Nothing exceeds like excess.

Normally this thing blog is limited to the world of wine and alcohol. Of course, without food, niether would be nearly as fun. With that said, this post may lead you to question the definition of 'food'.

It looks like the fast food industry is taking their cues from the politicians in this country and have tossed any remaining logic and self-respect right out the window.

Case in point: A BIG breakfast at Burger King

On a recent to trip to Baltimore, my traveling companion was nursing abit of a hangover when she announced that 'greasy' hash browns were the order of the day. Next thing, we're walking into a Burger King. I must admit that I have not seen one of these things in person, but the static stickers on the windows advertising this sandwich are enough to make you haul ass in the opposite direction.

The No. 2 fast food chain debuted its Enormous Omelet Sandwich Monday. The sandwich has one sausage patty, two eggs, two American cheese slices and three strips of bacon.

That works out to 730 calories and 47 grams of fat -- more than a Whopper sandwich, which the Burger King Web site said has 700 calories and 42 grams of fat.

Holy Shit!

When I originally read this article, there was a quote from Morgon Spurlock - director/star of the movie 'Supersize Me'. It seems to have been removed, but his comment went something like 'Burger King should be giving out coupons for $5 off your first by-pass surgery with every purchase'. I can't imagine why this doesn't appear in newer versions of this article.

But BK is not alone in this:

"The new sandwich comes about four months after Hardee's also bucked the "health trend" in fast food restaurants by offering a burger it dubbed the "Monster Thickburger," with 1,400 calories and 107 grams of fat."

In case your not familiar with this little gem of American gastronomy, this sandwich 'contains two 1/3-pound slabs of Angus beef, four strips of bacon, three slices of cheese and mayonnaise on a buttered sesame seed bun.' Honestly, who the hell needs this?

For a breakdown on the 'nutritional values' of the 'Enormous' one, as well as all the other delights Burger King is providing, go here. According to their own admition, the E.O.S. weighs in with an amazing 1,860 mg of sodium. Just in case that doesn't do much for you, keep in mind that the RDA (recommended daily allowance) for sodium in the U.S. is 2,400 mg. In the U.K. that number is around 1,600 mg per day. So this 'sandwich' is providing better than 3/4 of the sodium one person should have all day. Unbelievable. Or so it would seem until you learn that 'The average intake in the United States is between 4,000 and 5,000 mg of sodium per day.' I haven't actually measured my sodium intake but I feel it pretty safe to say that it is on the lower side of things. On my cursory knowledge of statistics would lead me to believe that if the average is 4000-5000 mg and I'm coming in around the 2400 mark, then there is at least one person who is taking in 7000-8000 mg of sodium.

This should be just about enough salt to properly pickle a horse.

BTW, I'll buy one of these breakfast things for the first one to correctly identify the source of the title for this post. Name the characters involved and the situation, and I'll even kick in for the value meal. As far as the subsequent health issues, you're on your own.

Genius Of The Week Nominee

In what very well may be a first, it appears that we have a duo putting their collective efforts towards winning the coveted GoTW award. I have said before that one must be insane (or at least heading that way) to run for public office. Need proof?

House says 'No' to alcohol tax; Senate considers it

I thought that I had seen the end of this but apparently not. Even in the Great(?) State of Tejas, these monkeys are steadfast at work trying to screw up the very thing that probably got them elected in the first place. I know it might be a bit of a stretch but I am assuming that the majority of their constituency were drunk by the time they got to the polls. I'm open to other explanations.

Enter contestant #1. From the article:

We are taxing bottled water. We are taxing snacks, including soft drinks. I don't really have a problem with that, except we leave out one import thing out which is beer, wine and ale," Howard said.

Actually Mr. Howard, there are a couple of mistakes in your statement. First off, too many uses of the word 'out'. Second, '..beer, wine, and ale' amounts to three things not one. Unless you want to get technical about it. In that case, ale would fall under the overall category of beer.

