Brookston Beer Bulletin

Jay R. Brooks on Beer

Socialize

Announcing Session Beer Month

By

session-month
Back in February, during SF Beer Week, it hit me that we needed a Session Beer Festival in the Bay Area. California is already known for big, hoppy beers but I was convinced that not everybody wants an extreme beer all the time. Don’t get me wrong, I love a hop bomb IPA or an Imperial Stout as much as the next beer geek, but not every day of the week. So I started talking it up, mentioning the idea here and there. I spoke to the San Francisco Brewers Guild, called Joe Tucker from RateBeer, and brought it up with several brewers. Everybody liked the concept.

Somehow word reached John Martin and Drake’s/Triple Rock. Their wonderful marketing director, Kelsey Williams, picked up the ball and has been running with it ever since. After discussions with all of us, she’s set a juggernaut in motion. First, at least in the Bay Area, we’ve declared that May is “Session Beer Month,” and we’re calling on all breweries, bars, restaurants and beer stores to create some sort of event to create awareness of session beers. This is the first year, obviously, so we’re not expecting too much this time around, but are looking at the long haul, hoping to create momentum so that next year Session Beer Month will be huge, or at least will grow bigger each year.

To facilitate that, she’s also created a Facebook Page and Twitter account for SessionBeerMay. Check them out; “like us” and “follow us,” and most importantly, if you’re in a position to help, please consider creating a session beer event this month. If you’re not, please consider supporting the effort by drinking session beers throughout the month. If your favorite place doesn’t have any, ask them to carry at least one session beer. Although it may spark an unwinnable debate, we’re defining “session beers” as 4.5% a.b.v. or below. We accept that sometimes a 5% beer can be considered sessionable, but for our purposes — with tongue firmly in cheek — those we’ll consider “imperial session beer” or “extreme session beers.”

Session-Beer-Month

On the Facebook page, Kelsey’s drafted our mission statement.

A Manifesto:

Beer lovers, we are in the midst of a revolution. We have thrown off the fetters of the fizzy yellows and clamored for change. To supplant the sameness, we sought and found the EXTREME. We now have Triple IPAs and World Wide Stouts, Bourbon Barrel Aged Imperials, Belgian Quads, and all manner of High Gravity beers stuffed with fruits, spices, malts, hops. We’ve reached for the outermost precipices of beer, and succeeded.

Yet, in our noble quest for more innovation and more experimentation we have flown past many classic, well-loved, craft beer styles that may have seemed, due to their modest alcohol contents, a little too close to the weak, yellow, fizz water we’d escaped.

We have left behind these beers of import, beers perfectly suited to a long conversation at the pub, a picnic at the park, a post-hike refreshment, or a mid-summer beach trip, and beers that one can happily imbibe over the course of a few hours and leave satisfied and still standing.

We call to you beer lovers. Do not disregard a well-made, flavorful Bitter, Mild, Scottish Ale, Dry Stout, or any other Session beer because you perceive a lower alcohol content as a sign of the weak and bland. Allow us to prove that these beers are worthy of consideration. They, just like the extreme beers, have their place in our fridges and on our local taps.

We declare the month of May for Session beers. Beers that need not be analyzed, dissected, sipped, or sniffed in abundance. Delicious beers that not only enhance a good conversation but can extend it through multiple rounds.

Raise a Pint. Raise a Few. Spread the word in May; Less is most certainly more.

Amen. That’s the idea, nailed up to the electronic doors of the church of extreme beer, in the hopes of sparking a session reformation.

The next step? That’s easy: A Session Beer Festival. This year the NorCal Session Fest, will be held modestly at Drake’s Brewing in San Leandro on Saturday, May 25, 2013 from 12-4 PM. As befits session beers, the festival will benefit the East Bay Bike Coalition. Tickets to the event are $30 in advance and $35 at the door. You can buy tickets online at Brown Paper Tickets. In addition to the beer, local food trucks will be on-site with tasty food for sale. Please join us for the first beer festival celebrating session beers in the Bay Area. Let’s make this an annual event. I’ll see you there.

Session

UNICEF Study Of Underage Drinking Yields Surprising Results

By

unicef
Actually, the results are only surprising if you’re a neo-prohibitionist or you’ve gotten all your information from them about underage drinking in the form of their relentless propaganda, posturing and fund-raising scare tactics. What a new study by UNICEF found was that the U.S. has the least number, or percentage, of kids drinking underage compared with nearly thirty developed countries. They looked at the drinking patterns of people 11, 13 and 15 years of age.

