Wine and Beer at Starbucks...Will It Be In A Cup?

Starbucks is going to take a shot at selling wine and beer. I have to admit that I am intrigued by this. On a recent trip to Paris and Rome, I could not help but observe that the coffee shops all sold wine and beer. Most sold lunches and some of the most delightful desserts on the planet. I could not help but wonder if and when American shops would follow. I love the taste of coffee that has not been tainted by a paper cup and desserts on glass plates.

It's official Starbucks is now getting in on the beer and wine business. I am, however, skeptical that it will succeed. Not because the good people of America don't want alcohol at our coffee shops. In other countries, coffee shops still serve the customer. Waiters and waitresses bring your order to your table and actually converse with you, the customer. In other countries, they serve the coffees in glass cups and give you a good old fashioned glass plate with your lunch or dessert. You will not find paper cups to taint the coffee taste or desserts in a little sack with a napkin like in America. Beers and wines are served in a glass as well.

While I am sure Starbucks has good intentions with this experiment, I can not help but wonder if they will serve the beer in a bottle or better yet, a plastic cup. As I sit at some Starbucks in the near future, I can almost hear my name being called now, "Garry" "Cup of Cabernet" as I walk to the counter to pick up red wine in a plastic cup with my name scribbled on the side. And just like that, Americans will begin their love affair with wine that has a plastic cup taste just like we have fallen for all those coffees that taste like paper cups.

Black Gold and Texas Tea!

Black Gold and Texas Tea made ole Jed a millionaire. Today it is destroying the ecosystem, the coastal economy, and the way of life for many. It is sad to see the destruction this whole mess is making in the U.S.

I hear the blame game going around. I've heard names like Bush, Obama, BP, and Transocean. Perhaps the most ludicrous is blaming you and me for using oil. I have heard that we should not criticize Bush or Obama until we take a look at how much oil we are using. Well, I admit it. I use oil. I don't use as much as I use to since I got rid of my gas guzzling SUV but I do use it as does everyone else in this country. We should definitely use less and find other energy alternatives to take us into the future. But blaming the consumer on the problem is just plain silly. When drug companies push a drug to market and all of a sudden complications arise and the drug is recalled. I do not hear anyone blaming the person who took the drug. In fact, they get some silk stocking law firm to sue the pants off of the drug company. So why does our use of oil make this any different. It does not matter whether I use one gallon of oil or a thousand, it is the responsibility of the oil companies to provide that to me safely and effectively.

Blaming presidents is easy as well. George W. Bush and Barack Obama supported offshore drilling. They have both received more than their fair share of criticism in this regard. George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton opposed offshore drilling out of fear that just this scenario would happen. I long for the days of sensible politicians who will stand up to the "Drill Baby Drill" mentality until we can come up with a way to safely extract oil from the gulf. We have the oil, we need the oil, but we need to get it safely.

As for the response by BP and the government, I find it appalling. This I can blame on Barack Obama just as I blamed the response to Katrina on George W. Bush. They are two separate events but the lack of presidential leadership is very similar in both cases.

I am afraid that the people of the gulf coast may indeed hear the kinfolks say "move away from there" but it won't be because of "swimming pools and movie stars".