no. (roses_rejoice) wrote,
no.
roses_rejoice

  • Mood:

In which Justice triumphs over inconvenience!

Cool decision by the S Ct in the wine case. One can only assume that the justices and their clerks were probably as sick and tired of being inconvenienced by this as the rest of the country. Soon, if lobbyists for in-state wineries work their magic, I will be able to take delivery of fine Virginia vino product at my actual house instead of my mom's. Then there's the guy who just started working with us who had a case of wine for a family celebration sent to our workplace because he couldn't take delivery at his house (his mom lives in India instead of a helpful state). The wine appeared in the mailroom in a gigantic box labeled ALCOHOL on all four sides. Way to embarrass a guy who's just started a new job. Perhaps soon I will also be able to ship Black Bush to idioticpoet in Michigan without either paying four times the store cost or pretending to the USPS that the package ain't booze. I was expecting the case to come out this way, and about dern time too.
Subscribe
  • Post a new comment

    Error

    Comments allowed for friends only

    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

  • 0 comments