When Forced To Choose, Some New Mexico Gas Station Liquor Stores Will Now Just Sell Liquor

A paternalistic new law is having unintended consequences.


Q: When is a gas station that sells liquor not a gas station?

A: When New Mexico lawmakers make its owners choose between selling gas or selling liquor.

Some gas stations in a rural New Mexico county are being forced by an inane new law to choose between selling gas or selling liquor and wine. Some have chosen to close their pumps in protest and sell alcohol instead of gas.

The new ban is part of a larger package of changes to the state's liquor laws—one its chief sponsor, Sen. Daniel Ivey-Soto (D–Albuquerque), calls "the biggest reform of liquor laws in 60 years in our state." The new law contains several key elements in addition to the gas station liquor ban. Many of those changes are steps in the right direction. In fact, the "original intention" of the alcohol bill was deregulatory in nature. Among other things, it lifts a ban on home delivery of alcohol, introduces a new, less expensive liquor license for restaurants, and allows alcohol to be sold longer hours on Sundays (on par with allowable sales hours on other days).

The bad parts of the law are, well, bad. Ask the owners of Kokoman Fine Wines in Pojoaque, which was forced to try to offload $65,000 worth of nip bottles—those little liquor bottles commonly found lurking in a hotel mini-fridge—after the new law banned their sale across the state.

And then there's the ban on gas station sales in McKinley County, where three out of four county residents are Native American. Sen. George Muñoz (D–Gallup), who introduced the gas-station amendment to the new law, says he did so because "people die in McKinley County because of alcoholism."

While I have no doubt that some people in McKinley County who abuse alcohol die from that abuse, compelling gas stations that sell alcohol to become alcohol stores that don't sell gas probably won't save many (or even any) lives, and may do just the opposite. The ban is also likely unconstitutional. That's why one chain of gas stations has sued the state to overturn it.

"Western Refining Retail has 115 stores and gas stations in New Mexico," KRQE reported this summer. "It's claiming it's unconstitutional for the state to keep it from selling liquor at 10 of its locations in McKinley County." The report notes that grocery stores, other liquor stores, restaurants, and bars are exempt from the ban.

The ban is also insulting and paternalistic and relies on shopworn, agency-robbing mythologies about Native Americans and alcohol. For example, a 1992 article in the Washington Post focused on "the long-held myth of 'The Drunken Indian,' a myth that portrays Native Americans as having an inborn weakness for alcohol." Recent articles, including this one, have made similar points. Yet vestiges of racist views about Native Americans and alcohol are slow to die in this country. Native Americans were subject to alcohol Prohibition until 1953. A ban on Native American distillery ownership, which dated back to the presidency of genocidal, anti-Native American lunatic Andrew Jackson, was lifted by Congress only in 2018.

But Muñoz stands by his ban.

"Just because it's legal, doesn't mean it should be readily available and convenient in every single location," Muñoz says.

While Muñoz may have been speaking about liquor, he may as well have been speaking about gasoline. After all, some gas stations unhappy with being targeted by the new law have protested by choosing to stop selling gas and continuing to sell liquor.

Muñoz told the paper he wasn't surprised by the gas station's actions, and suggested they were thinking only of profit margins.

"I think they made a moral choice, a financial choice," Muñoz told the Journal. "They probably weren't pumping that much gas. They were just really liquor stores with a gas pump outside." Now they're just a liquor store, pumping no gas.

Not surprisingly, the sudden lack of gasoline in remote areas along the Arizona border is having a negative impact on county residents. "The choice to stop selling gas in rural parts of the county has stranded some motorists and added another inconvenience to life near the border of the Navajo Nation," the Albuquerque Journal reported this week.

The new law targeting McKinley County gas stations and consumers also arrived nearly in tandem with a state high court ruling that encourages gas stations across the state not to sell gas—a decision that's also tied to alcohol. In that case, the New Mexico Supreme Court ruled that gas stations may be "liable for drunk drivers if they sell them fuel."

All told, New Mexico's message to residents seems to be that buying more alcohol and less gas will make the state a safer and healthier place.

NEXT: When the 'Native Son' Became 'The Man Who Lived Underground'

Alcohol Prohibition Native Americans New Mexico Paternalism

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

Please to post comments

199 responses to “When Forced To Choose, Some New Mexico Gas Station Liquor Stores Will Now Just Sell Liquor

  1. Get it right: between..and, not between..or. You want “or” after “choose”, leave out the “between”.

    I can’t believe first is a grammar nazi post, but there you go.

    1. The “editors” here aren’t the greatest.

      1. When everyone is an editor, nobody is.

        “What did Clippy say about your article?”
        *thumbs up*

        1. These are 2 pay checks $78367 and $87367. that i received in last 2 months. I am very happy that i can make thousands in my part time and now i am enjoying my life. Everybody can do this and earn lots of dollars from home in very short time period. Just visit this website now. Your Success is one step away Open this web……WorkJoin1

          1. Seriously paycheck of $19632 and all i was doing is to copy and paste work online. this home work makes me able to generate more cash daily easily. simple to do work and regular income from this are just superb. Here what i am doing.

            Try now……………… VISIT HERE

            1. Sarah getting Paid up to $18953 in the week, working on-line at home. I’m full time Student. I shocked when my sister’s told me about her check that was $97k. It’s very easy to do.QEd everybody will get this job. Go to home media tab for additional details……

              So I started………


      Skitt’s Law: “… people who correct other’s spelling or grammar are likely to commit errors themselves.”

      1. Did Laursen essentially just pettifog someone for grammar naziing?
        He’s like a parody machine.

        1. She’s a squawking bird named Dee.

          1. Guilty of at least one cawmma splice.

      2. cawwma police, arrest this man . . .

    3. The period goes inside the quotation marks.

      1. I don’t follow that rule either—it doesn’t always make sense. Whether the period logically belongs inside or outside the quotation mark depends on how the quote is being used in the sentence.

        1. I don’t like it either and occasionally break the rule for emphasis/clarity. I also exceed the speed limit on the highway. When I get pulled over I know what I have done.

        2. Who said, “Silence, like a chancre, grows”?

          I said, “Hell, I don’t know!”

