, entitled “Selling Beer and Wine in Morton—the mayor’s newspaper interview” I asked several questions in relation to the mayor giving factual support to the claims that he was making in relation to the loss of revenue because we do not allow beer and wine to be sold in grocery stores. I got one response to that post—negative, of course. Tonight, I am posting that response exactly as posted and my comments in regard to the response. The response:
“Anonymous said
Speaking of statistics do you have studies that support that allowing grocery stores to sell beer or wine leads to a statistically significant increase in th amount of underage drinking, if so what studies are they? What did they use to control for local differences that could affect the level of underage drinking independent of if sales are allowed by grocery stores? What methodology did they use and where they published in a peer reviewed format? On similar note do you have any evidence that out of town people that do shop in Morton do so because the local grocery stores can not sell alcohol or is it because they have a better selection of products. You mention a couple from Mackinaw do they shop in Morton for that reason or do they do so because Mackinaw has a either a smaller or poor selection of grocery products and if Morton was allowed grocery stores to sell alcohol would that affect their shopping decisions? Along with that are their any statistics that show theft of alcohol from grocery stores is a major source of liquor for underage drinking, as opposed to taking liquor from a family member or having it given to them by some of age, just because some dopey girl AZ did it once doesn't necessarily make it a main source of alcohol for underage drinking. The US is a free market economy, at least in theory, and in such an economy it would seem when a group of people wants to restrict the rights of another group to sell a perfectly legal product it should be beholden upon that group to show that allowing the sale of said product by said group would put an unreasonable burden on the local community.
10:16 AM”
His (or her) first point was to ask if I had my own statistics. “Speaking of statistics do you have studies that support that allowing grocery stores to sell beer or wine leads to a statistically significant increase in th amount of underage drinking, if so what studies are they? What did they use to control for local differences that could affect the level of underage drinking independent of if sales are allowed by grocery stores? What methodology did they use and where they published in a peer reviewed format? On similar note do you have any evidence that out of town people that do shop in Morton do so because the local grocery stores can not sell alcohol or is it because they have a better selection of products. You mention a couple from Mackinaw do they shop in Morton for that reason or do they do so because Mackinaw has a either a smaller or poor selection of grocery products and if Morton was allowed grocery stores to sell alcohol would that affect their shopping decisions? Along with that are their any statistics that show theft of alcohol from grocery stores is a major source of liquor for underage drinking, as opposed to taking liquor from a family member or having it given to them by some of age….”
My comment: Thank you! Thank you! Thank you! You may not realize it but you just proved my point! Anyone can make any claim whatsoever. Just because someone claims something to be true—that does not make it true. Just as someone claiming something to be false does not necessarily make it false.
However, I am NOT the one who is proposing a SIGNIFICANT change in the Village ordinance. Change in and of itself is neither good nor bad. However, any change by definition can have only three possible outcomes. It can improve the situation overall—to what extent no one before the fact can possibly know. It can make the situation worse—to what extent no one before the fact can possibly know. Or, the situation can remain the same even after the change occurs. NO ONE knows FOR CERTAIN which of the three will actually occur. Consequently, it is incumbent upon the one who is proposing the change to give evidence of the likely outcome of that change. It is neither my responsibility nor the responsibility of other citizens of the community to do so. We are NOT proposing the change!!!
As far as I know, the mayor has NOT done so. He speaks in broad generalities with absolutely no evidence presented, that I know of, to support those claims. That is NOT sufficient to garner my support for the changes. If it is for others, that is their personal choice. As a citizen of this Village I have a right, I have an obligation to speak out again a proposal that I believe will be detrimental to the Village. That is what democracy is all about.
Indeed, he may have presented evidence to the Trustees that I do not know about. He may have given evidence to the reporter that was then converted into the generalities. I and no other citizen can possibly know what occurs outside of our own personal scope. However, I am not aware of any such evidence and I did watch his yearly address—State of the Village Address—and he did NOT present any concrete evidence during that address either.
Indeed, I doubt if he has such evidence. However, I certainly don’t know for sure. If you will go back to my post, I asked “If he has such studies doesn’t he have an obligation to make them public BEFORE the vote to approve the amendments?” That is a valid and reasonable request! I also asked later in the post “Doesn’t the mayor have an obligation to address these issues BEFORE proposing a change in the liquor ordinance?” That is also a valid and reasonable request!
