Perhaps I’ll have some thoughtful musing about this later, but I’ve already used up my thinking-about-beer time for the morning. Priorities are priorities, right Matt?
Not only do I not care if my beer is hip, but I also will not cast my vote for president (in the primary or general election) based upon which candidate I would rather have a beer with.
That’s just a dumb idea.
Obviously the National Beer Wholesalers Association leadership wasn’t thinking of me when they came up with an online poll that lets you vote on who you would most like to have a beer with.
Apparently George Bush was that guy in 2000. Don’t people know he doesn’t drink?
So today we’ve got this story in the San Francisco Chronicle about how Barack Obama needs a good turnout among wine drinkers to have a chance of winning the California Democratic primary.
The big showdown between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama could come down to California’s “beer-drinking Democrats” versus its “wine and cheese” liberals – with the Bay Area playing a pivotal role in the outcome.
Pollster Mark DiCamillo, who has been taking the state’s political pulse for 30 years, describes the beer vote as mostly blue-collar workers, the elderly and ethnic Democrats, especially Latinos, in the Los Angeles area and rural parts of the state.
The more liberal, more educated, wine-and-cheese crowd congregates here in the Bay Area, where more than a quarter of the ballots will be cast in the Democratic primary Feb. 5, he says.
And as DiCamillo sees it, the blue-collar group likes Clinton and the wine-and-cheesers go more for Obama.
“If Obama has any chance of winning California, we should see it here in the Bay Area,” DiCamillo said. “And he’ll have to be winning here by double digits” – no easy task, considering the Clintons’ long popularity in the area.
Monday’s post about wine prices and perception caused Josh Mishell of Flying Dog Ales and BeerDinners.com to drop me a note about an episode of Penn & Teller’s Bullshit! (Showtime) featuring a “water steward” hawking high-priced bottled water — in bottles being filled from a garden hose out back.
I’m not sure what to think of the cover for the latest All About Beer magazine that prominently features New Belgium Brewing co-founder Kim Jordan with a headline that reads She makes America’s Hippest Beer.
Jay Brooks writes inside about the greening of America’s breweries (New Belgium is at the forefront), but it’s also made clear that “hippest” on the front refers to Fat Tire Amber Ale.
Look, I’m a fan of New Belgium (had Fat Tire with dinner in a restaurant Saturday) and have been writing for AABM for more than 14 years. I’m certainly not trying to pick a fight, but the hippest beer in America? In further considering the idea I came to a series of (eventually painful) conclusions:
* I have no idea which beer America’s drinkers might vote hippest.
* I don’t care if my beer his hip.
* Therefore I might just be old.
I finally figured this out after a comment from jesskidden in the discussion about “extreme beers”:
I also noted that I found using “sick” as a synonym for “great” (especially for beer) to be confusing- “This beer tastes SICK!”
This wasn’t a Belgian brewer talking about his lambic going through a bad phase. This was more like the e-mail I received from a brewer who talked about a store’s sick selection, meaning I’d like it.
Hey, it’s good that the next generation thinks beer (“craft,” “extreme,” “micro” or whatever) can be sick.
Now I’m wondering why I find the question of who brews the sickest beer more compelling than who brews the hippest.
– Philly Beer Week “officially” lasts 10 days (March 7-16), but it starts with a festival a week earlier. And it looks like they plan to pack at least a month’s worth of events in. Quite a schedule at the website.
And they’ve even got this cute commercial:
– And a story that just makes you smile — The Seattle Times updates what Charles and Rose Ann Finkel have been doing since buying back Pike Brewing in 2006. Let’s saw they aren’t resting on their considerable laurels. “Now our overall goal is to make it a world-class brewery,” Charles said.
There are few stories that raise the hair on the back of a good beer geek’s neck as fast as those about the ongoing battles between American Bud and Czech Bud.
Thus Evan Rail’s report that the often-rumored privatization of Budejovicky Budvar won’t be happening for at least two more years should produce a few smiles.
The government still plans to transform the company into a joint-stock company in preparation of future privatization, but will own 100% of the shares. It will be left to the government that emerges after the 2010 elections to decide about privatization.
I can’t march in lockstep with the “American Bud bad, Czech Bud good” crowd, so maybe I think this is a good news for a different reason. As Rail suggested in one of his first post at the appropriately named Beer Culture blog were Budvar privatized then Anheuser-Busch might be the best fit.
Just look what has happened when classic brands have ended up in the hands of SABMiller and InBev. And make no mistake, if the brewery is sold it will be a brewing conglomerate.
It’s a Czech beer. It should belong to the Czechs. It’s good news that it’s going to continue that way — at least for now.
Not only do I not care if my beer is hip, but I also will not cast my vote for president (in the primary or general election) based upon which candidate I would rather have a beer with.
I’m not sure what to think of the cover for the latest