          1. Just give them a blank stare.

        3. Me neither.

          But “between…and” makes sense, while “between…or” doesn’t. Especially when one could leave the “between” out entirely if you just prefer “or”. I think “between…or” came from times where in a long sentence the speaker forgot s/he said “between”.

          But the oft-given advice to choose between “between” and “among” based on number of items is out-and-out wrong. Most people’s intuition on “between” and “among” (or even “amidst”) is better than that number rule, except where their intuition has been corrupted by that number advice.

          1. Wait, what? Can you give an example of a sentence there “between” is the better word to use with more than two things be chosen among?

            (See, I even used “among” to pose the question. 🙂 )

    4. I hate to dogpile pedantics on yoir pedantics, but It’s not Grammar Nazi-ing, it’s Grammar Partizan-ing. The O.G. Nazis were the ones who policed content, not structure.

      1. Spelling Partizan Correction: I hate to dogpile my pedantics on your pedantics…

        1. Now let’s do “converse” and “conversate” Meriam-Webster says the latter is a legitimate English language word. Thoughts?

          1. Well, dictionaries are meant to a documentary of how words are used in real life, not an fixed definer of what words are or a fixed standard of proper usage. So, if people use “conversate” as a word, I guess there we are, though it would be best if it had “Colloquial” noted next to the word “Conversate.”

          2. It’s a dumb word, possibly an attempt at humor, but I understood instantly what it meant. Sure, it’s a legit English word, constructed on a silly but intelligible model.

            And that model is subject to recursion. Now that there’s “conversate”, its existence proves also the existence of either “conversateate” or “conversatate”. I think we’ll spell it the latter way.

            1. Oh, Roberta, it’s just a Popeye-ism. No need to be disgusti-pated about it. Ack!-ack!-ack!-ack!-ack! 😉

              1. Food for thought. Thanks to all for this insightful discussionation.

            2. When I was in college, each semester we went to “registrate” for class. We knew what we were saying. We also called the walking bridge over part of the campus the “stomp across”.

              1. We also had a guy who came up with such things as “Sale of Two Titties” and “screw me to the sticking point, thou wheyfaced prick!” We were amused by low-brow humor and intentional idiocracy.

                Nowadays, I am amused by things like “Buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo.”, is the ‘s’ or ‘c’ silent in ‘scent’, and the classic

                This Is the Title of This Story, Which Is Also Found Several Times in the Story Itself

                This is the first sentence of this story. This is the second sentence. This is the title of this story, which is also found several times in the story itself. This sentence is questioning the intrinsic value of the first two sentences. This sentence is to inform you, in case you haven’t already realized it, that this is a self-referential story, that is, a story containing sentences that refer to their own structure and function. This is a sentence that provides an ending to the first paragraph.

          3. Sadly, the job of lexicographers is one of description, not proscription.

  2. Get off the woke high horse. The law is crappy, but that part of the state *does* have a significant issue with alcohol abuse. Hell, I’m surprised they limited it to one county.

    And as for being “unconstitutional”, given the 21st Amendment, it may actually be one of the *more* constitutional things passed recently. Stupid or not, at least there’s delegated authority there.

    1. This idiotic law will do nothing to stop alcohol abuse.

      1. I don’t think it will either. That’s why I said it was a crappy law.

        But apparently I should have added a lot more context to my comment, because apparently every person who read it and commented back misunderstood what I was trying to say.

        The part I was criticizing as being on a “woke high horse” was this quote from the article: “The ban is also insulting and paternalistic and relies on shopworn, agency-robbing mythologies about Native Americans and alcohol.”

        Which is what I was talking about when I referred to that part of New Mexico having significant problems with alcoholism. I don’t think this law will do a godsdamned thing to fix that, and I as I previously stated, I think the attempt is stupid.

        All that said, the 21st Amendment does grant states the authority to regulate alcohol sales pretty significantly. Just look at Pennsylvania. Which is why I think that the attempt to combat it in the courts as “unconstitutional” is probably going to fail. They’d probably do better fighting it under the CRA. Though I suppose that relies on the 14th Amendment, so maybe it’ll work. I’m not a lawyer.

        1. There may be state constitutional grounds, too.

    2. Alcoholics are about as likely to stop drinking because there’s no liquor at gas stations as you are to stop eating if there is a ban on junk food in gas stations.

    3. Good to know that you are an admitted nanny-state fan. Anything else you want government to protect us from?

      1. Pointing out that a legal theory may be unlikely to succeed under existing constitutional law on the subject is not, in fact, an indication that one thinks the existing constitutional law on the subject is morally or philosophically correct. States already have broad regulatory powers over economic activity and SCOTUS has held in multiple decisions (including relatively recent ones) that states actually have even broader regulatory powers specifically relating to the manufacture, distribution, and sale of alcohol because of the 21st Amendment.

    4. There is nothing “woke” about criticizing Nanny Staters. If you really want to criticize Woke people, don’t dilute the term.

      1. I’d rather deal with “woke” people any day of the week vs white nationalist Trumpers.

        1. Attitudes like this is how peaceful protestors get shot in the head while violent rioters murder and commit arson.

        2. “white nationalist Trumpers”

          Except “white nationalist” Trumpers don’t exist outside of establishment fairytales, while the woke have infested everything, Shrike.

          If you’d just said “nationalists” or “chauvinism” that would have been fine, but white nationalism is a very different thing, and I’ll point out that Richard Spencer supported Biden, not Trump.
          After all, woke pillars like CRT are ethno-nationalism and segregation always dreamed for by the Nazis and the Klan.

          1. Tucker Carlson is today’s most prominent White Nationalist, Tulpa.

            Well, other than Donald J Trump that is.

            Your beloved GOP has descended into petty populism and is most like the Know-Nothing Party of the mid 19th century and the John Birch Society.

            1. The pedophile is also a liar.

              1. A Buttplug, a progressive, a pedophile and a liar all walk into a bar. He orders a drink.

            2. “Tucker Carlson is today’s most prominent White Nationalist”

              What makes Tucker Carlson a White Nationalist, Shrike? What has he ever said that makes him a White Nationalist according to the encyclopedia definition?
              I’ve never heard Carlson (or Trump) even once argue for a white ethnostate. Or are you so fucking stupid that you and your new sock mistakenly conflated the fact that he’s white and jingoistic, with the concept of white nationalism?
              Actually, I bet that’s exactly what you did.

