Like you, I've never been in July -- though I do go often, it's never been in the Summer. (That said, I *will* be there in early June, the latest in the Spring I've ever visited.)

In addition to the fine suggestions so far, I would particularly suggest Restaurant Patois for a casual yet excellent dinner (it's on Laurel & Webster, a couple of blocks from Clancy's, also excellent but a touch more formal). Right there, you have your casual and celebratory dinners covered. Then again, there's also Shaya, Herbsaint, Coquette, and dozens and dozens of other options.

Typically, I do Galatoire's and Commander's Palace for lunch, not for dinner. Friday lunch at Galatoire's has become a tradition for us, as it has for many New Orleanians (and probably something to avoid for just as many, and probably for the exact same reasons, too!). Commander's is also wonderful, and during weekday lunches, one can take advantage of their 25¢ Martinis -- making it a perfect chance to "pick up the bar tab." If Galatoire's closes around July 4th, then it becomes easy to choose between the two. ;^)

Other places to consider for lunch would include Toups' Meatery, Turkey and the Wolf, Compère Lapin, and . . . and . . . and . . . .

Galatoire's remains excellent. While there are a few new waiters due to retirement, much of the waitstaff remains the same, and I find the quality to beas good as it's ever been.

Casamento's is interesting to me in that it's never been a "destination" or "go to" place for me. If I'm already on Magazine, and it's nearby, then fine -- let's go. But I have never found it worth deliberately traveling to . . .

Domilise's remains delicious.

And I can't comment on Mosca's, as I've never been.

You have finally grasped the point (your previous 24-paragraph brief notwithstanding):

>>>>> is it legal? (I am suggesting) Yes it is. Is it good writing? No, probably not! <<<<<

NO ONE has questioned the legality of Carnevino's statement re: the quality of their beef as printed on their menu. From a legal point-of-view, I'm sure it's a fine statement. (Then again, I'm pretty sure that, legally, one could defend "Prime Cut Steaks," too¹.)

But from the POV of a consumer . . . well, that's another matter entirely. ;^)

_______________
¹ It's probably akin to the old saw about a DA and a ham sandwich.

As my final comment(s) on the matter: as I've mentioned elsewhere, I spent 40+ years in various facets of the wine trade which has meant, among other things, I've spent a rather long part of my life dealing with various types of restaurants (though mostly what would be called "fine dining") and people in various positions -- from owners and managers, to chefs and wine buyers, to wait staff and their marketing people (whether sole proprietorships or corporations). Indeed, I've *been* the wine buyer for various restaurants and helped write the menus.

Obviously I don't think I'm "reading to much into" the language of Carnevino's menu; I interpret its meaning as I see/read it. It's one thing to decide not to state their sources ("Farmer Brown's chickens," "Rancher Joe's beef"), and no one can fault a restaurant for that -- after all, there is no requirement to do so. But if one does decide to provide added verbiage, I would hope it provides clear, useful, and meaningful information. At Carnevino, this is not case. Their language is not deceptive in the way "Prime Cut Steaks" is deliberately deceptive, but I find it obfuscating and intentionally so. They are making a claim about their meats ("better than USDA Prime"), then demeaning that grade/standard ("regular Prime" -- as opposed to superior Prime? irregular Prime" what?), and finally hedging their bets (using the word "often," which *does* mean "not always," as in "sometimes it is, sometimes it isn't").

[Note: I was also a wine writer and magazine editor for many years, so -- yes -- I do perhaps scrutinize language a bit more thoroughly than the average consumer.]

That said, above all else, let's simply agree to disagree. After all, everyone is entitled to their own opinion, and to express it.

Cheers!

Me thinks thou misunderstood my point. When CARNEVINO states on their menu, "BBL beef is *often* beyond regular USDA prime standards for marbling and flavor" (my emphasis added), it is MY take on THEIR words that BBL meat can vary . . . why say that BS at all? When Chez Panisse (e.g.) identifies the farmer, the rancher, the sources of their ingredients, they don't bother saying "X is beyond Federal standards," they simply say their beef/pork/duck/chicken/whatever comes from ___________. Why can't Carnevino merely say they get their beef from BBL, period?

Yes, it IS "Buyer Beware," and Carnevino is muddying the waters, not clarifying them . . . .

"I'm talking about non-alcoholic beer wine & spirits that taste exactly like those with alcohol. I know they don't exist but this makes the question more interesting."

You are correct: they do NOT exist, and therefore the question is not more interesting, but rather a pointless exercise. Your question is also a faulty premise: that people drink wine and/or beer SOLELY because of the alcohol.

I grew up in the wine trade. I started learning about and tasting different wines in 1963, at the age of 10. I could care less about the alcohol -- indeed, I could count the times I've been truly drunk on one hand, with fingers left over . . . once in my teens, and twice in my 20s. Drinking wine is not about getting drunk. Wine is food, and for me, it's all about complimenting one's meal.

