Back in 1996, John T. Steen, Jr. gave
$6000 to the Bush-Perry Gubernatorial Campaign and, two years later, was awarded the post of Chairman of the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission. Not a bad investment, if you ask me. The top of the Commission consists of a chairman, (Mr. Steen, Jr.) and two other commission members (Corporate fundraiser maven
Gail Madden of Dallas, and
"The Jumburrito King",
Jose Cuevas, Jr. of Midland. Both of whom are great supporters of the President.) These three, in turn, appoint an Administrator who is responsible for the day to day workings of the Commission. After several years of fly-by night Administrators, they finally found someone to take the job. Lo! And behold…Who did they appoint? …None other than a Mr. Alan Steen.
Now, I’m not sure what familial relation, if any, exists between these two Steen men, but I do know that, here in Texas, most people turn a blind eye to a little bit of high ranking nepotism. After all, they reckon, why not share the good fortune, right? We’re used to that kind of thing down here. It’s all part of that Good Ol’ Boy mentality that has kept Our Great Republic locked firmly in the grip of the descendants of White, Christian, Land Grabbing, Prairie Pirates and Death Merchants, who, in the hoary old days, once wrested the land from both Mexican and Indian alike.
Now, those are the three at the top of the
TABC ladder but what about the origination itself? What is this organization that has the power to regulate not only the sale and distribution of booze and beer but, it would seem, the consumption of it as well. According to their
website the TABC "shall inspect, supervise and regulate every phase of the business of manufacturing, importing, exporting, transporting, storing, selling, advertising, labeling and distributing alcoholic beverages, and the possession of alcoholic beverages for the purpose of sale or otherwise."
It seems to be that “or otherwise” part at the end, there, that gives them the right to tell Texans how much, and where we can drink. In fact, on page 7 of the September 2005 issue of of
TABC Today Mr. John T. Steen, Jr. himself outlines the plan that would become Operation Last Call, including such gems as:
“The action plans involve a strong and visible presence by dramatically increasing the number of stings that detect sales of alcohol to minors and intoxicated persons. The results have been impressive.”
And,
“[W]e’re on target to conduct 6,000 minor stings this fiscal year—more than double that of last year. With additional agents, the number of stings will increase even more next year. “
And, my favorite,
“Rather than working to increase arrests of drunk drivers, it is our intent to decrease the number of drunk drivers by stopping them before they leave the bars.”
So, these “sting” operations are said to be aimed at curtailing alcohol sales to drunks and minors, but the motivating factor behind it all, we’re told, is to put a dent in the high instances of drunk driving.
So, these “sting” operations are said to be aimed at curtailing alcohol sales to drunks and minors, but the motivating factor behind it all, we’re told, is to put a dent in the high instances of drunk driving.
In fact, in October of 2004, the Texas Sunset Advisory Commission filed a
report that made several suggestions aimed and helping the TABC move away from it’s Prohibitionist roots and towards a more fiscally responsible and socially aware organization. What they seem to point to repeatedly is the “changing social attitude” towards drinking and alcoholic beverages in general.
And this is where things really start to get dicey because, if you check, several of these recent TABC initiatives are not only widely supported by but, in many cases, were first suggested by the nefarious Texas born hate group, MADD.
Now, I know what some of you are thinking. “How can you call an innocent support group of grieving mothers a hate group?”
Simple. Wikipedia defines a
hate group as: “An organized
group or movement that a
dvocates hate,
hostility or violence towards members of a race, ethnicity, religion,
or other sector[s] of society.” (Emphases my own).
David J. Hanson, Ph.D. has published a very well researched, and meticulously documented
paper that gives us a good idea of what those cracked pots over at MADD are really all about. There is also a fantastic list of quotes by several scholars, reporters, academicians, lawyers, and people in the know who have sounded the warning bell on this Neo-Prohibitionist movement. Here are just a few of my personal favorites:
MADD has an "anti-alcohol campaign."- Prof. Jenny Edbaure, University of Texas
"The Women's Christian Temperance Union and the Anti-Saloon League spearheaded the constitutional prohibition effort. Groups such as Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) assume that mantle today."- Hans G. Nichols
"Mothers Against Drunk Driving may soon have to change its name to Mothers Against Any Drinking Whatsoever -- that is, if it wants to avoid false advertising." -Washington Times
"Mothers Against Drunk Driving (has) decided to wage war on social drinkers." -Radley Balko, Fox News columnist
MADD has become "overzealous." -Candy Lightner, founder of Mothers Against Drunk Driving
"MADD generally attempts to mask its radical, neo-prohibitionist agenda in the veneer of sound science and sober statistics." -Charles V. Pena, former MADD official
"MADD is a hate group, without question." -Darlene J. Dowling, AFA
Mothers Against Drunk Driving "displayed its contempt for civil liberties, as well as the judicial system, by calling for (a) judge to resign because she criticized a MADD-backed program she felt violated the constitutional rights of young adults."- Center for Consumer Freedom.
