Historically anyway. I was under the (mistaken) assumption that Minnesota was a liberal place.
Minnesota Wine Sale Proposal Gains Steam :
State Sen. Linda Scheid, D-Brooklyn Park, and Rep. Phyllis Kahn, D-Minneapolis, introduced the “Wine With Dinner” bill in the State Capitol here that, if passed, would allow consumers to buy wine at grocery stores in Minnesota. “Consumers don’t understand why they can buy a bottle of wine with their other dinner items at supermarkets in 33 states, including Wisconsin, Iowa and South Dakota, yet they can’t do it here,” Scheid said. “Wine With Dinner will give Minnesotans the convenience, choice and lower prices that consumers in other states have enjoyed for years.” The bill would allow only grocery stores with at least 8,000 square feet of retail space to sell wine. An independent, scientific study conducted by Decision Resources, Minneapolis, showed that Minnesotans support Wine With Dinner by a margin of 68% to 31%, according to the Minnesota Grocers Association. “It’s time to change our 70-year-old liquor laws so they protect consumers, not higher liquor profits,” Kahn said.
I assume a hold-over from the dour, religious Minnesota that drove Bob Dylan (and others) away. Wine should be an intrinsic part of meal planning, not a speciality item only available at liquor stores, and controlled by an obsessive government.
Al Franken ought to make this reform part of his platform.
---
update: Minnesota hates mushrooms too, apparently.
Bob Dylan is unique. I am for access to all mind-altering substances, something like what the Dutch do.
I must agree with you about alcohol with a meal. Beef begs bordeaux. German food begs beer. Strung out pissed off pours at least a shot of scotch.
You gotta be kidding. ...the last thing we need politicians fighting for is another outlet for access to wine. "We must protect the consumer, not higher liquor profits" - c'mon; this isn't a populist issue, this isn't a liberal issue. In fact, it's crap like this that gets us liberals bashed more and more.
I don't need a fight to net large supermarket chains more money. So what if you go to the liquor store? You'd expect better from them anyway and can't expect better attention to our suggestions and requests. Also, let them keep the burden of keeping alcohol from underage drinkers.
...my god, "this is the kind of thing that drove Bob Dylan away" - seriously?!
Maybe I'm getting this wrong, is it that you can't buy wine anywhere in Minnesota? That does seem extreme but it seems to be that this bill only serves to increase the number outlets that one can produce alcohol while doing so only to benefit large supermarket chains.
I love wine with my dinner but I don't need politicians to waste their time and my tax-dollars fighting to save me an extra trip to go and buy it. If Democrats want to look strong over the next couple of years we've really got to drop nonsense like this.
(eek: "can expect better attention"; "increase the number of outlets where one can purchase alcohol")
my muddled point is that government shouldn't regulate where wine can be purchased. No dancing, no wine, no fun. I'd leave too.