And now for the dude batting clean-up:

"While the Joe Sixpack we hear about would not care about paying another 2 cents, youth who do not have the expendable income that adults have, it can make a difference." Steve Ross, Communications Director for Texans Standing Tall, said."

This is brilliant! I don't live in Texas, but my brother does. If I did, I'd be looking for a way out. To read his words it is painfully obvious that 'Joe Sixpack' is most definitely some dude Mr. Ross has only 'heard' about. If his holiness would take about a minute of his precious time to go find this elusive beast, he would realize pretty damn quick that Señor Joe most definitely cares about his two cents. And seriously, do you think another 12 cents for a sixer of PBR is going to break Johnny Quarterback's allowance? In all seriousness, HELL NO!

And what would Mr. Ross spend this windfall of cash on?:

"The organization Texans Standing Tall wants to double the alcohol excise tax to help pay for the ills of alcohol abuse and to lower underage drinking."

I can't get enough of this kind of vague babble. Just how would two cents per can pay for the 'ills' of alcohol abuse? I don't mean to imply that it does not exist, clearly it does. But seriously, two cents? And as far as the underage drinking is concerned, give me a break.

Taking a look at T.S.T.'s website it become very clear, very quickly what they are all about:

House leaders swept up all the loose change they could from taxing sundries to pay for a proposed tax swap this week, with one glaring
exception: booze.

A word to the wise...Whenever you read the word 'booze' in any article written since 1933, immediately read 'pro-prohibtion'. There simply is no other purpose for the use of the word other than to imply that those who imbide are walking hand in hand with the Devil.

A few other gems from their website:

"This April, the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) Division I Board of Directors will reconsider its alcohol policies. That review presents a tremendous opportunity to accomplish one of the
Campaign for Alcohol-Free Sports TV'smajor goals: to end beer ads
during college sports."

If it weren't for beer, most college sports would be half empty.

Our office has received complaints about the BRATZ doll Limo toy that includes little bottles and glasses. Even a six year old made the immediate connection saying, "Look, Mommy, the BRATZ drink alcohol."

Complaints to MGA Entertainment (makers of the BRATZ toy) resulted in the following justification: "Any bottles are generally labeled as water or sparkling cider in the instruction manual."

However, six year olds cannot read "sparkling cider" and kids will be playing with the objects, not reading the instruction manual.

For those of you unaware who the 'BRATZ' are, you can check them out here. I apologize in advance for the uber-obnoxious sountrack. If you as a parent are actually buying this kind of crap for your child, you have far greater things to worry about than your wee one connecting the dots about a doll drinking.

"HB 38 – Alcohol Amount in Individual Drinks

Relating to the amount of alcohol that may be served in a drink by the holder of an alcoholic beverage permit or license. HB 38 stipulates that an alcoholic beverage for on-premise consumption may not contain more than one-half ounce of absolute alcohol or the equivalent. A violation of this bill would be a Class A misdemeanor."

One-half ounce? I suppose short drinks coupled with higher taxes equals more cash for TST.

I could go on...

The fine folks of Texas, consider yourself warned.

One step for reason...

One giant leap for truth in advertising? We'll see.

Napa vintners win labeling battle

In arguably the biggest non-issue to come down the pike for The Supreme Court, the big 9 dismissed straight-away Bronco Wine Company's attempt at riding the coat tails of the almighty Napa Valley. I have opined in the past about this and agree whole-heartedly that place-names should be granted all the protection in the world.

The article doesn't really shed any new light, but there is one little bit that strikes me funny:

"Gary Heck, owner of Korbel Champagne Cellars and Kenwood and Lake Sonoma wineries, filed a brief on the side of Bronco with the U.S. Supreme Court.

"If I make a Napa Valley cabernet in Kenwood, is that deceiving the public?" Heck asked. The decision "could be far-reaching to other counties and viticulture areas."

In case you missed that, Mr. Heck is the owner of Korbel Champagne Cellars located in the heart of the historic Russian River Valley. For the geograghically challenged, that's nowhere near the Champagne region of France. To be more precise, it isn't even on the same continent.

