Wednesday, May 9, 2018


The Molly Ivins discussion is only an introduction to why we need to boycott Cobbleheads and demand the indictment of Joe Kenny and the bartender who served Rene Oliveira.

At BISD I gave the trustees the BISD documents they needed to know documents were falsified to justify BISD's mistreatment of special needs children.  I demanded action.  They ignored me.  I pulled the trigger as promised and now they are under TEA and Department of Education oversight to see if they will fix the problem.  Every trustee breached their duties to the children  Hence everyone one of them is a child abuser.  We can no longer tolerate this nonsense of Trustees and Commissioners doing nothing and remaining silent when they know things are wrong and even illegal.

The BND know there needs to be an investigation into the laundering of campaign money in the last election.  They will remain silent and do nothing.  This is not acceptable so I will spend my money and time to pull the trigger and do the job the BND should be doing.

DA Saenz will never do anything against anyone who over serves drunks and causes accidents.  He will always protect the bar owners.  Well within a week or two a local bar will be sued for over serving this woman Saenz refuses to prosecute.  Had the medics not revived the victim after being declared dead at the scene, she would have killed him.  This is acceptable to Saenz and that trained monkey we call a police chief.  The Dram Shop law is being challenged as unconstitutional.  The state is not sued.  The lawsuit simply includes a notice to notify the State AG so they can defend the law if they so chose.  The State is not a defendant.  Saenz and Brownsville are the perfect place for such a challenge because Saenz will never enforce the law.  In addition it is clear the bar owners are using the Dram Shop law to protect themselves from liability while intentionally getting their patrons so drunk they present themselves as a danger to everyone.

The motto at places like Cobbleheads and Marokko is serve them until they drop.  The lives of DWI victims do not matter.  Rene Oliveira and Cobbleheads will play a central role in the lawsuit to prove the point.



Joe Kenny is 100% about profits while sacrificing the lives of everyone on the street when the drunks leave his bar.

Back to Molly Ivins - if you want to change things you and everyone you know need to demand the indictment of Joe Kenny and the bartender who served Rene Oliveira while telling everyone on your FB account or any other social mediate to boycott Cobbleheads.

The lives of DWI victims matter.  We protect them by punishing those who enable alcoholics and push people to the point of dangerous intoxication.  

The punishment at the polls will also go to anyone who uses Cobbleheads to promote their campaign.

If you do nothing then you are surrendering your government to the very people you accuse of corruption every day.  



Anonymous said...

I have some thoughts on this. I go to bars maybe 3 times a year but as it happens, I was recently at Cobblehead's for the fist time in maybe ten years. I sat with friends at the back window where we were not visible from the bar. The bar tender had no way of tracking our drinking. The waitress would take our order and bring our drinks and keep track of out tab. The bartender had no way of knowing who the drinks were for. But lets sue him for taking that job in the first place, I guess. And we will sue the server because they should have been keeping track and observing our behavior after all, a server's below minimum wage job requires they have these skills. I guess they should have picked them up in high school. And, of course, they all know whether or not there is a designated driver. I just have a bit of a problem holding some poor person, working mostly for tips, at a bad job with bad hours responsible for the decision of some, often older, wealthier and with more resources person to drive when they shouldn't. Are we to be responsible for others who make the decision to get behind the wheel when they drive, whatever the reason? What if we suspect an elderly person (not a relative) of not being a competent driver? Do we act on it? Suppose someone is incapacitated by illness and they describe their inability to perform even basic tasks because of their illness. Should they be allowed to drive? Or do we pull the plug on them? Thank hard about this one as you have, more then once, described situations that incapacitated you at night but the following day you drove somewhere. What happens to us if you become incapacitated while driving? Do I have an obligation to make the DPS aware of the situation and let them decide? Or should you be treated like a responsible person that would choose not to put others at risk if you though there could be a mishap? I'm inclined to hold people responsible for their own behavior. I mean, every day in this city their are car accidents, most of them minor, caused by cell phone use. Should the blame for the accident be shared with the sales person who sold them the phone or maybe with the manufacturer? By your reasoning, if someone hires a drinker they are then responsible for enabling that persons negative behavior because the pay check allowed them to buy alcohol. So, does that mean alcoholics should not be allowed paid employment, do we set up some system to maintain them and their family until they can be trusted not to buy booze? And who decides any of this?
I think you will consider this post a troll but these are real questions that deserve a discussion. Does it take a village or our we own on own as we go through life or is there some reasonable middle ground and, if so, how do we decide what that is?

BobbyWC said...

Your post while raising valid concerns makes a lot of false assumptions. First to the last of your post, good families are moving to have loved one's licenses pulled every day. It is a reality and it is happening.

Your post assumes the law says being a bartender is enough to be sued or indicted. It is not. This is why there is an investitgation. But there is enough evidence at this point to show Cobbleheads has turned a blind eye to the problem.

The law is whether a waitress or a bartender is you see the patron has had too much you cut them off. That is the law. An investigation will tell us if it was a bartender or a waiter/waitress. And if you thing any waiter/waitress or bartender is going to cut off Rene at Cobbleheads you are delusional. Rene brings Joe Kenny too much business.

Futher as to a lawsuit the bar is held liable for the judgment not the bartender, waitress or waitor.

So why I agree your post raises questions which needed to be addressed, you post was based on a lot of false assumptions.

Bobby WC

BobbyWC said...

As is always the case you trolls accuse without one example to justify your complaint.

Bobby WC