              You’re too stupid to be arguing here, you should ask Open Foundations if they can transfer you to FunnyJunk or something.

              1. He admitted to being involved with the Open Society Foundation.

              2. Remember, using woke “logic”, anyone who does not repeat the chants about oppressed black, brown, female, it-male, or poor people, is a white nationalist. As are any people who express a preference for equal treatment of all people.

              3. Ah, but has that encyclopedia been updated in the last week to redefine the term? That’s a thing now, apparently…

              4. If you’re white and don’t hate yourself for it you’re a white nationalist.

                Get with the program, ML.

            3. turd lies; it’s what he does. turd is not on speaking terms with truth; win he does, on rare occasions, tell the truth, it is accidental.
              turd is a pathological liar, entirely too stupid to understand that he is, or that most every one else knows it.
              turd lies. It’s what turd does.

    5. Here’s what going to happen, perhaqr: some of the ‘Drunken Indians” the paternalistic racist bill sponsors are so worried about will now drive to the next county, where they can buy gas and liquor in one convenient stop. Some of them will choose to immediately consume the latter and then use the former to make the longer drive back home.

      As for the wokeness: on very rare occasions wokeness, common sense, and libertarianism are in three way alignment. I believe this is one of those cases.

      PS I agree the ban would be constitutional in light of the 21st, if it was statewide. But if someone could show that it was narrowed to one county with both the intent and effect of targeting Native Americans, they might have a shot at getting it overturned. The danger is that NM would “fix” the law by making it statewide.

      1. As for the wokeness: on very rare occasions wokeness, common sense, and libertarianism are in three way alignment. I believe this is one of those cases.

        Is it Wokeness that’s getting the DP, with Common Sense doing the Vajayjay, and Libertarianism doing the buttsex?

    6. What is “Woke” about upholding Individual Rights and Equal Justice For All? If someone took your land and your language, and forced their religion on you in death-trap Indian Residential Schools, wouldn’t you be driven to drink too?

      This law addresses symptoms, not causes.

      1. I swear it’s like no one noticed my referring to the law as “crappy” and “stupid”.

  3. Are the deregulatory parts severable?

  4. Fuck Joe Biden, Fuck Joe Biden, Fuck Joe Biden, Fuck Joe Biden!!

    1. He’s fucking us, let’s fuck him, back

    2. Fuck Joe Biden

    3. Fuck Joe Biden.

        1. This isn’t going to catch on. Mostly because you’re here to be laughed at more than anything.

        2. Fuck off and die, Mike.

        3. Fuck Joe Biden and fuck those that White Knight for him.

        4. Fuck White Mike!

    4. Fuck Joe Biden

    5. Joe Biden (Fuck Be Unto Him!)

  5. The people’s republic of Massachusetts has long banned the sale of alcohol anywhere except package stores, and yet it is one of the booziest states. Go figure.

    1. Lived in a small town in MA while briefly stationed in CT in the 80s. The package store was the cultural center of that dump. Never been to a more consistently lit up place since, and that includes a lot of time spent on The Rez out in AZ.

    2. That’s because people will find alcohol regardless, even if they have to make it in a bathtub.

    3. Booz is the opiate of the mass(hol)es.

    4. Yeah, but Massachusetts is practically Utah if you remove the Kennedy’s bar tabs

  6. The ban is also insulting and paternalistic

    Aren’t most of these sorts of laws that tell you what you can and cannot do?

    1. Why else have a (big) government? Oh, and elections.

      1. To force your healthy neighbor to get injected with an experimental drug. That’s why.

  7. Need more proof that covid lockdowns/mandates are political and no scientific? Just like Newsome before her, Whitmer reduced covid restrictions as the election approaches her to help fight her falling poll numbers.

    The decision, just like most of the decisions around Covid, has been done purely for political ones.

    1. This is also true of Walensky overruling the FDA’s findings on booster shots (where they found almost no benefit and were concerned by the lack of safety data provided to them). The FDA in a 16-2 vote (it wasn’t close) had ruled boosters only approved for those at high risk and the elderly. But Biden made a promise of boosters by Sept 20th, and Walensky used her appointed powers of being a political appointee to the CDC to expand the use coverage of boosters.

    2. Inslee did the same.

    3. Election over; embargo on.

  8. Instead of doing it through Twitter like the last president, Biden calls out the US media in front of the Indian Prime Minester.

    “The Indian press is much better behaved than the American press…I think, with your permission, you could not answer questions because they won’t ask any questions on point.”

    Apparently he is still upset at being asked non ice-cream related questions.

    1. Modi knows the American press is a bunch of lunatics, Joe. Just look at the nonsense that Shikha wrote about him here.

      But I guess that this is just more of the wonderful diplomatic finesse that the junta’s press arm promised us.

      Just like how the President of South Korea personally accompanied American soldier’s remains back to the US two days ago, and was ignored by the administration who couldn’t even send Kamala to greet him.

      Or when France pulled its ambassadors from the US because of some weasely shenanigans on a business deal.

      Or when the Biden administration was censured by the parliament of the UK for fucking them over in the Afghan withdrawal.

      Good thing Orange Hitler’s not around to screw things up anymore, huh.

      1. If he had met with the President of South Korea to receive the remains of a fallen soldier, Sloppy Joe would have just checked his watch after a few seconds.

      2. the American press is a bunch of lunatics

        Go ahead and say what you want to – that a free press is the enemy of the people.

        You can’t wipe the Trump off excrement.

        1. Hey Mr. Buttplug, got any terrifying intel briefings to share today?

          After the 9 / 18 SECOND INSURRECTION BY RIGHTWING EXTREMISTS you warned us about resulted in such a staggering body count, I’m wondering if you’ll literally save my life for the second time this month by giving me another date on which it’s just not safe to leave home.


          1. Why is the media censoring insurrection 3 they/them OBL? If not for you and Mr. Buttplug I wouldn’t have even been aware of it.

        2. “You can’t wipe the Trump off excrement.”

