Making Wine and a Difference

Wolverine, people who enjoy a glass or two of wine with dinner are not alcoholics. Not everyone drinks to get a buzz. Drinking well crafted wines in reasonable amount with family and friends around the table is delicious and healthy, and a long-standing traditions in many countries.
I appreciate the information this article provides, and look forward to trying local wines I had not yet sampled.
Our local wineries contribute significantly to the quality of life in SB County by preserving open land, attracting tourist dollars, providing jobs, and producing world-class wines.
Yes, some folks drink too much, but a lot of people eat too much too. Does that mean the Indy should stop writing about good restaurants?
Alcoholics and drunk drivers wreck lives, but please don't blame the winemakers or the writers. Any AA member will tell you you can put a drunk on a desert island and he'll find a way to get smashed.

"OMG, Independent! Why are you pushing alcohol on your readers at every opportunity? The number of pro-alcohol industry articles you publish is just plain crazy. "

Three words: "Follow the money". Alcohol is the new religion.

In wine, truth. In water, bacteria.

Its getting a little much.
It's almost as if the Indy really isn't for local readers anymore, which is fine- just be upfront about it.

You'd have to have been living in a cave to call me a Prohibitionist, or in an alcoholic stupor.

And I have been exploring other sites myself, in search of hard local news. I was amazed to learn how much crime happens, and how so little of it is reported here.

(Part one of two) (Matt: Have you ever taken the time to read my anti-prohibition posts? If you haven't let me clarify where I'm coming from, as communication is the best thing.

I will go on record yet again to say that I am absolutely anti-prohibition. In addition to pointing out the failures of alcohol prohibition, I also have been very outspoken about the failure of the War on Drugs, pointing out that whether it's alcohol or drugs, or even (cough!) cigarretes that are being banned, such interaction between government and consumer creates more (Black Market crime-related) problems. In short, we are not 21st-century Prohibitionists, nor of any other century.

What we are--or what we should say--aren't--are people who are in denial about the correlation between drinking and driving. We see the local wine-related events and see the people pouring out of their who are obviously intoxicated. We call for more law enforcement presence, we write letters to the editor, we blog, and of course we get ridiculed for our efforts.

Here are some basic facts about the culture that you defend: These people drink to get "buzzed". I see it in Solvang all the time. The Santa Ynez Valley Association (comprised of many liberal/artistic types lest they be labled Old World reactionaries) complained for years about the selling out of their bucolic creative town to the alcohol industry with its loud, foolish, lautish drunken behavior. Bottom line, the drunks have lots of $$$ and there are no politicians in the local area willing to place people above profits so all the protesting to preserve the unique quality of life were in vain.

When a person drinks, they lose the ability to judge their own sobriety. Why else would a person who's smashed to the eyeballs get in a car/truck/SUV and take to the road? Second point: One can appear sober but have just enough alcohol in them to be unfit to drive. Third, one does not have to be legally drunk to be dangerous. My dad was nearly killed by someone who had a couple of drinks. The man's Blood Alcohol Content was 0.069 but he was impaired enough to smash into my dad while my dad was waiting to turn left with such force that it knocked the car 180 degrees and pushed it into the opposite lane, but as the guy said, "I just had a couple of drinks".

The other unspoken myth about this issue is that as long as it's WINE, it's somehow not really alcohol. As you point out, tradition that goes "deep into human history". Cigarrettes go deep into human history, but we finally woke up and realized that wasn't cool and have since collectively abjured that habit yet booze continues being glamorized.

(Part two of two)

It is sad that so many people are incapable of enjoying life without having to dull their senses with a chemical which acutely renders them less intelligent, with impaired judgement, and unsafe to drive, but obviouisly this is the zeitgeist that surrounds us. I realize that our refusal to worship at the altar of tourism as well as our refusal to pay homage to the god Bacchus is akin to arguing Arminism with a Calvinist in the 16th century, but those of us who can get high just by watching a sunset, or enjoying a good song or the company of loved ones see the dependency so many have on this drug and many of have had loved ones who have either been hit by drunk drivers, or have had family members who have been alcoholics, and we simply want to educate the public about the consequences of this. We are also aware that denial is a huge factor in the life of many alcoholics.

What you do with your body is your business, I ain't no Carrie Nation, but the way you people casually push this way of life, without mitigating it with the fact that nobody should get behind the wheel after drinking, suggests either that you don't know all the dangers, or that you simply are willing to play Russian Roulette with your own life, and that of others. Given your familiarity with my previous writings, I'd guess the latter scenario applies in your case, but either way, you certainly now know the dangers that even casual drinking can pose when mixed with driving.