The study, Child Well-Being in Rich Countries, showed that overall the U.S. is in the bottom third, coming in number 26 of 29. Sad, really, but not terribly surprising if you’ve been paying attention. They looked at a variety of factors, and in Dimension 4 they tackled “risk behaviors,” including alcohol. Here’s how the 29 countries stacked up.

alchol-chart

Other findings that contradict the standard anti-alcohol agenda and how they tend to frame the state of underage drinking include the following.

  • More than three-quarters of the 21 countries also saw declines in alcohol use by young people – as measured by the proportion of 11-, 13- and 15-year olds who report having been drunk on at least two occasions.
  • The biggest falls were again recorded in Germany (where the alcohol abuse rate fell from 18% to under 12%) and in the United Kingdom (which saw a decline from 30% to just under 20%).

The Washington Post reported these findings, but curiously spun the story as sort of a win for the neo-prohibitionists. The author, Max Fisher, suggests that because the U.S. is the country least likely to have kids drinking it “lends a bit of credence to the U.S.’s relatively late and well-enforced drinking age, unusual in the Western world.” Of course, there’s no causal link for such a statement whatsoever, but such is the power of decades of propaganda. As the Post’s foreign affairs blogger, he should probably stick to what he knows. He continues, saying that the U.S. is “joined by the tee-totaling kids of Iceland, the Netherlands and, believe it or not, Italy.” Iceland’s minium age is 20 (although “possession or consumption of alcohol by minors is not an offense”), the Netherlands is 16 (for alcohol that’s under 15% a.b.v., 18 if over) and Italy is 16. So there’s no real pattern that can be gleaned from the countries with the lowest reported underage drinking. And in fact the rest of the top ten are either 16, 18 or even have no minimum age, so trying to link a higher minimum drinking age with lower consumption is misleading at best, a little obnoxiously anti-alcohol at worst.

In the next paragraph he then contradicts himself. “Despite the strong wine cultures in Italy, France and Spain – or maybe because of them, given the degree to which it cultivates drinking “to enjoy,” as I’ve heard many French say – children in those countries are among the least likely to get drunk.” So in those “drinking cultures,” the kids aren’t as likely to get drunk for cultural reasons, but in our drinking culture it’s due to more stringent laws? With that attitude, no wonder he was surprised by the results of UNICEF’s study.

But in two of the countries with the most vocal anti-alcohol organizations, Great Britain and the U.S., not only are both countries lower than the propaganda might suggest, both nations have falling rates of this measure, too. In the U.S., we dropped from 12% to 6%, half of what it was just eight years before, And in the UK, it dropped from 30% to below 20%, falling more than a third. But as we’re learning, for many anti-alcohol organizations it’s not about results or the mission, it’s about punishment or profit for themselves. Even as rates of underage drinking continue to fall, their rhetoric increasingly gets turned up, becoming more radicalized and intransigent as they try to squeeze the last dollars out of their followers. It probably won’t surprise you to find out that not one of the usual neo-prohibitionist groups whose websites I checked even mentioned this study, despite it having been published over a week ago. If the results had been different, it would have been on their respective homepages immediately.

child-drinking

Beer Flavor Triggers Dopamine In The Brain

By

brain-2
An interesting study recently conducted at the Indiana University School of Medicine shows a preliminary result that “[t]he taste of beer, without any effect from alcohol itself, can trigger dopamine release in the brain, which is associated with drinking and other drugs of abuse.”

The study itself, Beer Flavor Provokes Striatal Dopamine Release in Male Drinkers: Mediation by Family History of Alcoholism was published last week in the journal Neuropsychopharmacology. From the press release:

Using positron emission tomography (PET), the researchers tested 49 men with two scans, one in which they tasted beer, and the second in which they tasted Gatorade, looking for evidence of increased levels of dopamine, a brain neurotransmitter long associated with alcohol and other drugs of abuse. The scans showed significantly more dopamine activity following the taste of beer than the sports drink. Moreover, the effect was significantly greater among participants with a family history of alcoholism.

“We believe this is the first experiment in humans to show that the taste of an alcoholic drink alone, without any intoxicating effect from the alcohol, can elicit this dopamine activity in the brain’s reward centers,” said David A. Kareken, Ph.D., professor of neurology at the IU School of Medicine and the deputy director of the Indiana Alcohol Research Center.

The stronger effect in participants with close alcoholic relatives suggests that the release of dopamine in response to such alcohol-related cues may be an inherited risk factor for alcoholism, said Dr. Kareken.