From another page on their website:

" Korbel is the number one selling premium methode champenoise-produced champagne in America."

WTF?!?!?

(put on your best Marlon Brando impersonation): "The irony....the irony.

Can you say....Horseshit?!?!? -- Part Deux

After sitting down to dinner last night with a bottle of Palazzo della Torre 2000 from Allegrini, I gave the aforementioned article a little more thought. At the risk of beating a dead horse, here goes:

As I said before, economics (and the study of it) are pretty cool. They can give one an idea of what is happening but more importantly, they can give one an indication of what might be. They are however, in no way the say-all and be-all of anything. As anyone who has followed American politics in even the slightest manner will recognize, the 'numbers' (or in this case 'findings') can and often are used in a way as to prove a point. More often than not, that point is a foregone conclusion.

Be that as it may, I have one basic problem with the entire premise of this 'study'. The problems with reducing wine (and all that wine entails) down to a data cell that is entered into a spreadsheet are myriad. Regardless of estate, pedigree, bottle cost, winemaker, and the collective intentions of them, wine is something more than a mere commodity. I should hope that with even the most basic knowledge of wine, one does recognize that we're not talking about pork bellies. And while I admit that I am not the biggest fan, I would afford most of the producers in California and Australia this same luxury. In the same breath, there are without question, a number of producers (and yes, even some of them French) to whom terroir is little more than a nuisance. Of course, these people/corporations are in the business of making milk, not fine wine.

And that gets to the heart of the matter. Like my Velveeta/Camembert analogy, one must differentiate the caliber of the product in the study. Do the quarterly numbers of McDonald's really have any correlative relationship to those of the French Laundry? I think not.

In the end, I think this paper is more about grabbing headlines implying that the French are effectively the two tailors in a viniferous versoin of 'The Emperor's New Clothes'.

Nice try...Better luck next time

Can you say....Horseshit?!?!?

Or as the French might say 'ça c'est de la merde'. Seeing as I am a little late getting on this one, here's what some fellow bloggers had to say on the subject:

Vinography,
Huge Johnson,
Fermentations,
Fermentations #2

...just to list a few. The article in question can be read in two forms. The first is from Decanter and the second is from The Observer International.

At the crux of the matter are the 'findings' of a study conducted by a couple of English economists. It is their conclusion the the concept of 'terroir' has little, if anything to do with how wines perform in marketplace via pricing, popularity, garnering ratings from certain critics and the like.

It is here that I would like to invite you, the reader to revisit the title of this post.

Economics can be pretty cool. Hell, for that matter economists can be pretty cool as well. I know I'm a bit biased but my brother's an economist and we get on pretty damn well. What I find very curious about this 'study' is something that my brother has repeated many a time (not verbatum): 'Economists can't predict the future, we simply look at the past and roughly predict human response based on previous actions'. It is in this light that I find it a bit odd that a couple of economists are now 'qualified' to pass judgement on something that many people hold to be true.

Let me say that those of us who actually believe in terroir might only be about 3 or 4 degrees off from the Hale-Bopp gang running around in black Nikes with their subway fare jingling in their pockets. I, for one don't think so, but it may be true.

From the Decanter article:

"The pair collected data on environmental conditions and winemaking techniques across the vineyards of the Haut-Médoc in 1990, including the first-growths Mouton-Rothschild, Latour, Lafite-Rothschild and Margaux.

The information was entered into a database in order to compare terroir characteristics with winemaking techniques for 100 vineyards in the region. The data was also compared with the prices certain vintages fetched on the wine market and the scores they received from tasters including Michael Broadbent and Robert Parker."

So this study lasted more or less fifteen years and according to this article, the study focused only on the 1990 vintage and how it performed in the market. To put that into a little perspective, when the 1855 Classification was commissioned to effectively 'rate' the wines of the Left Bank, not only were the wines tasted, but the sales/shipping receipts for the previous 100 (that's one hundred) years were taken into consideration as well. Suffice it to say, I find this study more than a little suspect.

