Note to Wegman's liquor flunkies: You lost. Get over it.

I have yet to meet Columbia Patch Guy (I was just getting used to Ellicott City Patch Gal when she was Columbia Patch Gal), and I know I said one time that his website picture makes him look like Austin Powers, but I saw him at the Wegman's hearing and he looks nothing like Mike Myers.  Plus, he retweets me so he has to be a nice guy.   Good day to you, sir!

Anyway, in a unprecedented, possibly new normal second post this morning, I present this article, picked from the Patch.  The head of Marylanders for Better Beer and Wine Laws is muy unhappy about the denial of the liquor license for the Wegman's property.

Said head is also, quite wisely, silent on speaking to the reasons why the license was denied.  Because I think even he would get it.

I actually am supportive of this group, and the head's advice to supporters is quite wise.  If there are supporters of this license, then they need to get their arses out there and get vocal.  Because if not, they're just a bunch of mutant spudheads.

So no more long faces, Weg-ites!  Get out there to fight another day!

Comments

[ColumbiaPatch]

Hah! I'll take Austin Powers, although I don't think I have the sideburns... yet. I was looking for you at the hearing, but as I didn't know what you looked like, it was basically me scanning the audience searching for someone surreptitiously taking photos and or smiling/ smirking/ grinning as he posts updates to Twitter.

Next time come say hello!

[Chaussures Nike Basket]

Chaussure Nike France Pas Cher Soldes, Livraison Gratuite

[Brad]

The trouble with this mentality is that not everyone can make it out to these things in person, but many of us would really like to do so. In my case, I'm a single dad of two little girls who had to be in bed. Taking them wouldn't be good for anyone. I was floored when I read one board woman's quote that no one had made it out to testify on the applicants' behalf who did not have a direct connection to them. Even looking past the scheduling difficulty for someone like me (there are many others, of course), how exactly would one know of a right to testify at a liquor licensing hearing? And most other councils, committees, etc., this one's member names aren't published, so we can't even appeal to them outside of the context of this hearing. Most of all, it's pretty clear that these board members had things other than the wishes of the constituency as a whole in mind. Their comments betrayed self-interest and predetermined conclusions.