Research for several decades has linked dopamine to the consumption of various drugs of abuse, although researchers have differing interpretations of the neurotransmitter’s role. Sensory cues that are closely associated with drug intoxication (ranging from tastes and smells to the sight of a tavern) have long been known to spark cravings and induce treatment relapse in recovering alcoholics. Many neuroscientists believe that dopamine plays a critical role in such cravings.

The study participants received a very small amount of their preferred beer — 15 milliliters — over a 15-minute time period, enabling them to taste the beer without resulting in any detectable blood alcohol level or intoxicating effect.

Using a PET scanning compound that targets dopamine receptors in the brain, the researchers were able to assess changes in dopamine levels occurring after the participants tasted the liquids.

In addition to the PET scan results, participants reported an increased beer craving after tasting beer, without similar responses after tasting the sports drink — even though many thought the Gatorade actually tasted better, said Brandon G. Oberlin, Ph.D., post-doctoral fellow and first author of the paper.

With the study only using a cohort of under fifty people, the results will probably not settle the question, and the UK Guardian’s science writer takes issue with it in Beer, dopamine and brain scans make an intoxicating mix. But it seems to be a good first step toward a better understanding of how dopamine is related to drinking and even alcoholism. The most interesting find is that it appears that dopamine is released by the brain even if there’s no alcohol present, just the taste of beer is all that the brain seems to need. If further studies bear out the findings, this could be significant.

852-06435128

It’s Done: ABI & Modelo Merger Deal

By

abim
The inevitable approval of the merger between Anheuser-Busch InBev and Grupo Modelo moved one step closer today, according to Harry Schuhmacher’s Beer Business Daily, who writes that a “consent decree has been filed with a federal judge today seeking court approval of the ABI-Modelo-Constellation deal with the DOJ. News of the settlement agreement comes before the April 23 court deadline to report to U.S. District Court.”

Apparently, “[t]he agreement is close to the one A-B revised in February, selling the big Piedras Negras brewery to Constellation and allowing them to some time to expand that facility to brew all of US Modelo beers (and any others Constellation wants to brew there). But the agreement also includes ‘certain distribution guarantees for Constellation in the United States.'”

Constellation Brands released a statement, Anheuser-Busch InBev and Constellation Brands Announce Revised Agreement for Complete Divestiture of U.S. Business of Grupo Modelo, outlining the deal, and the transaction website, Global Beer Leader, also has a statement.

abimo-chart

Here’s part of ABI’s press release:

Anheuser-Busch InBev and Constellation Brands Announce Revised Agreement for Complete Divestiture of U.S. Business of Grupo Modelo

AB InBev to sell Piedras Negras brewery and grant perpetual rights to Constellation for Corona and the Modelo brands in the U.S. for USD 2.9 billion

Constellation to acquire 50% of Crown it does not own for USD 1.85 billion

Terms and merits of combination between AB InBev and Grupo Modelo relating to global deal remain unchanged

AB InBev synergy projection revised to approximately USD 1 billion from USD 600 million

Anheuser-Busch InBev (Euronext: ABI) (NYSE: BUD) and Constellation Brands, Inc. (NYSE: STZ, STZ.B) today announced a revised agreement that establishes Crown Imports as the #3 producer and marketer of beer in the U.S. through a complete divestiture of Grupo Modelo’s (BMV: GMODELOC) U.S. business. The transaction establishes Crown as a fully owned entity of Constellation, and provides Constellation with independent brewing operations, Modelo’s full profit stream from all U.S. sales, and rights in perpetuity to the Grupo Modelo brands distributed by Crown in the U.S.

As part of AB InBev’s acquisition of the 50% of Grupo Modelo it does not already own, AB InBev has agreed to sell Compañía Cervecera de Coahuila, Grupo Modelo’s state-of-the-art brewery in Piedras Negras, Mexico, and grant perpetual brand licenses to Constellation for USD 2.9 billion, subject to a post-closing adjustment. This price is based on an assumed 2012 EBITDA of USD 310 million earned from manufacturing and licensing the Modelo brands for sale by the Crown joint venture, with an implied multiple of approximately 9 times. The sale of the brewery, which is located near the Texas border, would ensure independence of supply for Crown and provides Constellation with complete control of the production of the Modelo brands for marketing and distribution in the U.S.