To harken back to my brother's quote, to base this study on the market performance of the 1990 vintage over the following fifteen years is, at best, ridiculous. This is akin to looking at the success/fail rate of 'democracy' in the Middle East over the last 48 months. I understand that our (and not just American) collective culture has become one that looks about ten minutes into the future and remembers about thirty seconds in the past but I find the entire premise of this 'study' laughable. Admittedly, I have not read the entire paper, but nowhere in either article do they make note of the obvious rise in market share of California and Australia, by way of general popularity. I am reminded of an article in Money magazine or some such publication that stated the French were having their asses handed to them by Australia - sales wise. This is without question. What that article, and this paper as well fail to point out is that this is not necessarily a zero-sum game. Just because Kraft is selling a shit-ton of Velveeta, decreased sales of Camembert this does not equal. And given the lack of attention-span that most people have on any subject, unless it's American Idol, I think 15 years of study is a joke

From the Observer article:

"Wine-making has become so sophisticated that it can completely shade the effect of terroir, and vines can be grown in almost any place, as long as the weather permits, and the right combination of vines is made,' the pair state before concluding with the chilling observation: 'The French terroir legend obviously does not hold; at least in the Haut-Médoc region.'"

Please take a moment and re-read the above quote. I will try to break it down one by one. It is true that wine-making has become far more sophisticatedthan in years past. And I would agree that this level of sophistication could, or as they say "can" completely shade the effect of terroir. One need look no further than Australia or California to find readily available evidence of this. But they don't stop there.

"...as long as the weather permits, and the right combination of vines..."

I'm not sure if this is ignorance or complete intellectual laziness but these two clowns are talking about some of the basic ingredients of the very 'terroir' that they claim does not exist or at the least, has no bearing on the final wine.And then the ringer:

'The French terroir legend obviously does not hold; at least in the Haut-Médoc region.'

I honestly don't know what to say to this. It seems to me that the only thing that is obvious is that these two jokers decided to go for the gold and make a completely outrageous statement in an attempt to garner a bit of attention for their 'hard work' (read: Headlines). This is not that far removed from the tactics of Michael Moore (Fahrenheit 9/11) and more recently Mr. Nossiter (Mondovino), one who I agree with, the other not so much. I suppose it's worked because here I am adding my .02 to the mix.

The simple reality is that while the French may have been the ones to have coined the phrase, they are far from the only party that subscribes to the concept of 'terroir'. Need proof? Why isn't Nebbiolo is being planted all over the damned place? Most Barolo producers command prices that others would kill for. Why? I'll give you two guesses and the first one doesn't count. Why aren't the Germans going ape-shit with Pinot Noir? They try, and once in a while they make something that is remotely related to the real deal but all in all, not so much. And speaking of the Germans, taste through a line-up of Rieslings from a single producer and a single vintage. If you can honestly chalk up the difference in the wines to simply 'mechanics' in the vat room, you're a damned fool. And if so, good luck. It only means more for me and the F.A.

I am working on a post to clarify my position on all things terroir (in case this was not enough) so stay tuned.

What you should have learned in school... Were you paying attention.

All due respect to Michael Feldman for the title, but I find articles like this increasingly more often and at the same time, increasingly less informative.

Italian wines complement several foods nicely

I understand that the author was probably afforded precious little 'copy' for this assignment but couldn't she have expanded just a bit as to why Italian wines are so food friendly.

Want to know why? Acidity. That's right, all that crap that your chemistry teacher was yammering on about actually had some worth.

Just to recap: Acid is the opposite of a Base. And conversely, bases are the antithesis of acids. This is precisely why German Rieslings pair so well with spicier dishes, the residual sugar in the wine cancels out the acids in the spice of the food. And when you're grilling that steak, the acidity in the Italian red helps counter the fattiness in the meat.

From the article:

Be it rich, hearty minestrone soup or refreshing gazpacho, an Italian wine will work.