When I was a member of a school board in Arizona, if the superintendent had proposed such a significant change in school board policy WITHOUT providing the necessary background information and evidence to support the benefits of such a change, I would have demanded the necessary information. One can probably never have sufficient information to make an ideal decision, but in general, it is ridiculous to expect an informed decision without as much pertinent information as can reasonably be provided. I have NOT observed any attempt to provide even the most basic of information to support the proposed changes. Certainly, to my knowledge, this most basic of information has NOT been provided to the citizens of the community. That is NOT my responsibility. It IS the mayor’s responsibility.
I also wrote “I think it is beyond dispute that having liquor in grocery stores will only increase the TEMPTATION to get something for nothing.” As far as I know, I did not write that A, B, C, or D WILL happen. I can NOT see into the future any more than the mayor can, any more than you can, or any more than anyone else can. There may never be an incident that is directly related to the increased availability and accessibility of wine and beer in grocery stores. Then again, THERE MAY BE.
The 12-year-old girl incident, which everyone seems to be jumping on, is an example that I personally know of where availability and accessibility was a FACTOR in behavior that could have ended badly. The three National Honor Society students’ death by automobile accident, which no one has addressed, is also an example of what has occurred when alcohol is consumed illegally. Those are historical events in relation to alcohol. Whether or not such an event will occur in the future is NOT knowable.
However, this is what the Bible says about temptation. “‘And whoever welcomes a little child like this in my name welcomes me. But if anyone causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a large millstone hung around his neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea.
Woe to the world because of the things that cause people to sin! Such things must come, but woe to the man through whom they come!’” Matthew 18: 5-7 (NIV)
“Woe to the world because of the things that cause people to sin!” I believe that increasing the accessibility and availability of wine and beer in grocery stores is, without a doubt, increasing the temptation for some to sin. I believe that doing so will be detrimental to some and detrimental to those who approve such a change in our present ordinance. If you don’t, that is your right. It is my right to be opposed to such changes even if I have no valid reason to be opposed to them. It is your right to be in favor of the proposed changes even if you have no valid reason to be in favor of the changes—that is what democracy is all about.
However, we also have responsibilities with that right. We are responsible for what we support. We are responsible for why we support it. We are responsible for how we support it. And if the changes occur, we are partly responsible for the outcomes that result because of those changes. (If the changes do not occur, we have no way of knowing what might have occurred.) Actions have consequences.
If you don’t approve of what I write, that is you right. It will NEITHER stop me from writing about my opposition to the amendments NOR will it change my position. If it does not change your position, that is also your right. When I was in college, a student was challenging the statements of the professor. The professor finally got tired of arguing with him and declared “I am giving information that I learned through intense study. If you don’t agree with what I am saying, that is your choice. DO YOUR OWN STUDY. (NOTE the difference: the professor gave information AFTER intense study. The mayor, that I am aware of, HAS NOT given any concrete information to the public!)
When I was teaching, I was known to say that “You can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make him drink.” Meaning, I can present all the information I have on a subject, I can’t make anyone learn. What you believe and support is your business. What I believe and support is my business. I WILL NOT SUPPORT THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS and the mayor and Trustees WILL BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR EACH AND EVERY DECISION THEY MAKE AS MEMBERS OF THE VILLAGE BOARD if not by me and the citizens of the community then CERTAINLY by GOD.
Concerning “some dopey girl AZ,” do you know her to know that she is “dopey?” I do know her. She graduated from the school system that I was a school board member of and also graduated from the University of Arizona. She was also in the school’s “Gifted and Talented” program. There was only one requirement to be a member of the “Gifted and Talented” program—a TESTED IQ of 130 and above. I think everyone of us at one time or another when we were young (NOT to mention when we are older—for example, John Edwards) did at least one thing that we should not have and later regretted or should have regretted.
I’m tired of people calling others inappropriate names because they have no valid argument and thus stoop to name calling. It does NOTHING to support your position and is, in fact, detrimental to your argument! IT WAS AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT IS POSSIBLE!