AB InBev and Constellation have agreed to a three-year transition services agreement to ensure the smooth transition of the operation of the world-class brewery, which is fully self-sufficient, utilizes top-of-the-line technology and was built to be readily expanded to increase production capacity. During this 3 year timeframe, Constellation plans to invest approximately USD 400 million to expand the Piedras Negras facility, which will then enable it to supply 100% of Crown’s needs for the U.S. marketplace. Today, Piedras Negras fulfills approximately 60% of Crown’s current demand.

As previously announced on June 29, 2012, AB InBev has agreed to divest Grupo Modelo’s 50% stake in Crown, the joint venture between Modelo and Constellation, that currently imports and markets Modelo’s brands in the U.S., to Constellation. The transaction value remains USD 1.85 billion, providing Constellation 100% ownership and control of Crown.

Carlos Brito, Chief Executive Officer of AB InBev, commented, “The AB InBev and Grupo Modelo transaction has always been about Mexico and making Corona more global in all markets other than the U.S., where the brands will be owned and managed by Constellation. We are pleased to have reached this revised agreement that preserves the merits of the Grupo Modelo transaction while allowing us to move expeditiously to the Modelo integration process and the capture of approximately USD 1 billion of synergies, up from our original estimate of USD 600 million.”

Rob Sands, President and Chief Executive Officer of Constellation Brands, said, “The revised agreement with AB InBev will make Constellation’s Crown beer division a fully independent competitor and the third largest producer and marketer in the U.S. beer industry. This is a transformational acquisition for our company as we will hold perpetual rights to Corona and the Modelo brands distributed by Crown in the U.S. We will have autonomous control of production, distribution, marketing and promotion of these brands in the U.S. Bill Hackett, President of Crown, and his management team have decades of experience in the beer industry with the iconic Modelo brands. I am confident that all Constellation and Crown stakeholders, including our valued wholesalers, shareholders and employees will see the benefits of this amended agreement.”

Should be all over but the shouting at this point.

abim
NOTE: This NOT their official new logo, I made this up as a parody.

Lagunitas To Expand Into Distilling

By

lagunitas-circle
After a lengthy struggle where apparently one neighbor refused to willingly let his new neighbor build on the adjacent property in a way that was approved by nearly every governmental and environmental agency, Lagunitas owner Tony Magee’s plans for the land he owns in Tomales Bay was finally approved by the California state Coastal Commission in a 7-2 vote yesterday. The property is in the unincorporated town of Marshall in western Marin County.

tomales-bay-lagunitas

According to the Marin IJ, “The project, overlooking the east shore of Tomales Bay at the northwest corner of 17990 Highway 1, includes a residence, garage, brandy distillery producing about 280 gallons a year, an equipment barn, shed, hops shelter, two sheep shelters, a greenhouse, a new well, special wastewater treatment and related improvements. Three public tours for up to eight people each will be offered for four hours on Saturdays. Brandy will be offered for sale to those on tours, but no tastings will be allowed.”

“Magee and one employee plan to cultivate hops on 6 acres and English dessert grapes on 6 acres, and graze about 35 pair of lambs and ewes on 50 acres. Other livestock would include 100 chickens.” Five years ago, almost to the day, I wrote about Lagunitas planting hops on this same bit of land, in Lagunitas Plants Hops in Tomales Bay, and this was the view at that time.

lagunitas-hopyard

So the brandy should be interesting; micro-distilling is certainly a hot trend lately. I’m sure the hops they’ll be growing will be for Lagunitas beer, but I wonder if the 6 acres of grapes will be used for the brandy? It’s seem likely, but we’ll have to wait and see. I assume it will be a while before there’s any brandy to taste.

But I think my favorite part of this story is that in the headline, the newspaper refers to Lagunitas owner Tony Magee as a “beer baron.” Lagunitas has certainly become one of the bigger small breweries, but I’m not sure they’ve ventured into “beer baron” territory. Either way, I don’t think I’ll be able to not think of Tony as a beer baron in the future. I recently did a feature profile of Magee in the latest issue of Beer Connoisseur if you want to learn about Tony and Lagunitas. If only I’d known then that he was a beer baron.

Sweden Forbids Lust

By

sweden
I tend to think that the U.S. has a lock on the provincial, puritanical thinking that forbids so many odd features of everyday life, often anything to do with sex, while at the same time allowing violence with nary a sideways glance. I’ve never understood that, but maybe that’s just me. Anyway, apparently Sweden is similarly off the deep end on sex, something I would never have expected. A Danish brewer, Amager Bryghus, created a series of seven beers based on the seven deadly sins, with a different beer, and label, for each. They call them the Sinners Series.