I know full well from the perspective of having had one parent who for many years was an alcoholic, (my mother, who finally quit drinking 11 years prior to her death--and thank God for those 11 years we had with her sober) and another who was nearly taken out by a buzzed driver. I've had three more relatives who were the victims of drunk drivers (two maimed, one killed--all in separate accidents) so I know what I'm talking about.

Try this Matt: Go to a party, and don't drink. If you start getting anxious, then you know you have an addiction problem. Meanwhile, take care young man, I see some of my high school friends with some health issues related to their younger party days; the liver can only take so much and the brain cells don't replace themselves, and most importantly, don't drink and drive.

This message has been provided free-of-charge from someone who cares enough to not want to see you standing in front of a judge and a grieving family.

Matt Kettmann, you likely won't get anywhere with your appeals to the Anti-Saloon League, headed up by "billclausen," his sister "Holly," and the newest True Believer, "wolverine."

I wrote the following to "billclausen," a few weeks back, in a hapless attempt to acquaint him with his extremist, reality-free posturings, and have included his response:

:: "...may I point out that your constant necessity to jump up on your Anti-Saloon League soapbox is most unseemly, mr.billclausen, and I'm sure is having quite the opposite effect you intend?

"Not to mention the picture you paint is an inch deep and a mile wrong; a childlike simplification of our adult world.

"No one *advocates* for driving drunk, nor excuses it.

"People take cabs, designate drivers, drink less, and plan more. Most folks drink socially, not to excess. The preponderance of drinking people enjoy the flavor of what they drink, and don't try it on as a cultural pose.

"The excesses of drink are dangerous, unfortunate, and real, this I know. Every alcohol-caused death, every damaged life, a thorough tragedy. Wrong, wrong, wrong.

"But excessive drinking, over-indulgence is also very much against the law.The laws are enforced (see the stats in the DMV report below), and they are enhanced for such behavior.

"Most importantly, society condemns and rejects reckless alcoholic behavior, the most long-lasting form of deterrence. What's clearly NOT cool, what is NOT an adoptable pose, is to be drunk. To be a drunk.

"In fact, a report released last month documents the 15% reduction in fatalities associated with drinking and driving last year -- a far cry from the impression you relentlessly suggest, that the roads from SB to Solvang are awash in a ever-rising tide of liquored-up and licentious poseurs, ignorant and inattentive to themselves and others.

"'Alcohol-involved crash fatalities decreased by 15.2% in 2010, the biggest decline since a decreasing trend started 4 years ago.'"
- - Report from the DMV, May 18, 2012
http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/newsrel/ne...

-- binky June 5, 2012 at 10:48 p.m.

. >

"Binky, are you an alcoholic?

"Santa Barbara/Santa Ynez has a very highly educated demographic yet people still drink and drive. With that in mind, are you suggesting drunk driving is done out of ignorance?"

- billclausen June 6, 2012 at 1:46 a.m.

"One more thing: Cars are being made much safer these days which could account for a drop in fatalities. It's also possible that law enforcement could be catching more of these people. Isn't it funny how statistics can conceal such subtleties. Zum wohl!"

- billclausen June 6, 2012 at 1:48 a.m.

You put a lot of work into that Binky, but the fact remains that these people are drinking and driving.

Your bizarre obsession with my previous posts amounts to saying "I DON'T rob 10 banks per month, I only rob 5 banks per month".

Methinks thou protesteth way too much.

P.S. Buzzed driving is still drunk driving. I know you don't want to hear that.

Bill, I feel your pain. I was married to an alcoholic who died of the disease, and I know first-hand how alcohol abuse can wreck lives. You also won't get an argument from me on drunk or buzzed driving. Alcohol and driving don't mix.
However, that doesn't change the fact that growing wine grapes and wine making are time-honored crafts, and that most people who enjoy wine are not alcoholics.
As for the emotional damage from growing up in an alcoholic home, Al-Anon helps a lot more than online rants.

I certainly didn't wish to demean wine crafters or invalidate the Gummere's humanitarian efforts. It is unfortunate this specific article comes after a wave of such material in which the focus was less than altruistic (and at times, not even on this coast.)
I'm not sure that attacking readers who are expressing disaffection is the best way to educate as to the expressed purpose of this article. After all, if the readers didn't care they wouldn't comment. Nobody said the Gummeres, Mr. Kettman or anybody else were "bad people".