“For God did not give us a spirit of timidity, but a spirit of power, of love and of self-discipline.” II Timothy 1: 7 (NIV)
“Anyone, then, who knows the good he ought to do and doesn’t do it, sins.” James 4: 17 (NIV)
“Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows. The one who sows to please his sinful nature, from that nature will reap destruction; the one who sows to please the Spirit, from the Spirit will reap eternal life.” Galatians 6: 7-8 (NIV)
I was also going to respond to the free enterprise comment but not tonight. The post would be much longer than I like one post to be. I don’t know if I will respond at a future time.
My book—The Black Sword: The Secret U.S. Army in Vietnam—is available by mail (not yet in book stores). See post on August 31, 2008 entitled The Black Sword.
I suggest you check out the following website if you are a policy holder of Farmers Insurance Group or thinking about having them insure you in any capacity: www.farmersinsurancegroupsucks.com
https://affiliates.visionforum.com/idevaffiliate.php?id=367
The above link is for a company—Vision Forum—that provides unique products for the family. I am an affiliate for the company and receive a small commission whenever someone uses this link and then makes an unreturned purchase while using the link. Check it out. I think you might like the products offered. I do. See my more complete explanation on my post of February 1, 2008 entitled “Affiliate program with Vision Forum.”
Based upon past historical data: 3,287+ UNBORN BABY MURDERS have occurred in the last 24 hours in the United States. See my post “BABY HOLOCAUST” posted January 22, 2008.
I’ve been involved in a problem one of my clients has with Farmers Insurance Group. My previous posts in relation to this problem were:
September 10, 2007 post: “Beware of Farmers Insurance Group”
September 11, 2007 post: “Farmers Insurance Group’s response”
September 18, 2007 post: “Farmers Insurance Company received the requested list”
September 19, 2007 post: “Farmers Insurance Company’s response to the list”
October 16, 2007 post: “Farmers Insurance Group and my request for information”
November 27, 2007 post: “Farmers Insurance Group does not respond to my request”
January 11, 2008 post: “Farmers Insurance Group latest stall”
January 12, 2008 post: “Farmers Insurance Group is sent a response”
January 14, 2008 post: “Farmers Insurance Group pays some money”
January 19, 2008 post: “Farmers Insurance Group continues to be obstinate”
January 26, 2008 post: “Farmers Insurance Group receives another request”
February 11, 2008 post: “Farmers Insurance Group shows how low they will go?”
February 12, 2008 post: “Farmers Insurance Group: If I were going to respond to the final letter”
February 13, 2008 post: “Farmers Insurance Group and associated companies”
February 14, 2008 post: “Farmers Insurance Group and how others rate the company”
I will not be continuing my Creationism posts today. I do plan to return to them soon.
Then, I plan to answer the response about Iraq. I am sorry for the change in plans. Plans, in reality, often are altered for one reason or another. “The best laid plans … often go astray.” Thank you for your understanding and patience.
How many unborn toddlers were murdered today because of the humanistic, paganish, barbaric decisions of the United States Supreme Court?
Stop the
Murder of
Unborn
Toddlers
“Anyone, then, who knows the good he ought to do and doesn’t do it, sins.” James 4: 17 (NIV)
www.farmersinsurancegroupsucks.com
www.childpredators.com
www.lifedynamics.com
www.libertylegal.org
www.alliancedefensefund.org
www.searchtv.org
In a previous post, entitled “Selling Beer and Wine in Morton—the mayor’s newspaper interview” I asked several questions in relation to the mayor giving factual support to the claims that he was making in relation to the loss of revenue because we do not allow beer and wine to be sold in grocery stores. I got one response to that post—negative, of course. Tonight, I am posting that response exactly as posted and my comments in regard to the response. The response:
“Anonymous said
Speaking of statistics do you have studies that support that allowing grocery stores to sell beer or wine leads to a statistically significant increase in th amount of underage drinking, if so what studies are they? What did they use to control for local differences that could affect the level of underage drinking independent of if sales are allowed by grocery stores? What methodology did they use and where they published in a peer reviewed format? On similar note do you have any evidence that out of town people that do shop in Morton do so because the local grocery stores can not sell alcohol or is it because they have a better selection of products. You mention a couple from Mackinaw do they shop in Morton for that reason or do they do so because Mackinaw has a either a smaller or poor selection of grocery products and if Morton was allowed grocery stores to sell alcohol would that affect their shopping decisions? Along with that are their any statistics that show theft of alcohol from grocery stores is a major source of liquor for underage drinking, as opposed to taking liquor from a family member or having it given to them by some of age, just because some dopey girl AZ did it once doesn't necessarily make it a main source of alcohol for underage drinking. The US is a free market economy, at least in theory, and in such an economy it would seem when a group of people wants to restrict the rights of another group to sell a perfectly legal product it should be beholden upon that group to show that allowing the sale of said product by said group would put an unreasonable burden on the local community.