Amager-sinner-series

Take a look at the seven labels below and see if you can guess which one Sweden decided had to be censored?

If you answered Lust, you’re correct. Here’s what the label looks like outside of Sweden.

lust-1

And here’s what it looks like inside Sweden.

lust-3

According to The Local, an English-language news website covering Sweden, the problem was that “Danish beer bottles ‘too sexy’ for Sweden.” Like some U.S. states and Canadian provinces, Sweden has government-run liquor stores, and they make the decisions as to what’s acceptable.

Sweden’s state-run liquor retailer has decided that the picture on the Lust bottle, which contains a sweet Belgian ale with a 9.2 percent alcohol content, doesn’t abide by Sweden’s alcohol etiquette.

“We can’t accept the label, it’s against Sweden’s alcohol laws,” Systembolaget spokesman Lennart Agén told The Local.

“It’s quite a sexual label.”

As a result, Systembolaget has told the brewers to remove or edit the picture if the beer is to be sold in Sweden. The brewers responded by simply blacking out the entire label so neither the woman nor the bath is visible at all.

But it wasn’t an easy process, according to the brewers.

“We had to go through ten attempts before they’d accept it,” Henrik Papsø, head of communications at the brewery, told The Local.

Still, it seems awfully weird that a cartoon woman that’s only suggestive at best tripped up the censors. And I though we were prudes.

Amager-lust

Olympia Beer Offers Million Dollar Prize For Finding Bigfoot

By

bigfoot-sasquatch
In what has to be one of the most unusual marketing efforts by a large brewer, Olympia Beer has offered to pay $1 million dollars — in increments of $25,000 a year for the next four decades — to anyone who can find conclusive evidence of a live Bigfoot. The contest is the brainchild of Evan and Daren Metropoulos, who recently bought Pabst Brewing Co., which also owns the Olympia brand.

bigfoot-reward

Full details and rules can be found at OlympiaBigfoot.com, but here’s their “Mission Statement” for finding Bigfoot:

Olympia Beer and Bigfoot have been leaving footprints together in the Pacific Northwest since 1896.

We have been sharing the same backyard for over a century and we believe it’s time to do what has never been done, and that is to offer a one million dollar reward to anyone who can ensure the safe capture of Bigfoot. When we say safe capture that means Bigfoot has to be alive and breathing folks, with no wounds. That’s right you can’t use any act of violence, no guns/knives/boxing gloves/nets/etc, only sugar or sweets to lure him in.

You must register to participate in the search. To report your discovery of irrefutable evidence of the existence of Bigfoot, click on the “Submit Capture Report” link on the left and follow the instructions to report your evidence. You participation in the search is subject to the complete Official Rules.

To aid us in this adventure, Olympia Beer is partnering with The Falcon Project

The Falcon Project has been identified as “the most penetrative search for Bigfoot ever conducted in the United States.” They will conduct an aerial search for Sasquatch employing an unmanned airship with high definition thermal imaging camera equipment.

Sure, it’s a publicity stunt, but it’s a funny one. And what if someone actually does it? Apparently 14% of all Americans believe Sasquatch to be real, while another 14% say they’re not sure.

paterson-bigfoot

Winners must provide “irrefutable evidence” of Bigfoot’s existence and, according to the rules, may include “DNA Evidence.” From the rules:

“Bigfoot” refers to a previously undiscovered species of upright, bipedal hominid, native to North America existing contemporaneously with the Contest Period or the twenty-five (25) year period immediately prior to the Contest Period. There is no set type or amount of evidence required to establish proof for purposes of this Contest other than that all evidence presented must satisfy the Judging Panel. Evidence may include, but is not limited to DNA Evidence. DNA Evidence may include hair, blood, tissue or saliva that proves the DNA sequence of the donor shows that said donor resides in the primate evolutionary family tree, among other apes or hominids, but does not have the same genetic markers and DNA sequence as any known species. Evidence may also include “Visual Proof” of a live physical body. Physical remains may be considered as evidence provided that it can be conclusively demonstrated that the date of death pre-dated the Contest Period. Visual Proof shall not include footprints, bone fragments, inconclusive skeletal remains, or any other non-definitive evidence of the existence of Bigfoot. Any photo or video taken with photographic or video equipment is not sufficient to qualify as evidence in and of itself for consideration in the Contest, but may be considered as supporting evidence.
NO HARM SHOULD BE DONE TO BIGFOOT OR ANY LIVING CREATURE AS A RESULT OF PARTICIPATION IN THIS CONTEST. ANY EVIDENCE OF SUCH ACTIVITY SHALL LEAD TO DISQUALIFICATION FROM THE CONTEST AND NOTIFICATION TO THE PROPER LEGAL AUTHORITIES.