I understand this is *my* point-of-view, and there are plenty of college students who can't wait to get f****d up at the frat party . . . then again, the vast majority of kids with medical marijuana cards get them just so they (think) they can legally get stoned, and can't understand why they got arrested for a drug-related DUI. (Serious medical marijuana patients, those with HIV or cancer for example, are a different matter entirely and NOT what I am referring to here.)

@caprimulgus -- While I can understand your sentiment re: (ultimately) "Buyer Beware" when it comes to Carnevino's claim that their "BBL beef is often beyond regular USDA prime standards for marbling and flavor," I would respectively disagree with you. My problem with their wording is that 1) it tells me that the quality of their meat is VARIABLE, and 2) prompts me ask my waiter "Is this one of the nights when your beef exceeds 'Prime', or should I come back a different night?"

In other words, while it is true that diners need to learn about the food they eat, it's also true that restaurants should -- in fact, *need* to avoid misleading language. Would you be excited to buy a wine, for example, that claims "We often exceed the quality of those 100-point wines . . . "?

This is nothing I have ever heard of.

It sounds to me as though Winery X is holding a party at, say, the Oracle Arena or the Staples Center and -- obviously -- want to serve their own wine. Alcoholic beverage sales are VERY profitable for sports arenas and the like, and if the winery were allowed to simply BYOB, the arena would make NO profit on their consumption. Therefore, THEY have a policy of buying the wine in question at wholesale from the winery, marking it up 25 percent (far less than they normally would, believe me!), and selling the wine -- bottle by bottle -- back to the winery. The reality is that this is no different than, say, selling wine to any private party off a catering menu, or charging someone corkage -- though usually "corkage" is charged at a dollar, rather than a percentage, rate.

Heather, Cognac is a distilled spirit, not a wine. Wine continues to age after it is bottled. Distilled spirits, however, do NOT age in the bottle. Period. The only thing that could happen to your (unopened) Cognac is that, if the cork crumbled or the seal is otherwise compromised, some of the alcohol could have dissipated (evaporated). That will also affect the taste somewhat, as it may have oxidized. But if the seal is intact, it should taste exactly the same as a brand new bottle . . . again, with the following warning: "if the blend that constitutes the blend of Rémy Martin VSOP has radically changed since then."

The OP asked, "Do you have a favorite winery that you like to visit?" Well, I mentioned five specific wineries, all within the Santa Cruz Mountains AVA, because a) I happen to live in California; b) they happen to be favorites of mine; and c) they happen to be wineries I visit on a regular basis.

Now I certainly could mention any number of producers in other states or, for that matter, in other countries. But I can't say they are a "favorite winery [I] like to visit." I may have only visited once, and I would classify that as, perhaps, a favorite experience, as opposed to a favorite winery per se.

But should you (or the OP) prefer vintners in other locations or nations, ask away . . .

Wineries in CA, OR, WA, AZ, NM, TX, LA, VA, MA, RI, NY -- and I'm sure in other states as well -- all sell their wines at WRSP (Winery Suggested Retail Price)¹.

That said, nothing in PA would surprise me, and -- no -- I've never visited wineries in Pennsylvania.

OTOH, buying from the cellar door in other countries is often the LEAST expensive way to acquire wines. The U.S. is the outlier in this regard . . .

/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\

That said, let me make clear my original comments, and those immediately above.

Having spent some 40 years in the California wine trade -- having worked for a number of wineries in the Napa Valley and the Santa Cruz Mountains, as well as visiting wineries as a buyer for both individual retail stores and a large, 104-store chain -- there is little reason for me to visit a winery UNLESS there is a specific reason above and beyond looking at yet another vine, another rack of barrels, another bottling line.

I realize this is certainly NOT the case for most of the thousands of people who visit wineries in the U.S. every year. In that regard, it is *I* who am the "outlier."

_______________
¹ Not including specific wines which might be on sale; I am referring to the winery's "standard practice" for selling their wines to the public.

In the U.S., I see little reason to visit wineries UNLESS a) There is more to the visit than just a tasting room, and/or guided "touristy tour" (think of visiting any larger Napa Valley producer); and b) Library wines and/or wines not sold elsewhere are available for sale.

Generally speaking, wineries in the US are *the* more expensive place to buy wine(s). They are frequently less expensive elsewhere. So unless there are things I can obtain that are not in the general marketplace, why go?

There is a THIRD reason to visit -- and that is to see friends. After 40+ years working in the wine trade, I have a lot of friends who own and/or work at wineries.

That said, wineries that I *do* visit on a semi-regular basis include:
-- Equinox
-- Ridge
-- Rexford
-- Santa Cruz Mountain Vineyard
-- Storrs (note: I worked for Storrs for 5+ years.)