10:16 AM”
His (or her) first point was to ask if I had my own statistics. “Speaking of statistics do you have studies that support that allowing grocery stores to sell beer or wine leads to a statistically significant increase in th amount of underage drinking, if so what studies are they? What did they use to control for local differences that could affect the level of underage drinking independent of if sales are allowed by grocery stores? What methodology did they use and where they published in a peer reviewed format? On similar note do you have any evidence that out of town people that do shop in Morton do so because the local grocery stores can not sell alcohol or is it because they have a better selection of products. You mention a couple from Mackinaw do they shop in Morton for that reason or do they do so because Mackinaw has a either a smaller or poor selection of grocery products and if Morton was allowed grocery stores to sell alcohol would that affect their shopping decisions? Along with that are their any statistics that show theft of alcohol from grocery stores is a major source of liquor for underage drinking, as opposed to taking liquor from a family member or having it given to them by some of age….”
My comment: Thank you! Thank you! Thank you! You may not realize it but you just proved my point! Anyone can make any claim whatsoever. Just because someone claims something to be true—that does not make it true. Just as someone claiming something to be false does not necessarily make it false.
However, I am NOT the one who is proposing a SIGNIFICANT change in the Village ordinance. Change in and of itself is neither good nor bad. However, any change by definition can have only three possible outcomes. It can improve the situation overall—to what extent no one before the fact can possibly know. It can make the situation worse—to what extent no one before the fact can possibly know. Or, the situation can remain the same even after the change occurs. NO ONE knows FOR CERTAIN which of the three will actually occur. Consequently, it is incumbent upon the one who is proposing the change to give evidence of the likely outcome of that change. It is neither my responsibility nor the responsibility of other citizens of the community to do so. We are NOT proposing the change!!!
As far as I know, the mayor has NOT done so. He speaks in broad generalities with absolutely no evidence presented, that I know of, to support those claims. That is NOT sufficient to garner my support for the changes. If it is for others, that is their personal choice. As a citizen of this Village I have a right, I have an obligation to speak out again a proposal that I believe will be detrimental to the Village. That is what democracy is all about.
Indeed, he may have presented evidence to the Trustees that I do not know about. He may have given evidence to the reporter that was then converted into the generalities. I and no other citizen can possibly know what occurs outside of our own personal scope. However, I am not aware of any such evidence and I did watch his yearly address—State of the Village Address—and he did NOT present any concrete evidence during that address either.
Indeed, I doubt if he has such evidence. However, I certainly don’t know for sure. If you will go back to my post, I asked “If he has such studies doesn’t he have an obligation to make them public BEFORE the vote to approve the amendments?” That is a valid and reasonable request! I also asked later in the post “Doesn’t the mayor have an obligation to address these issues BEFORE proposing a change in the liquor ordinance?” That is also a valid and reasonable request!
When I was a member of a school board in Arizona, if the superintendent had proposed such a significant change in school board policy WITHOUT providing the necessary background information and evidence to support the benefits of such a change, I would have demanded the necessary information. One can probably never have sufficient information to make an ideal decision, but in general, it is ridiculous to expect an informed decision without as much pertinent information as can reasonably be provided. I have NOT observed any attempt to provide even the most basic of information to support the proposed changes. Certainly, to my knowledge, this most basic of information has NOT been provided to the citizens of the community. That is NOT my responsibility. It IS the mayor’s responsibility.
I also wrote “I think it is beyond dispute that having liquor in grocery stores will only increase the TEMPTATION to get something for nothing.” As far as I know, I did not write that A, B, C, or D WILL happen. I can NOT see into the future any more than the mayor can, any more than you can, or any more than anyone else can. There may never be an incident that is directly related to the increased availability and accessibility of wine and beer in grocery stores. Then again, THERE MAY BE.