Why Success Is Killing the Craft Brew Industry

By

money-bag
This ran in The Street a couple of weeks ago, and I meant to post it before but it kept getting pushed down in the queue. Portland writer Jason Notte does an interesting job dissecting the industry and the recent kerfuffles over taxes in Why Success Is Killing the Craft Brew Industry. If you follow the business side of the beer industry, it’s worth a read.

yellow

The Neo-Prohibitionist Agenda: Punishment Or Profit

By

target-alcohol
Regular bulletin readers know well my disdain for the hypocritical anti-alcohol organizations trying their damndest to remove all alcohol from society or, failing that, make everyone who makes, sells or enjoys alcohol as miserable as they are. Not surprisingly, at the recent Alcohol Policy 16 Conference, which took place in Arlington, Virginia in early April, they revealed just how far their hypocrisy extends yet again.

Angela Logomasini, who attended the conference on behalf of Wine Policy, noted that during a panel discussion on alcohol tax policy that the “entire discussion revolved around how to lobby for taxes and profit in the process.” Given that the subtitle of the entire conference was “Building Blocks for Sound Alcohol Policies,” she can be excused for believing that the discussion might involve “research related to the impact of taxes on alcohol abuse” or whether “higher taxes really reduce alcohol abuse.” Such reasonable topics, however, were not even discussed. Instead, as I said, the entirety of the talk “revolved around how to lobby for taxes and profit in the process.”

Logomasini continued her description of the panel discussion:

Rebecca Ramirez of the Bloomberg School of Public Health at Johns Hopkins University presented her qualitative research on the framing of pro-tax messaging for use in lobbying campaigns. It included interviews with policymakers and activists involved in these campaigns. Ramirez’s discussion eventually turned to earmarking, which is apparently the key reason many groups are involved. Officials with one disability advocacy group, she noted, told her flat out they simply didn’t care about the public health impacts of taxes. They were in the game solely to get some of the tax revenue steered toward their organization.

She wonders aloud how that might serve the public good, and it appears she’s not the only one. Surprisingly enough, Bruce Lee Livingston, sheriff of my local anti-alcohol posse Alcohol Justice, disagrees, apparently believing profiting from lobbying efforts does not serve the public health. He takes a different view. Livingston “commented during the question and answer portion that activists are unable to get taxes high enough to actually produce positive public health benefits. Rather, he called for a ‘charge-for-harm’ approach, which is based on the assumption that anyone who drinks deserves to be punished.” That’s the same bullshit approach he took trying to get an additional tax on alcohol in San Francisco in 2010, all but writing the script for Supervisor John Avalos’ ultimately failed Alcohol Mitigation Fee Ordinance.

So, as Angela Logomasini observes, there were only two approaches or reasons to raise alcohol taxes brought up by essentially every neo-prohibitionist group in the country, or at least in attendance. As I’ve been ranting for years now, none of those reasons had anything to do with public health, or safety, or any other lofty goals. These self-proclaimed “public health advocates” only want to raise taxes on alcohol for two reasons: either to enrich themselves and profit from the alcohol companies their groups target or to punish every single person who dares to enjoy a pint of beer or glass of wine. And yet they still maintain non-profit status.

If nothing else, this should teach us that like many modern charitable organizations, they’ve strayed very far from their original purpose and self-preservation and profit are their only motives now. As I’ve said many, many times, they need a reason to exist and so they keep reinventing themselves in order to survive and keep their — in the parlance of Mel Brooks’ Blazing Saddles — phony baloney jobs. And so raising money becomes the driving force, not any interest in bettering the world, instead just pandering to their members’ fears, paranoia and prejudices. And if all of us who enjoy beer, and drink responsibly, get punished in the process, so what? Apparently, that’s just a bonus.

No alcoholic beverages

Tiger Woods Hits Hole In One Into Fan’s Beer Cup

By

golfball
It’s now being widely reported, including by Business Insider, that at the Masters at Augusta National earlier today golfer Tiger Woods on the third hole drove his ball into a cup of beer held by someone along the fairway watching the golf tournament. Apparently there’s no picture or video because inexplicably one of golf’s most famous events is not being televised.

Tiger Woods