          Can’t wipe the shit off a turd, either.
          turd lies; it’s what turd does. turds a pathological liar, entirely too stupid to recognize the truth when he’s flushed down the toilet and lands in it.
          turd lies. It’s all turd ever does.

    2. It’s gone from kinda funny, to embarrassing, to terrifying. We’re not even through the first year.

      1. It was terrifying the moment they called one of the mildest DC protests in two years, an insurrection, and used it as an excuse to enact a military purge.

  9. Majority of the news coverage on the Arizona audit has solely covered the numerical recount of all ballots. A hand recount verifying a previous hand recount. But that was only part of the audit. The report focused on ballots that were questionable: out of district/state voters, voters who voted twice in two different counties, returning of two ballots from voters who were only sent out one, and other discrepancies. These votes totaled about 44k in number, 4x what the winning threshold was.

    The Maricopa County board has claimed that these can all be explained in their “fact check.” They have made claims such as people could move, or people could be in the military (it doesn’t explain the double voting at all). These defenses are offered without actual investigation however, merely “it could be because of this” reasoning. These findings have now been sent to the Arizona AG to investigate further.

    Reminder, Ga admitted there were over 5000 double voters they knew about in Fulton County. No actions were taken there either.

    Causes of double voting could be intentional double voting by voters (once by mail, once by person) or evidence of fraud (once by voter, once by someone using their name). No investigation has ever taken place on these numbers. But if the latter it would also imply some of the votes tallied may never have been made by the valid voter at all. This is why people are still skeptical of the voting process, there are no means to catch this fraud through mail in voting. Especially in localities that chose to end signature verification completely. Of course areas like Pennsylvania have made discovery on fraud hard when they do things like destroy the mail envelopes or in Wisconsin where democrat areas “cured” the ballots for people without ever contacting the people to make sure they were the ones who voted. Previously I’ve linked to stories across the country of mass nursing home votes from patients with dementia where their families claimed they were unable and did not vote. It is a massive issue, one ignored by those happy with the results of the election.

    1. Populi – “Half of those ballots are fake! We need an audit into their veracity”

      Press – “Oh, well let’s just count them again”

      Populi – “No, they need to investigate the ones that look like they were run off on a photocopier”

      Auditors – “The ballot count was the same but 44,000 of them were of questionable provenance”

      Press – “There, they recounted them. Same number. Your fears were misplaced”

    2. Jacob Sullum has fully researched this matter and written literally dozens of screeds, er, articles proving beyond a shadow of a doubt that the 2020 election was the best election ever. The conspiracy theories being spread by you and your ilk are so far outside of normal parameters… I can’t even.

      1. No widespread corruption.

    3. Yep. Recount of bad info still gets you bad info. Pretty sure the ship has sailed and the servers are wiped, but the mountian of burnt trust capital won’t return…

  10. While I have no doubt that some individuals in McKinley County who misuse alcohol die as a result of their addiction, forcing gas stations that sell alcohol to become alcohol stores that don’t sell gas is unlikely to save many (if any) lives, and may even harm them. visit my website newsNgobrol Games

  11. #BidenBoom update.

    Democratic economic messaging: Let’s have our coolest Congressperson wear a “Tax the Rich” dress — that’ll show voters the 1% is scared of us!

    Democratic economic reality: The Biden economy is rapidly concentrating wealth at the very top; for example, Elon Musk made another $5 billion yesterday, raising his net worth to $209 billion.


    1. So, AOC was just pretending?

      1. She is a useful idiot.

        1. No, the useful idiots are the low-info poor voters who are vulnerable to being manipulated by savvy politicians like AOC. I guarantee AOC is fully aware that she belongs to the preferred party of American billionaires.

  12. This may be a bad law, but Indians drinking isn’t a stereotype. At least not in Canada, according this summary of a book on Worldcat. Draw your own conclusions about the situation in the U. S.

    Firewater : how alcohol is killing my people (and yours).
    Author: Johnson, Harold
    Publisher: Regina, Saskatchewan University of Regina Press 2016
    Edition/Format: eBook : Document : EnglishView all editions and formats
    In a passionate call to action, Harold Johnson, Cree trapper and Crown Prosecutor, examines alcohol–its history, its myths, and its devastating impact on his community. Confronting what he calls a crime against humanity–one in every two will die an alcohol-related death in northern communities–Johnson refuses to be silent any longer. Asserting that the “lazy, drunken Indian” story is a root cause of the alcohol problems, Johnson sets out to recast the narrative of his people, urging them to reject this racist description of who they are. In plain, frank language, Johnson calls on traditional stories, spirituality, and medical research for guidance. He also enlists the support of Indigenous artists and leaders, including contributions from Richard Van Camp and Tracey Lindberg. Written specifically for the people of Treaty 6, Firewater is relevant to anyone struggling with alcohol. A graduate of Harvard Law School and the author of six books, Harold R. Johnson is a member of the Montreal Lake Cree Nation and lives in La Ronge, Saskatchewan. Read less
    (not yet rated) 0 with reviews – Be the first.

    Alcohol use

    1. The Pine Ridge reservation in South Dakota was one of the dry holdout jurisdictions in the US:

      “The end of alcohol prohibition for Native Americans came in 1953. Native Americans were allowed to be served and drink alcohol across the country and reservations would be allowed the presence of alcohol–barring tribal regulations. Despite the passage of this legislation, certain tribal nations, such as the Oglala Sioux Tribe, maintained prohibition on their reservations for public health and safety reasons.

      “On August 13, 2013, the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation voted to end prohibition and legalize alcohol so the tribe could use the profits for education *and treatment.* [emphasis added] After that voting process was complete, the result was 1,843 for legalization and 1,683 against it. So although the majority vote approved the sale of alcohol on the reservation the results of that election have never been implemented. Pine Ridge is still a dry reservation.” [as of Nov. 2019]

      1. “The Pine Ridge reservation in South Dakota was one of the dry holdout jurisdictions in the US…”

        And a South Dakota convenience store, just outside the Rez boundaries, was renowned as one of the largest accounts for Anheuser-Busch in the United States. The Sioux may not have been allowed to buy it on the Rez, nor were they supposed to have it, but somebody was buying literal pallets of Budweiser at a time.