The 12-year-old girl incident, which everyone seems to be jumping on, is an example that I personally know of where availability and accessibility was a FACTOR in behavior that could have ended badly. The three National Honor Society students’ death by automobile accident, which no one has addressed, is also an example of what has occurred when alcohol is consumed illegally. Those are historical events in relation to alcohol. Whether or not such an event will occur in the future is NOT knowable.
However, this is what the Bible says about temptation. “‘And whoever welcomes a little child like this in my name welcomes me. But if anyone causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a large millstone hung around his neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea.
Woe to the world because of the things that cause people to sin! Such things must come, but woe to the man through whom they come!’” Matthew 18: 5-7 (NIV)
“Woe to the world because of the things that cause people to sin!” I believe that increasing the accessibility and availability of wine and beer in grocery stores is, without a doubt, increasing the temptation for some to sin. I believe that doing so will be detrimental to some and detrimental to those who approve such a change in our present ordinance. If you don’t, that is your right. It is my right to be opposed to such changes even if I have no valid reason to be opposed to them. It is your right to be in favor of the proposed changes even if you have no valid reason to be in favor of the changes—that is what democracy is all about.
However, we also have responsibilities with that right. We are responsible for what we support. We are responsible for why we support it. We are responsible for how we support it. And if the changes occur, we are partly responsible for the outcomes that result because of those changes. (If the changes do not occur, we have no way of knowing what might have occurred.) Actions have consequences.
If you don’t approve of what I write, that is you right. It will NEITHER stop me from writing about my opposition to the amendments NOR will it change my position. If it does not change your position, that is also your right. When I was in college, a student was challenging the statements of the professor. The professor finally got tired of arguing with him and declared “I am giving information that I learned through intense study. If you don’t agree with what I am saying, that is your choice. DO YOUR OWN STUDY. (NOTE the difference: the professor gave information AFTER intense study. The mayor, that I am aware of, HAS NOT given any concrete information to the public!)
When I was teaching, I was known to say that “You can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make him drink.” Meaning, I can present all the information I have on a subject, I can’t make anyone learn. What you believe and support is your business. What I believe and support is my business. I WILL NOT SUPPORT THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS and the mayor and Trustees WILL BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR EACH AND EVERY DECISION THEY MAKE AS MEMBERS OF THE VILLAGE BOARD if not by me and the citizens of the community then CERTAINLY by GOD.
Concerning “some dopey girl AZ,” do you know her to know that she is “dopey?” I do know her. She graduated from the school system that I was a school board member of and also graduated from the University of Arizona. She was also in the school’s “Gifted and Talented” program. There was only one requirement to be a member of the “Gifted and Talented” program—a TESTED IQ of 130 and above. I think everyone of us at one time or another when we were young (NOT to mention when we are older—for example, John Edwards) did at least one thing that we should not have and later regretted or should have regretted.
I’m tired of people calling others inappropriate names because they have no valid argument and thus stoop to name calling. It does NOTHING to support your position and is, in fact, detrimental to your argument! IT WAS AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT IS POSSIBLE!
“For God did not give us a spirit of timidity, but a spirit of power, of love and of self-discipline.” II Timothy 1: 7 (NIV)
“Anyone, then, who knows the good he ought to do and doesn’t do it, sins.” James 4: 17 (NIV)
“Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows. The one who sows to please his sinful nature, from that nature will reap destruction; the one who sows to please the Spirit, from the Spirit will reap eternal life.” Galatians 6: 7-8 (NIV)
I was also going to respond to the free enterprise comment but not tonight. The post would be much longer than I like one post to be. I don’t know if I will respond at a future time.
posted by Christian Gunslinger at 4:32 AM
2 Comments:
I would argue that regardless of whether or not some is arguing for change or not, if they are advocating for one side or the other of a policy debate it just as incumbent on them to present evidence supporting the position that they are taking. Things like well it will increase the temptation for an act to occur isn't evidence, because one it based on a personal opinion. As the commenter you replied to said you are taking a position that restricts the right a private entity to sell a good that is legal and in the case of law that restricts some one or some entities right it should be incumbent on the those people to show that allowing the exercise of that right puts an unreasonable large burden on the larger community. You are supporting a policy that deprives people of part of their economic freedoms you should show that it justified.
Whatever happened about the letter to Lindy's? Did they respond?
Post a Comment
<< Home