Let’s face it, my Freaky Darlings- these gibbering killjoys are out to ruin the fun for all the rest of us. Their agenda has shifted from lowering drunk driving fatalities to making drinking, even socially, so appalling and stigmatizing, that soon, they hope, people won’t want to drink at all. They have targeted people who drink, whether they drive or not, and are waging a deliberate and malicious campaign to wipe them out.
So, suddenly, the fog clears up some and we are left with a solid connection. Recall that our sitting President was once
arrested for a
DUI back in 1976.
“It appears from all reports, that candidate Bush did abuse alcohol for a long period of his life, but in 1986 decided to quit, because it began to "compete for his energy."
Well, there’s nothing I hate more than a reformed Drunk. They get all preachy and holier-than-thou and they 12-Step me to death. They piss me right the hell off. Besides that, I never could stand a quitter.
But better still:
“In September 2002, Bush invited five religious leaders-three Christian, one Jewish, one Muslim-to meet with him in the Oval Office. "You know," he said, "I had a drinking problem. Right now I should be in a bar in Texas, not the Oval Office. There is only one reason that I am in the Oval Office and not in a bar. I found faith. I found God. I am here because of the power of prayer.” ( Link )
In other words, it seems, Jesus = Good and Drinking = Bad.
Now, I’m not suggesting that our President is at the top of some huge, sinister movement that is out to destroy our Right to drink but I am starting to think that there is something more behind these TABC “Sting” operations that have swept across Texas like a Kiowa raiding party. Is it really that difficult a leap to think that it could all be part of some wider agenda fostered by powerful, neo-prohibition lobbyists, teetotteling Super-Christians, and spiteful, money grubbing hate mongers?
As I’ve said before, my Freaky Darlings, Paranoia is a survival trait. There are any number of people around today who would be quick to point an accusatory finger at the Bush Administration for such things as the never ending War in Iraq, or the Vice-Presidents connection to Halliburton, or, more recently, the Domestic Spying Scandal. It seems evident to many people that this President has no trouble at all wiping his ass with the Constitution and calling it Necessary for National Security.
Now, they want to strip us of our comfort zones by keeping us from talking about it in public while drunk. It’s in their best interests to prevent us from doing so. The Right to peaceably gather in a public place of comfort, to socialize with different people, and to share a multitude of ideas in an open forum with the spirit of mutual friendship and good humor is also how Rebellions get started.
The Sons of Liberty met in taverns, Hitler and his Brown Shirts gathered in a beer hall, Francisco Madero plotted the Mexican Revolution from a cantina on the West-Side of San Antonio. Whenever paranoia ran high and tension grew too thick, people would gather and drink liberal amounts of alcohol, and commiserate about their deplorable state of affairs.
Is it any coincidence that the
Volstead Act was passed in the same year (1919) as both
Abrams V United States and
Schenk V. United States? Back then people were living under the Original Patriot Act, called
The Espionage Act of 1917.
To that fine piece of war time drama Congress added, in 1918,
The Sedition Act which stated in very clear terms that:
“Whoever, when the United States is at war, shall willfully… incite insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny, or refusal of duty,… shall willfully utter, print, write, or publish any disloyal, profane, scurrilous, or abusive language about the form of government of the United States, or the Constitution of the United States, or the military or naval forces of the United States . . . or shall willfully . . . urge, incite, or advocate any curtailment of production . . . or advocate, teach, defend, or suggest the doing of any of the acts or things in this section enumerated and whoever shall by word or act support or favor the cause of any country with which the United States is at war or by word or act oppose the cause of the United States therein, shall be punished by a fine of not more than $10,000 or imprisonment for not more than twenty years, or both.... “
Savage scary stuff for 1919; but, to make matters worse, booze was, suddenly, outlawed. You couldn’t make it, couldn’t own it, and couldn’t drink it. After decades of loud-mouthed United Temperance Movement dingbats running around the country, singing hymns outside of bars and holding pointless marches, for some strange and cruel reason, the U.S. Government chose that time, that exact place in history, to start listening to them, and they started slapping down the drunks.
The Great War was over and a generation of youth, traumatized by the horror of it all, was trying to reintegrate into a society that just didn’t want to hear about it any more. The Nation was sick of it, and everyone just wanted to move on with things. People were angry and dissatisfied with the lack of jobs, and unfair work practices were stealing the Soul of the Country; social indifference or outright discrimination was common place. Political dissent was the meat that people couldn’t afford for dinner.
