Today's Shoes

JM Weston split-toe bluchers in dark tan calfskin with a fudge welt and double leather soles (Ref. 598 demi-chasse). My shoes aren't blue suede like the 598s in the picture above, but I wish they were. Those blue suede shoes are sweet.

Last Night's Tipple

Liquor Claus gave me two bottles of whisk(e)y for Christmas: a Glenfarclas 12 year old, which I wrote about back in December; and a bottle of Eagle Rare Single Barrel 10 year old Bourbon. I hadn't felt like drinking Bourbon until last night, so I hadn't opened the Eagle Rare. Last night I did, though.

Eagle Rare began life in the 1970s as a Wild Turkey knockoff. It was bottled at 101 proof, just like WT; and I suppose that the eagle was supposed to evoke memories about the debate over what the American national bird was to be. Ben Franklin thought it should have been the turkey; but the other founding fathers, in their infinite wisdom, realized that the eagle was a nobler and much more appropriate alternative. Similarly (I conjecture), Bourbon consumers would conclude that Eagle Rare was a nobler alternative to Wild Turkey. Originally a brand owned by Seagram's and distilled at what is now the Four Roses Distillery in Lawrenceburg (the Wild Turkey Distillery is located in the same town). Sazerac acquired the brand in 1989, and it's currently distilled at the Buffalo Trace Distillery in Frankfort.

A few years ago, Sazerac decided to take Eagle Rare up-market. They lowered the proof from 101 to 90, put it in a fancy heavy-bottomed bottle, and made it a single barrel bottling. Oh, yeah -- they raised the price, too. All of these changes were calculated to appeal to the yuppie boutique Bourbon drinker, and they have. Sazerac believes that Eagle Rare will be one of the engines of growth for their Bourbon business in the years to come. Buffalo Trace has three Bourbon mashbills: a wheated one used for WL Weller; a high-rye one used for Ancient Age, Elmer T. Lee, Blanton's, and others; and a low-rye one used for Buffalo Trace, Old Charter, and Eagle Rare. I didn't know that Eagle Rare came from the low-rye mashbill until I looked it up just now, but it's hardly a surprise. The Bourbon was corny. There was very little bite. Instead, it was sweet and smooth. Despite the age, I didn't get a whole lot of overt wood flavor, although it did have a decent amount of vanilla that must have come from the toasting on the barrel staves. My reaction to it is a lot like my reaction to Old Charter: a nice, tasty Bourbon, but not one (like Bulleit or 1792 Ridgemont Reserve) that I could get really enthusiastic about.

Airport Security

Bruce Schneier calls attention to a post by Clark Kent Ervin on the New York Times's Jetlagged blog. Ervin doesn't think that security at airports is rigorous enough. Specifically, he says, there's a problem because terrorists can get into airport terminals, even if they can't get to the gates.

Like many people, I spend a lot of time in airport terminals, and I often think that they must be an awfully appealing target to terrorists. The largest airports have huge terminals teeming with thousands of passengers on any given day. They serve as conspicuous symbols of American consumerism, with McDonald’s restaurants, Starbucks coffee shops and Disney toy stores. While airport screeners do only a so-so job of checking for guns, knives and bombs at checkpoints, there’s no checking for weapons before checkpoints. So if the intention isn’t to carry out an attack once on board a plane, but instead to carry out an attack on the airport itself by killing people inside it, there’s nothing to stop a terrorist from doing so...

To prevent [attacks similar to the 2002 attack at the El Al ticket counter at LAX and the 2007 attempted car bombing at the Glasgow airport] — and larger ones that could be catastrophic — what if we moved the screening checkpoints from the interior of airports to the entrance? The sooner we screen passengers’ and visitors’ persons and baggage (both checked and carry-on) for guns, knives and explosives, the sooner we can detect those weapons and prevent them from being used to sow destruction.

The problem with this reasoning is that airport terminals aren't especially attractive targets for terrorists, incidents of terminal attacks notwithstanding. Airplanes are attractive targets, for a number of reasons. Airport terminals just form another class of places where large numbers of people congregate. They're no more attractive than shopping malls or sports stadiums or movie theaters. Why would you have onerous security for airport terminals but not the other places? Would the security actually deter or prevent any attacks, or would it simply make some people like Ervin feel better? As Schneier writes,

This is a silly argument, one that any regular reader of this newsletter should be able to counter. If you're worried about explosions on the ground, any place you put security checkpoints is arbitrary. The point of airport security is to prevent terrorism *on the airplanes*, because airplane terrorism is a more serious problem than conventional bombs blowing up in crowded buildings. (Four reasons. First, airlines are often national symbols. Second, airplanes often fly to dangerous countries. Third, for whatever reason, airplanes are a preferred terrorist target. And fourth, the particular failure mode of airplanes means that even a small bomb can kill everyone on board. That same bomb in an airport means that a few people die and many more get injured.) And most airport security measures aren't effective.

Today's Shoes

Day

Gravati cap-toe bals in medium brown grained calfskin (Lama, color Larice) with single leather soles (16592, 500 last).

Evening

Gravati wingtip bals in walnut brown waterproof suede with thick combination leather/rubber soles (15902, 640 last).

Last Night's Tipple

Last night, I finished off the rest of the bottle of Louis Bouillot Perle de Nuit Blanc de Noirs Crémant de Bourgogne. Similar with other experiences I've had with sparkling wine, it was better the second night than it was the first night. I think, although I'm not sure, that this is because it's lost some of its carbonation after being open for twenty four hours, making the wine less acidic and sour and allowing its fruit to show through more readily. This makes me think that I should move on to Italian Prosecco next. Produced from eponymous Prosecco grapes in the Veneto region of northern Italy, it is typically less carbonated than Champagne and Champagne-style sparkling wines.