The only reason I include this is because I would be curious to know what the Spanish would think about Gazpacho being Italian.

Not much, I suspect.

Once again...

I have opined in the past about the possible merits (or lack thereof) of this publication. Well, it's making the rounds one more time:

Helping you to pick wine with confidence

If you feel so inclinied, read my original comments about this 'Gold Medal' guide. Reading back, I find my one of my statements quite ironic, especially when juxtapozed with the closing comment of this 'Confidence' article.

My words:

" In my experience, it indicates that the wine 'shows' well, but more often than not it isn't exactly 'correct' or 'true to form'."

From the article:

"How could I argue against last year's L.A. County Fair top gold winner, a big, beefy, Hahn Estates 2002 syrah from California's Central Coast for $12? What a brawny but nuanced red, out zinfandeling a host of zins in the competition."

Just to re-iterate a point that I have hinted at before, what's wrong with a grape tasting like it should? Furthermore, who the hell wants a Syrah that tastes like anything other than Syrah?!?! I know who...people who don't like Syrah. And I should add that using brawny, nuanced, and 'out zinfandeling' in the same breath 'don't make no damn sense'.

Water? You don't need no stinking water

Workshops will introduce California vintners to BEST Wineries Tool to reduce energy and water costs

It has been some time since any California winery called me for advice but here goes:

Worried about the amount of water you are using and the financial burden that it adds to you over-all operation? How about this? Don't irrigate. I know it sounds like a crazy idea, but the French have been growing grapes sans irrigation for quite some time.

Oh yeah, I forgot, the French are stupid. In that case, open 'em up and count the days because water isn't going to get any cheaper.

Life imitates what?

This is brilliant! Many of you may be familiar with the wine made by Bonny Doon and bottled under the Ca'del Solo label known as 'Big House Red'. The wine is a perfectly fine 'daily drinker' which is exactly what it is trying to be. The name of the label 'Ca' del Solo roughly translates into 'House of Solitude' and the 'Big House' of both red and white fame is a reference to the state penitentiary that can be seen from the vineyards of Bonny Doon. Enough about that, I'm starting to sound like I like the stuff and I've got a reputation....

So why am I going on about this? Well, it appears that the folks running the penal system in Italy have gotten wind of this and put the practice to work.

This wine is made within the whitewashed walls of Velletri prison, a few miles south of Rome, and is put out by thieves and murderers. Fuggiasco means fugitive. A sister vintage goes by the name Seven Turns of the Key, an Italian expression for the depressing finality of imprisonment.

Right on.

Although one could make the argument that this is 'cruel and unusual punishment'. It's not bad enough that you're in prison but now they want you to make wine, which I'm fairly certain they are not permitted to consume. I reckon it's better than stamping out license plates.

Another Great Loss

From Decanter.com:

"Italy's Bartolo Mascarello – the patriarch of Barolo – died at his home in Barolo on Saturday at the age of 78."

In as much as Hans Selbach kept a steady course in the the German wine world, Bartolo Mascarello did the same for Barolo. I have been fortunate to have had a few of his wines and they are without a doubt as 'traditional' as one will find. Most recently, I tasted his Dolcetto. This grape, when in the hands of most winemakers, can make anything from kool-aid in a fancy bottle to something that approaches a memorable wine. Not so with Mascarello. His Dolcetto drank more like a Barbera on steroids. Unbelievable.

It is truly sad that we continue to lose the older winemakers. Of course, this is the nature of things and I can only hope (and I do on a daily basis) that the offspring of these masters recognize the beauty of traditional winemaking and the importance of fighting fashion. Here's are a couple of great quotes:

'Mascarello spent most of his life tending four small vineyards in prime locations: Cannubi, San Lorenzo and Rué in Barolo, and Rocche in La Morra. He favoured the old-school practice of blending from those four plots, rejecting the modern style of single vineyard crus. He always argued, 'We don't even have a word for cru: we have to import it from France.'

and

'He began hand-painting his labels, many of which became collectors' items. One such was the famous 'No Barrique, No Berlusconi' label, which lampooned the prime minister. Mascarello said at the time, 'No Barrique, because I am against the use of barriques in Barolo. No Berlusconi because I don't like his type of politics.'