        (Which, considering the alcoholics I’ve known, is just sad. Having to make do with beer, versus handles of Popov. They knew when the liquor stores opened.)

      2. One thing that makes me suspicious of the whole “Injuns-and-Fire-Water” stereotype is that Australians also said exactly the same thing about, and restricted alcohol access to, Aborigines. Surely, Euro types can’t be the only ones that can hold their liquor!

        1. A theory is that Europeans (and Asians) have been exposed to alcohol for thousands of years, so that for hundreds of generations those most vulnerable to it have been squeezed out of the gene pool (though obviously not with 100% success).

        2. Apparently the Mongols also had issues with strong drinks. Their cultural traditions were to have drinking contests but their traditional beverages were very low content, when they ran into other cultures with more potent drink, they kept the binging traditions with bad results.

          The explanations for such stereotypes may not be completely correct, but that does not they are entirely wrong either.

    2. Or maybe alcoholism is not a cause, but an effect–the outcome of living in an impoverished, corrupt socialist society, i.e. many indian reservations.

      How about comparing rez life not to mainstream 21st century America or Canada, but to 20th century Russia?

      1. The people I’ve cited are Native American/First Nation, and they don’t strike me as the kind of people who would absolve the surrounding society of responsibility for social conditions on the reservations.

        OTOH, when one is facing bad conditions, overconsuming alcohol isn’t, long-term, a good way to cope. Moderation or abstention helps you keep your wits about you (and keep your health) while you deal with the bad hand you’ve been dealt.

        This is particularly true when medicine (not to mention TV and other less dangerous addictions) provide various less-dangerous ways to calm one’s nerves.

      2. I’m metis, and trust me, the alcoholism is genetic.
        In fact the genetic component has already been identified and pretty effective treatment has been in place for a decade. But a lot of people don’t want to be treated. They love getting loaded.

        1. There may be a genetic marker that makes some people react badly to alcohol, but there’s no genetic marker that makes anyone actually take the drink. (How would the trait have manifested itself prior to man’s discovery of the process of fermenting grains with yeast and water in vacuum?)

          Dr. Stanton Peele has the right idea: Alcohol and drug addiction are ways of responding to the world, and especially unbearable circumstances. When people develop other healthier means of dealing with their world–and are free to do so– addiction has no hold.

          As I mentioned elsewhere, I’d say that having one’s land, language, and culture forcibly wrested away and being forced to take up an alien religion and culture in abusive death-trap Residential Schools would be enough to drive many to drink and drug up when they encounter alcohol and drugs.

          Same likewise with a Reservation system that make people dependent on government aid and keeps just about anything productive or profitable but casinos out of their reach.

          1. “but there’s no genetic marker that makes anyone actually take the drink… Alcohol and drug addiction are ways of responding to the world, and especially unbearable circumstances.”

            Well of course there isn’t a gene that force them to drink. The gene just gives them similar serotonin rewards to sex or some drugs.

            A lot of these people get shitfaced not to deal with negative things, but because it’s really enjoyable, and the enjoyment becomes addictive.

            1. I’m sure if reservations had more businesses to offer productive work and had no welfare statism to discourage work, people there would have much better ways of enjoying themselves than just intoxication.

      3. My only experience with McKinley County, NM, is driving through Gallup, but I’ve seen the Indian reservation in the next county over, and it is dirt poor and depressing.

        Having said that, some native Americans may also have genetic differences that make it harder to metabolize alcohol, so they get drunk quicker. Genetic inability to digest alcohol runs in my wife’s Asian family; and native Americans are ultimately of Asian decent.,the%20way%20they%20metabolize%20alcohol.

        1. Shut your whore mouth Dee.

          1. Dee will tell us about how Asians crossed the Bering land bridge to the Americas during an ice age. HO2 in the ocean froze making this possible.

      4. Genetically, natives had not encountered liquor in any form, as opposed to Europeans who had grown with it for generations.

        3 sip dips, basically.

    3. Back in my hometown we used to have a lot of local native drunks, mostly Dene.

      One of the most famous was “Old Mary”. She was a tiny bush native woman, dressed like a babushka, who used to ask people for money for “soup”.
      She wasn’t mean or rude, so people watched out for her, both white and native.
      She disappeared one winter, but they found her body the following spring out in the bush. It looked like she had tried to take a shortcut from the highway to her house, passed out drunk and froze to death.

      Later as the reserve got wealthier (It now owns about 8% of the commercial business in the area) they clamped down on the drunks wandering through town.
      The last time I was home I saw one catching shit for begging for booze money in front of Walmart, from a middle age native man and his wife. They told him he was embarrassing natives everywhere. If you know how soft-spoken Dene usually are, you’d know how extraordinary this is.

  13. Any surprise that the politicians pushing this law all have a “D” behind their name. I wonder what their kickback was supposed to be from the businesses that benefitted from this law?

    1. It backfired. It was supposed to reduce competition with the liquor stores. Instead it created more competition.

      This is my favorite kind of unintended consequence.

  14. These people seriously think banning liquor or gas will stop an alcoholic? lol. Also that county where they’re saying liquor or gas sounds like they’re being racist as hell. And don’t say this is Democrats. Love at the effed up Sunday laws in Texas and some counties are still dry. Republicans like their regulations and bans as much the Democrats; it’s just on different stuff.

  15. Muñoz, it was your change to the law that stranded those motorists.

    1. A very good point. How many people could die in the desert because this asshole Muñoz wants to virtue signal his “Noble Savage” phony compassion for Native Americans?

      Indeed, how many Native Americans might suffer or die because they might not get needed food oand medicine while stuck on a Reservation because truckers can’t get fuel? Or indeed how many Native Americans might die because they are truckers or travelling for work and get stranded in the desert without fuel?

      As the old pinchline put it: “What’s this ‘we’ business, Kemosabe?”

      1. Correction: Punchline, though it does pinch too. 🙂

  16. Not surprisingly, the sudden lack of gasoline in remote areas along the Arizona border is having a negative impact on county residents.

    The market will respond by setting up gas stations and liquor stores right next to each other. Two separate buildings increases costs slightly, but otherwise will have little effect.