Suddenly, booze was in the same category as sedition, and there needed to be Constitutional Amendments put in place to specifically prohibit the Citizens of the Nation from doing either.
The whole thing seems to start to fall apart when you consider that, not only was Prohibition repealed about 15 years later, but that it completely failed. People actually started to drink more. Suddenly, the bootleg hooch was flowing day and night, and people partied hard. Bathtubs full of gin, or sparkling wine, garnished with a pretty girl, were all the rage at parties. People who had, before then, never been hard drinkers were suddenly dying of acute booze poisoning, and, of course, we cannot forget one of the biggest effects of the Volstead Act-The Rise of the American Gangster Empire.
Organized crime families were falling over each other to provide illegal liquor to the thousands of underground bars, where the people were instructed to “speak easy”, and danced to fantastic Jazz. These crime syndicates made boat loads of dough smuggling hundreds of crates of outlawed liquor in from Mexico and Canada, and they killed anyone that got in their way, and built vast Gomorrah’s of sin, and greed, and violence. When the law shut down one port of entry, they found another. When they couldn’t get it in anymore the clever bastards found people here that could make the booze for them. Ah, the American Dream in action – You have got to love it.
But it was only possible because of Prohibition. So, it’s fair to say, that the whole thing was a spectacular but magnificent flop. Congress repealed it in 1933 with the 21st Amendment. In 1935 Texas ratified the Act which repealed it and, suddenly, we could once again drink our cold beer and sip Tequila in relative peace and comfort, and all was well with the world.
Enter the TABC. In a Special Session of the 44th Texas Legislature, in 1935, the Liquor Control Act was enacted which created the Texas Liquor Control Board. Basically, this was a watchdog organization created to monitor the complex taxation and regulation involved in the distribution of alcohol. They didn’t really concern themselves much over who could drink what, or when, and how much. That came much later. Back then all that seemed to matter to them was getting the taxes paid on every barrel of beer or gallon of booze that moved through the state.
In 1970, the name was changed to the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission, and in 1977 they drafted the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Code, which is, pretty much, the foundation for what we have today.
Texas drinking laws are notoriously confusing. They are a jumble of regional preferences, state regulations, personal choice, and antiquated Old West traditions. According to one
website cited the Star-Telegram,:
“Move from Fort Worth to Arlington and you’ll be surprised that you can buy beer but not wine at the grocery store. Move to Grand Prairie and you can’t even find beer there, but you can buy alcoholic drinks at restaurants in both towns. Then move to Burelson, which has alcohol sales in the Tarrant County portion of the city but not in the Johnson County side of town.”
I remember that, when I first came back to Texas, in the mid 1990’s, several things about drinking had changed in only a handful of years. Suddenly, the open container was only allowed in the passenger area, and you needed a TEXAS ID to purchase beer in most places. Passports didn’t count. Also, you couldn’t buy beer or wine at the store after midnight. Still, I could drink in the passenger seat of a car and, as I never cared to learn how to drive, that arraignment suited me just fine.
There is a big difference, I think, between drinking and driving, and drinking and riding, but, not, it seems, to them. The Death Knell for the Good Times sounded on September 1st, 2001, when
House Bill 5, passed by the 77th Texas Legislative session the previous May, and signed by Governor Rick Perry in June, went into effect. Just 10 days before the horrifying acts of terror that would strike and shock the Nation, Texans were, quite suddenly, no longer allowed to ride around with an open container in the passenger area of a vehicle.(except for busses, limo’s, taxi’s and Winnebago’s)
It’s been a down hill ride here, ever since, with our rights as Drinkers slowly being eroded and chiseled down to the stump, until, at last, it’s come down to this. They are sending undercover operatives into the bars to eavesdrop on our drunken ramblings, great thick-necked geeks who leer menacingly at you from the other side of the bar, shrewdly judging your level of danger to others and yourself. They are forcing innocent bar patrons, who are neither in the process of operating a motor vehicle nor wandering aimlessly on the streets, to undergo field sobriety tests and breathalyzer tests, right off the bar stool.
What ever happened to the Fifth Article of the Bill of Rights that says: “No person…shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself…”
And, My Freaky Darlings, that’s what those drunkenness tests are all about. They are using your own behavior against you. When the time comes, and they drag your ass into court, it all comes down to the arresting officers report on how badly you walked the line, or recited the alphabet backwards, or stood on one leg and touched your nose. In the end, one way or another, they’re going to make you screw yourself and, for now, at least, there's not a damn thing we can do about it.