From the New York Times: (subscription needed - it's free)

'In recent years, Mr. Mascarello's little town house was a destination for visitors from all over the world. Sitting in a wheelchair, he would offer his philosophy, which he boiled down to a mantra: "No barriques, no California, no cabernet, no chardonnay, no wines with made-up names."

Fare ye well, Mr. Mascarello....you will be missed

Ridiculous Analogies and The People Who Use Them

It should probably come as no surprise that I have precious little patience for this.

Building the Essential Wine Wardrobe: Author Hosts Fashion Show to Teach Wine Fundamentals at Taste Washington

In a nutshell, Leslie Sbrocco is making the rounds on the wine circuit giving 'educational' speeches on the finer aspects of wine. Sounds great, right? Except the vehicle by which she conveys the differences bewtween various grapes is the woman's wardrobe.

" Sbrocco will draw fashion comparisons with wine while educating the audience. For example, Cabernet Sauvignon is the author's "classic suit wine" because it is structured and timeless.

"The fragrant, fruity character of a Riesling is comparable to the refreshing feeling of slipping into a springtime dress, while cashmere is a perfect descriptor for Washington Merlot, which is smooth and sensuous," adds Sbrocco."

I reckon the analogy for Cab is more or less on point, although I would disagree with the timeless bit and sometimes the structure leaves a bit to be desired. The Riesling analogy would be great if I knew what 'slipping into a springtime dress' was all about. And I would be curious to know which of the Washington Merlots she has been drinking. The ones that I have are more akin to a brillo pad than a cashmere sweater. I don't mean that in a negative way, it's just that the Merlots from Washington State are generally more tannic and structured than the Cabs that come from there.

I know... What difference does it make how someone comes into wine, just so long as they do? Well, here's the problem. And it's the same thing for the school of thought that uses all the pop culture references (i.e. 'This wine tastes like J.Lo's leather pants' or some other silly shit).

What article of clothing would one use to describe the wines of Condrieu or Pic St. Loup?

And that doesn't even approach the fact that most people have the attention span of a gnat. What happens when said article of clothing goes out of style? Does that mean the wine no longer matters?

As much as I wold like to think not, I fear it most definitely would mean just that. Need proof? Pick up anypaper from the last 4 months and you read about how Merlot is 'so yesterday' and anybody who's anybody is drinking Pinot Noir.

WTF?!?!

This afternoon I was having lunch with the F.A and wasting a few minutes flipping channels on the boob tube. I can't remember which news channel it was ,and truth be told it doesn't really matter, but there sits some clown yammering away with a line below him with the words 'Butane Ban'. Fearing what I already figured out, I watched on. Apparently, it is now illegal to carry a lighter on an airplane. The jury is still out on matches but I suspect we already know the answer on that one.

Let me say this: I smoke. I know that I shouldn't but I do. I don't like to fly. I know that I should but I don't. There are two things that ease (somewhat) my trepidation about taking to the sky: Cigarettes and Alcohol. It is now nearly impossible to smoke within a half a mile of any airport in this country. And as of March 1, 2005, I can no longer carry my Zippo. I suppose I could carry a couple of sticks to rub together but then I'm sure some monkey from the TSA would think them to be weapons and immediate confiscation would ensue.

So after pulling me head from my hands, a commercial break. What commercial? The one for the 'New Jetta'. The F.A. asks if I have checked it out. Upon arrival in the shop I did exactly that. I would like to say that it looks exactly like a Honda Accord but I can't. The truth is the Accord actually looks better.

Why am I posting this here? Because to me, alcohol and tobacco are birds of a feather (good, bad, or indifferent). And as far as the VW goes, this is what happens when you start making your product for a market. I know it may be a bit of a stretch, but I would caution those who keep calling for the French to make their wines 'more accessible'. It's okay to have an open mind, just not so open that your brain falls out.