    1. With they have overlapping ownership?

      Will they just erect a wall between the two sides of the building. “You can’t get gas here, only liquor, you’ll have to move to the other side.”

      I mean, I’m not saying that would comply with the law, but if it turns out that it would, I wouldn’t be surprised.

      1. I’ve actually seen a number of gas stations exactly like that, with the convenience store on one side and the liquor store on the other. Saw something similar somewhere in Indiana, where it was the convenience store on one side and tobacco on the other. They even shared the register area, which was built between the two sections, with the same clerks handling the two sides.

      2. They will do the minimum thing that’s necessary to comply with the law.

        Overlapping ownership is unlikely to be a problem.

  17. There’s little profit margin in selling gasoline. I suppose the legislatures and regulators never bothered to learn that.

    1. Their profit margins on the stuff is considerably greater.

      1. Really, it should be, “their profit margins on gasoline are,”

        Sorry, Roberta.

    2. This.

      Had friends who owned a gas station a while back. The money all comes from the convenience store and, increasingly, carwash. If it’s a branded station, the gas station usually has their profit margin dictated to them as x cents per gallon, they don’t even know the price until the truck is due to arrive since it changes daily. Unbranded have to follow along.

      So the general rule is that gas is almost a loss leader. Small profit so people arrive and while they are at it grab some drinks and snacks before getting back on the road, or a sixer so they don’t have to stop again on their way home.

      1. The Big Gulps and overpriced milk are where they get ‘cha!

  18. Many of those changes are steps in the right direction. In fact, the “original intention” of the alcohol bill was deregulatory in nature.

    Now you know why I do not trust the “zoning” reforms in cities which increase densification.

    1. “Now you know why I don’t trust the government.”

      No need to specify the particular flavor of vile, really.

  19. Videos from J6 were demanded to be released this week by a judge at must protestations of prosecutors. The videos show at the initial entry of the Capitol, men in black looking organized breached and opened doors while Capitol Police looked on doing nothing. Protestors then entered the building, milling around after. The original breachers were in all black and looked well organized, quickly leaving after.

    Now the FBI admits they had agents in the area for J6.

    1. Any “Tear Up D.C.!” texts from them yet?

    2. Next time they will bring guns.

  20. I wonder how exactly that law is worded on the gas station/liquor store split. I know here in Georgia there are some counties that have similar ordinances that prohibit liquor stores from selling beer and wine (to protect the gas station sales of beer) but the way the law is worded, you can have both in the same building so as long as you have separate entrances for each half, supposedly to keep minors out of the liquor store. So you can get your beer and your booze at the same place, you’re just required to pretend those are two completely separate stores there.

  21. One of the biggest stories of the last week was the Senate parliamentarian ruling that the Democrats’ immigration reform couldn’t be included in the budget reconciliation bill. That means that it needs to be subject to the Senate veto. A lot of voices on the left are urging the Democrats to put in the budget reconciliation bill anyway and dare the Supreme Court to rule it unconstitutional.

    I think it’s interesting the way the issue is splitting the Democrats in the House. Keeping immigration reform out of the $3.5 trillion reconciliation bill makes the nine moderate Democrats more likely to support it, but right now, the biggest threat to the $3.5 trillion budget reconciliation bill seems to be progressive Democrats, who are saying they’ll vote against the infrastructure deal unless the $3.5 trillion budget reconciliation bill passes first.

    Meanwhile, the progressives need the moderate Democrats to vote to increase the debt ceiling to make the $3.5 trillion budget reconciliation bill possible, which they’ll need to do–without any help from the Republicans in either chamber. I’m sure Manchin has it in him to do the most epic flip-flop in American history, but if he were planning to do that, he probably would do it on Friday or over the weekend to spare himself the spotlight.

    The Democrats are ripping themselves apart right now–and if he were planning to flop, he could have spared them from all of this.

    I am not immune to wishful thinking, but if we wanted to see the Green New Deal and the socialist entitlement expansions fall apart, we should be hoping to see flustercluck on the Saturday before the vote. What are the progressives willing to offer Joe Manchin and the moderate Democrats in the House to change their minds on Sunday that they weren’t willing to offer them on Friday?

    Remember when the Biden administration had seven months to get Americans out of Afghanistan–but didn’t really get started until the Taliban had taken Kabul? I don’t know why they waited until August 15th to start getting Americans out in earnest, but I’m starting to wonder if it might be for the same reason they waited until two days before the vote to start taking the moderates in their own party seriously. Maybe the Biden administration isn’t just incompetent about one thing.

    Maybe the problem with the Biden administration is that the Biden administration is incompetent. They wake up in thinking incompetent thoughts, they eat some incompetent food, they read some incompetent news, and then have meetings with a bunch of other incompetent people, share their incompetent ideas, and brainstorm an incompetent strategy. When their incompetent plans fails miserably, it’s probably a surprise. But they don’t learn anything from failure–because they’re incompetent.

    1. This could be the Golden moment for moderate Democrats in the House.

    2. I’m stealing “flustercluck”.

      1. Incidentally, letting go of whatever you’re holding onto is the first step in getting out of a flustercluck.

        1. Hold my beer and watch this…

    3. I really hope everything fails, we default and the whole shebang comes down.

      I honestly feel it will be less damaging in the short- and long-term than letting this heap pass.

    4. veto, filibuster, you knew what I meant!

  22. Lancet Covid-19 Commission is disbanding because so many people on the panel, it turns out, were associated with EcoHealth Alliance–the ones who funded the research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. When you’ve taken money from them in the past, telling the public a story that might be used to defend future funding won’t do much to assuage their concerns.

    “Peter Daszak, who has been a vocal opponent of the theory that the virus escaped from a lab, led the task force until he recused himself in June. But Sachs thought it was better to end the whole thing since other members had also collaborated with Daszak on other projects, although one member told the Journal there was no conflict of interest.”

    I can’t help but notice that they didn’t feel it necessary to recuse themselves when they were telling us that anything but the natural origin theory was a conspiracy theory. They all knew where their bread had been buttered before they started this. Something must have happened. Someone must have said if they didn’t go public, he or she would take them public.