The Louis Bouillot was around $18 a bottle. Was it worth it? Well, that's a hard question to answer. It wasn't as enjoyable as either the Gruet Blanc de Noirs or the Gruet Rosé, and each of those was $5 cheaper a bottle. But compared to the California and Champagne sparklers, each of which has cost more, it more than holds its own. Plus it includes Gamay, which makes for a unique experience. I don't regret the purchase price, but I doubt that I'll be a regular purchaser.

There's Not Enough Legroom, But At Least You Can Surf

The Wall Street Journal reports that AMR, the parent company of American Airlines, plans on beginning a pilot program that will make wi-fi available in the cabins of some of their planes:

By this summer, the world's biggest airline, measured by passenger traffic, expects to provide Internet service on its Boeing 767-200 aircraft, used for longer flights, and gradually to add service across all of its fleet.

The service works on passengers' own wireless devices, like laptops and Apple iPhones. Travelers can access the Internet, including a company's intranet site, and send email. For flights of more than three hours, wireless service will cost $12.95, with a charge of $10 planned for shorter flights. American will generate some revenue from the service, Mr. Backelin said, but "our main goal is to improve our customers' experience." ("AMR to Test Wi-Fi Service For 767 Planes" by Ann Keeton, January 23, 2008, p. D3)

The FAA has to approve this, and I certainly hope that they do and that the other airlines feel compelled to offer something similar to compete with American. Reading books and watching DVDs on long flights are both well and good, but sometimes you just want to surf. Or blog.

Today's Shoes

Day

Grenson Masterpieces three-eyelet blucher ankle austerity brogue boots in antiqued chestnut calfskin with single leather soles.

Evening

Santoni three-eyelet plain-toe blucher ankle boots in dark brown suede reverse welted with a thick rubber lug sole. These shoes were originally purchased to be Manhattan walking shoes. I've bought a lot of these. Walking in Manhattan can be brutal, both because there's so much of it and because the concrete sidewalks provide no cushioning at all. Shoes that don't fit well will cause blisters; and even if they do fit well, they can leave your feet feeling like they've been pounded with hammers. These ankle boots have a thick, cushy, latex rubber sole, and I thought that they would do well in Manhattan. They did okay, I suppose, but the fit in the heel wasn't as good as it needed to be to avoid discomfort after a long day of walking.

Last Night's Tipple

Champagne is the king of French sparking wines, but there are many other regions in France that produce sparkling wine. Sparkling wine from an appellation d’origine contrôlée is generally called crémant. The ones that I have seen most frequently in the United States (not that I have been paying that much attention) are from Limoux (in the Languedoc), Alsace, and Bourgogne. Crémant de Bourgogne, it seemed to me when I was browsing the sparkling wine section at Central Market, should be the most like Champagne of all the French crémants since Bourgogne uses mostly the same grapes as Champagne does (namely, Pinot Noir and Chardonnay) and since it's relatively far north in France and would consequently be able to produce grapes high in acidity, as it should be with sparkling wine. Central Market had both a Blanc de Noirs and a Blanc de Blancs from Louis Bouillot, a Crémant de Bourgogne producer about which I knew nothing; but the price was decent and I thought what the heck. Given the fact that I typically like Blanc de Noirs better than Blanc de Blancs, I bought the Blanc de Noirs.

I don't know much more about Louis Bouillot than I did when I bought the bottle a couple of days ago. Their importer's website says that they began producing sparkling wine since 1877. The bottle says that they're based in Nuits-St-Georges in the heart of Burgundy, although that's not necessarily where the grapes they use for the wine are grown. Louis Bouillot Perle de Nuit Blanc de Noirs Crémant de Bourgogne is made from Pinot Noir from around Yonne and Gamay(!) from the Mâconnais. Well, this is a little bit different. Gamay isn't used in Champagne, and it's the grape of Beaujolais. I like (good) Beaujolais because it's fresh, fruity, and exuberant, so this is very promising. The wine is a deep straw color with just a tinge of salmon. The nose is, as one would expect, fresh, fruity, and exuberant. It is more immediately pleasing than any sparkling wine that I have tried on this latest binge. In the mouth, it's round and berry-like with plenty of body. I like this very much.

Big Old Expensive Phone Company

Time Warner, the company then responsible for management of the Time Warner-Comcast joint venture that was and is the dominant player in the Texas cable market, tried and failed to manipulate Texas law to stop AT&T (then SBC) from rolling out a television package back in 2005. Now AT&T's U-verse is a reality, and Comcast (which now manages the Time Warner-Comcast joint venture) has to convince the consumer not to give it a try.



Don't get me wrong: I think the commercial is funny, but am I the only one wondering why Comcast is calling the viewer's attention to AT&T's inexperience with television when Comcast's corporate health depends to a large extent on its ability to persuade consumers to purchase services from Comcast in spaces that Comcast has little experience in, like telephone and alarm service?

Today's Shoes

Day

Gravati split-toe monkstrap in caramel-colored Radica 03 calfskin with a combination leather/rubber soles (17194, 697 last). The principal complaint that I have with Gravati is the way they do their sockliners. They're longer to hit the foot just behind the ball, and they're glued down with glue that's not perfectly suited for the task. The result is that the sockliner can sometimes peel back partially and ball up underneath the arch of the foot, making walking unpleasant. The only solution to this problem is to cut out the curled-up portion of the liner with an X-acto knife. This happened to these shoes, and it's the reason why I get all of my Gravati special orders with a full-length sockliner.

Evening

Gravati four-eyelet plain-toe bluchers in dark brown grained (Lama) calfskin with combination leather/rubber soles (16532, 640 last).