So the U.S. Government is going out of their way to keep me from flying ever again. Volkswagen is going above and beyond the call of duty to make sure I never buy one of their cars again. Sixes are Sevens. I think I might go jump off a bridge.

Either that, or ramp up my exit strategy by about 20 years and move to the south of France next week.

Monkeys at the helm?

I suppose that is open for interpretation, but either way you come down on that one, this is what happens when rational thought gets trumped by 'safety':

Winery Gets a Taste of the Bioterrorism Act

I have previously opined on the effects of this 'Act' but that was mostly concerning its effect on the shipping of Champagne and Burgundy from around the world to our shores. Well, it looks like the proverbial 'chicken has come home to roost':

Napa Valley's Silverado Vineyards prides itself on tailoring its winemaking processes to the unique character of its grapes. But new Food & Drug Administration requirements under the U.S. Bioterrorism Act are forcing the winery to document more than just the oak and bay leaf flavors in its Merlot.

"There are identification and lot numbers on ingredients we use that we've never had to write down," said Elena Franceschi, assistant winemaker at the 35-year-old vineyard. "That includes the bottling supplies as well. The FDA wants to know what glass from what production date, and even what cork touched the wine. It's a monumental amount of paperwork to track." (emphasis T.t.S.)

That's right. This is the same FDA that can't decide whether that drug you saw advertised on TV is going to kill you or turn you into God's gift to women. And now they want to know the source of the glass bottles. I guess my initial reaction is this:

1. I would think the number of producers that make wine bottles would be relatively low and relatively easy to track down. This isn't exactly like setting up a Meth lab in the back seat of your .74 Duster. Maybe I'm wrong, but I suspect Mondavi (now Constellation) isn't sourcing bottles from 50 different producers. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if they have their own glassworks.

2. Would they know what to do with this sort of information, even if they had it?

"Each yeast sold for winemaking has a lot number that has to be tracked," said Doug Campbell, vice president of winery systems at eSkye. "A winery may use 40 different types of yeast for hundreds of lots of wine, which are then blended. It's very complex -- a 59-gallon barrel of wine may be blended from 100 different batches."

So this begs the question: What about a winery that uses indigenous yeast? For those unaware, there is yeast evverywhere. There's even some yeast on your person right now. More than a few wineries, albeit many of them French, don't use cultured yeasts in their winemaking. They rely on the naturally occurring yeast that lives and breathes in the same vineyards that the grapes do. I would think it pretty difficult to apply a 'lot number' to something that is natural. Of course, this leaves the door wide open for a new designation: Rogue Yeast Cells.

I can already hear the key points in this new opposition (enter your favorite political impersonation here): There's yeast out there...And unlike most yeast, it doesn't pledge allegiance to any nation....It's sole purpose is to attack the sugar and destroy it....Our precious sugar....But as soon as the yeast attacks, it dies, leaving a wine with a reasonable amount of alcohol....This a 'new' enemy, one which seeks to change our whole way of life....Imagine, a world where high octane Zinfandels cease to exist...The horror...

Maybe, I should stop.

"You add egg white to some red wines," she said. "So if I run down to the store to pick up a dozen eggs, I'll have to enter all the coding from that carton."

So think it through. Not only do they want all the info from the winery about glass, cork, label, and the origin of each, they also want the skinny on the eggs from which the whites are used in fining the wine. And what about the producer of the styrofoam container. Unbelievable. Of course, it's probably equally unbelievable that Elena Franceschi comes in to work one day and thinks "Shit, I need some eggs."

At the end of the day, it seems that maybe not all is lost. By the looks of this, our government is alive and well, busy collecting endless mountains of poo. And while I have no intention of offering the supporters of the 'Three Tier System' any advice, I am quite surprised that those clowns haven't starting tooting their horn about how vital their presence is in this new fight againt terrorism.

I'm sure it's only a matter of time.