    I find the idea that they all suddenly realized that there was a conflict of interest after the fact . . . um . . . unlikely.

    1. What’s wrong with a conspiracy theory to explain a conspiracy?

      I’m really bothered by the use of “conspiracy theory” to mean:

      • theory that doesn’t involve conspiracies;
      • theory to be dismissed from consideration, whether it involves a conspiracy or not;
      • proven correct theory to be dismissed because it required a conspiracy; or
      • some line of thought that’s not even theorizing but is vaguely kooky.
      1. It’s like there’s a law of nature that says people can cooperate only to accomplish good things, i.e. that cooperation/coordination automatically makes outcomes good.

        1. This is sarcasm, right?

          1. It seems to be what “they” (in conspiracy, of course) believe, because it’s only a conspiracy if it’s nefarious, therefore conspiracies do not exist.

      1. Daszak was a known piece of shit on this since March of 2020. Mentioned at the time that it was a bitter pill to swallow, hearing this asshole go on every social media, and swear on a stack of gel medium that SARS-CoV2 couldn’t have had an artificial origin. Jesus fuck: just look at Shi’s co-author index.

        Better late than never though, and hey! No more mean tweets.

        1. Oh, and China evidently is having trouble keeping the lights on and factory lines running. See, e.g., Michael Yon’s latest tweets on the problem. Lack of electricity, supposedly. Which is mind-boggling, considering the sheer number of coal plants they have, and that they couldn’t have mined out all of Manchuria by now. Maybe though they went through all of those Powder River shiploads they were importing a short while back.

          Anyway, throw it onto the stack of, “That’s really fucking weird, and unprecedented for the Chinese to be doing now. What the fuck?”

          1. Too many Bitcoin miners, obviously.

    2. As a good friend of mine recently said, “I’m going to need new conspiracy theories, all my old ones have come true.”

      1. Conspiracy theories should now be called spoilers.

        1. Next Week Tonight with John Oliver

    3. They got caught. There’s no ethics, just political calculation.

      Penalties need to get MUCH steeper.

  23. “…its chief sponsor, Sen. Daniel Ivey-Soto (D–Albuquerque)…”
    “Sen. George Muñoz (D–Gallup), who introduced the gas-station amendment to the new law…”


    Anyone surprised?

    1. If this were Canada, a rule restricting alcohol sales in an area with a heavy concentration of First Nations people would probably be considered extremely racist.

      Exhibit A:

      “Alcohol consumption is weaponized to keep Indigenous people down by shame and blame, and those who are consumers are often dismissed entirely by society and seen as disposable,” says Nickita Longman, a freelance writer, community organizer, and Saulteaux member of George Gordon First Nation in Treaty 4 Territory, in an interview with Canadian Dimension. “White folks are elevated with a vast variety of ‘classy’ options, and are invited into a lifestyle that celebrates their consumption.”

      This hypocritical approach by the state to alcohol consumption is far from a new trend. The racist history of liquor control traces back to the genesis of colonial occupation of what is now known as Canada, evolving and reconstituting itself over the decades in new forms to justify the theft of land and resources, and to quash efforts towards self-determination. The policing of Indigenous alcohol usage has become much more visible recently—but it has been building for centuries.

      —-Canadian Dimension

      I won’t claim to be an authority on the history or culture of New Mexico, but during the recent statue toppling craze on the left, where people in the South were facing off over statues of Confederate heroes, the activists in New Mexico were facing off over statues of Spanish explorers, generals, heroes, etc., whom the indigenous peoples were claiming were the villains’ and enslaved and oppressed them. Santa Fe was established ten years before the pilgrims landed on Plymouth rock, and my understanding is that the establishment families in that area go waaaaaaaaaaaaaaay back.

      Being a Democrat in New Mexico may not be the same as being a Democrat in Los Angeles.

      1. It’s not. New Mexico is a blue state, but it’s a rural and relatively remote rural blue state. As a result there’s an odd infusion of somewhat conservative Democratic politics there- driven by a strong Catholic tradition, good relationship with personal firearm ownership, history of open-range ranching (self reliance) etc.

        It’s not an easy state to pigeonhole. Oh, and Northern NM is much different than Southern NM (where I grew up). We in the south were looked at as the poor country cousins of the crystal waving white money-hippies in the north.

        1. Exactly. Most folks are rather conservative in values, but they vote D to keep the benefits going. Your average dirt-poor vaquero and his family may not have finished school, but they know the tax code and deductibles better than any IRS drone.

      2. If this were Canada, a rule restricting alcohol sales in an area with a heavy concentration of First Nations people would probably be considered extremely racist.

        Most Northern First Nations bands have done just that for decades, because when they don’t the suicide rate goes through the roof. It’s only possible because ice roads and airplanes are the only access to the outside world.

        So now everyone has switched to huffing gasoline.

  24. “…one its chief sponsor, Sen. Daniel Ivey-Soto (D–Albuquerque), calls “the biggest reform of liquor laws in 60 years in our state.”…”

    Yeah, putting a lot of people out of work is “big”, isn’t it?

    1. Actually this article makes it look like most of the putting of people out of work in this case will be from gains in efficiency due to deregulation. Only the gas station provision seems to cut against that grain. And gains in efficiency put people out of work only temporarily.

      1. Consider the possibility that most of the gas stations selling liquor were doing so only because it had been easier for them to get permission to do so than it was for other businesses that would’ve been more efficient doing so. And with this bill it’ll be easier for those other businesses to get that permission.

        1. No, it won’t. There is never anything easy, cheap or honest in dealing with liquor licenses.

      2. “…Only the gas station provision seems to cut against that grain….”
        Only little bit pregnant?
        Sufficient to trigger Sevo’s law:
        “When a third party sticks its nose in a transaction between two parties involved in a trade, at least one, and likely both, lose.”
        You don’t get to choose a ‘degree’, one drop pf gov’t interference will do ya.

        1. But you have more than one such drop as the status quo. Why do you measure change against an ideal, instead of against the status quo?

        2. I know you’re not alone in this. There are some who wouldn’t throw the switch to have the trolley run over 1 person to prevent it from running over any greater number of persons. But you understand there are plenty who would.

  25. Democrats are racist.
    Clear and convincing proof.

    1. I guess. If you are a partisan who is predisposed to demonize Democrats, and therefore have a really low bar for proof.

  26. But I can still buy vaping products there, correct?

    1. Only if they taste bad.

  27. When I was living in New Mexico, the best place to get a green Chile burrito was at the gas station between Los Alamos and Sante Fe. You had to get them when they made them fresh, but— man— were they good. I miss that place.

    1. WTF?

      An on-topic comment? No attempt to distract from the Biden economy’s profoundly un-socialistic concentration of wealth at the very top by bringing up Drumpf? Not even a rant about state-level abortion laws?

      You’re off your game tonight.


      1. I suspect his cheeks are a bit chapped lately.

      2. He must have recently drunk the Jekyll potion, he will probably go back to Hyde eventually.

      3. Looks like Shrike forgot which sock he was using.

    2. Fuck off and die, commie shit. No one cares where you tried to screw a business owner.

    3. That wasn’t a green chile burrito, you just wrapped up what you found in the gas station toilet in a tortilla.

  28. “The New Mexico state Supreme Court ruled on Monday gasoline stations in the state have a legal obligation not to sell fuel to a driver the retailer ‘knows or has reason to know’ is intoxicated.”


    I swear to fucking zombie Jesus, public beatings need to come back into vogue.

    1. This is the new government. Am seeing it in my industry too. We now do their job and they review it. It is a mixed bag because while we are spending our time to do their work, the regulators become disconnected from the technical aspects of it and no longer understand the technology. So when we make a technical argument in our favor when in a grey area, they capitulate. But in non-technical grey areas, they act like bureaucrats.

      1. Hey, Chumby. Since the story is about gas-o-line stations in New Mexico, I thought you would enjoy this groaner pun I remember from my childhood:

        A Disney book I once had shows Goofy’s Gas Station and the sign says:

        “Eat At Goofy’s And Get Gas!”

        Ol’ Walt Disney was starting kids early at being little potty-brains. It never wore off with me. 🙂

    2. That’s the first time since watching The Dukes of Hazzard that I’ve heard anyone call anyone else a Dipstick.

      Brings back fond memories of The Duke Boys, Daisy Duke, Uncle Jesse, Crazy Cooter, and The General Lee fighting the corrupt system of Boss Hogg and his minions Roscoe P. Coletrane and Enos! As a boy, I never associated the Rebel Flag with bigotry and racism, just with fun-loving defiance of unjust authority. Perhaps modern Duke Boys would call their vehicle The Thomas Paine and sport a Gadsden Flag.

      The Dukes of Hazzard Intro

  29. Who wants to vomit (or fap if you’re Jeff, Shrike or Mike)?

    According to these court documents we learn that The Dark Lord himself, George Soros, paid for his own investigator to work for the U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee to plant the Trump-Russia story, and John McCain let him do it.

    George Soros personally paid for an investigator, former FBI analyst Dan Jones, to frame Trump through his political organization called The Democracy Integrity Project (TDIP).

    Jones’s job was to look into the DNS data that purported to “prove” links between Trump and Russia on behalf of McCain and the committee. Those so-called “links” turned out to be regular mass marketing emails from Trump Properties sent worldwide – including Russia and everywhere else. McCain knew what Jones was actually up to, but used them to create “inferences” and a “narrative” to attack Trump.

    Warmonger McCain and Soros actually worked on this fraud together, and Soros paid for it, and that fed four years of psychotic bullshit and the Mueller investigation.

    It’s all starts in the link. Everyone should read it.

    1. I need to ease off the redpills or I’m going to start stocking up on ammo again.

      Already I despair of accountability ever reaching these bastards.

      1. There is still Russian steel case ammo available.
        Since the Biden ban on Russian imported ammo, prices have been rising
        When the steel ammo stocks are gone in a few weeks, all those dollars will be chasing the brass cased ammo.
        Prices are certain to rise further.
        Buy your ammo now and stack it deep.

  30. These are 2 pay checks $78367 and $87367. that i received in last 2 months. I am very happy that i can make thousands in my part time and now i am enjoying my life. Everybody can do this and earn lots of dollars from home in very short time period. Just visit this website now. Your Success is one step away Open this web……Webwork8

  31. I moved from Ned Lamont’s oppressive CT to the oppressive NM. I miss the nip bottles.

  32. So, the intent of the law was to protect the poor people from the demon Rum, while allowing the wealthy to continue to consume it. Sort of like rich progs demonizing sugary soft drinks while not cracking down on sugar-laden lattes.

  33. There is a gas station in Austin that started selling barbecue on the side. Now it’s known as a barbecue joint that sell gas.

    1. Quite a few of those in Texas. For awhile, the best BBQ between Austin and Houston (not counting Snow’s, which really isn’t on the direct route) was a Shell station just east of Brenham, that also had a pit to the side. It wasn’t Lockhart or Franklin-esque, but it was pretty good brisket and ribs.

      Of course, it sold, got famous, and now isn’t very good (as of four years ago, when I last tried it.)

      In the vein of gas stations that sell other stuff you wouldn’t expect, (and tipping a 10-gallon hat in the direction of Bucees) one of the better sushi places in Houston that wasn’t the Big Japanese Three in West Houston, was a gas station just SE of downtown. It had drive through, and wasn’t the most artistic, but the seafood was good.

      Lastly, one of the best wine selections I’ve ever seen, was an, IIRC, Arco station in South San Jose. Might’ve been off 85. It had a wine fridge in the back (with a lock), next to the coke machine and hot dog rotisserie. In it, was a bunch of mailing-list CA stuff, back when that was a real thing, as well as stuff like 375s of d’Yquem and full bottles of Anne Gros Richebourg. Decently priced too.

  34. Anniversaries are the perfect time to remember why we are there. Remember why we keep trying, why we care so much and why we want to keep doing it. It’s finding your reflection in the eyes of the person you love and realizing the smile in your face.
    It is a moment to look back on time and see the road traveled with all the willingness to keep walking that same stretch, to keep walking by their side.

  35. How about buying into less govt. edicts and more into freedom?
    How do lawmakers get away with saying legal activities are not exempt from control? Isn’t that what “legal” means? Call for recall.