Third Stone Brown is one of the under-rated ales at Empyrean. Sometimes overshadowed by it's dark brother the vanilla porter and shunned by those who think that they don't like dark beers. As Empyrean's website states it shatters the myth that dark beers have to be filling. There's hints of roasted caramel and even a little well-hidden chocolate. You can definitely enjoy more than one of these babies!
Friday, January 29, 2010
Beer Review: Empyrean Ales Third Stone Brown
Third Stone Brown is one of the under-rated ales at Empyrean. Sometimes overshadowed by it's dark brother the vanilla porter and shunned by those who think that they don't like dark beers. As Empyrean's website states it shatters the myth that dark beers have to be filling. There's hints of roasted caramel and even a little well-hidden chocolate. You can definitely enjoy more than one of these babies!
Thursday, January 28, 2010
What's On Your Mind?
Are you the type of person who says what's on your mind to those around you? Or are you one who always tries to maintain a cordial facade, even you've got problems with the other person? I've always believed that letting people know where you stand is the best policy. Granted there are extremes to that way of dealing with people, most of us know people who have no filter between their brain and their mouth, with every stupid thought spilling out at the most inappropriate times. there is such a thing as discretion...and manners. If the guy in the next booth thinks that I'm ugly, or that my mostache is crooked, I don't really care to hear his opinion, but if someone with whom I regularly deal with is offended by something that I did or said, or if my actions affect another in some way, then by all means, speak up! For many people it's the fear of confrontation; they have an issue with someone, so instead of dealing with it with the person involved, they get someone involved: a relative, friend, co-worker, in effect gossiping about that person. Often that third party cannot affect any change in the person being gossiped about and is left with a negative image. If they can do something the third party becomes stuck in the middle, hearing partial information when direct, face-to-face communication would be more effective.
Maybe it's a difference in culture between the East Coast and the Midwest, maybe it's just that I don't like behind the scene back-stabbing.
Maybe it's a difference in culture between the East Coast and the Midwest, maybe it's just that I don't like behind the scene back-stabbing.
Wednesday, January 27, 2010
Beer Review: Empyrean Ales Limited Belgian Pale Ale
The glass appeared without much of a head, but think that it sat on the serving tray for a few minutes before it made it to the table. There was some nice lacing as I drank it down though. There was some pronounced hoppiness, but not overwhelming. The color was a pale gold with very little cloudiness. There was a faint citrus aroma with hints of pine. I'd estimate about a 6% ABV. Overall a good solid brew, but crisp and clear enough for a hot day (if we ever get one of those again). Good reaction from the others at the table, including the Budweiser drinkers!
Wednesday, January 20, 2010
Unity and Diversity
When I was growing up in the Rosedale neighborhood of Queens New York we were surrounded by an ethnic group from a country that had warmer weather than we did, spoke a Latin-derived language, and whose older members spoke little or no English. They typically had large families, with several generations frequently all living together in the same house, were overwhelmingly Catholic and were connected to a subculture of crime. Who were these people? Not the Mexicans, though you might be forgiven for thinking so, but it was the Italians. Just next door to us was the Spitale family. Grandma Spitale, who spoke about seven words of English, presided over her family from the balacony of the two family house. Mr. & Mrs. Spitale spoke both Italian and English; Mr. Spitale was a trash man, which seemed to be so overwhelmingly staffed with Italians that many referred to it as 'Mussolini's Army'. Lenny Spitale, who was a year older than I was, spoke no Italian at all is a pharmacist.
Every non-English-speaking ethnic group has had to contend with the language barrier when arriving here. Many of us are descended from those people. In general, the generation that first arrives here speaks little or no English. The children of these immigrants speak both, their family's language at home and English at school and with their friends. The grandchildren are usually indistinguishable from children whose ancestors arrived one hundred years ago or more.
One of the differences is that these days you see more efforts to communicate to these immigrants in their native languages. Some folks see this as a bad thing, that immigrants should be required to learn English before getting a job, receiving government benefits or being served in a restaurant or grocery store. Most of these people have no idea how hard it is to learn a new language as an adult, or how hard many of these new immigrants labor to learn English. Yet we take cheap shots at immigrants for their lack of facility with the language, when our own ancestors were in the same boat.
Every non-English-speaking ethnic group has had to contend with the language barrier when arriving here. Many of us are descended from those people. In general, the generation that first arrives here speaks little or no English. The children of these immigrants speak both, their family's language at home and English at school and with their friends. The grandchildren are usually indistinguishable from children whose ancestors arrived one hundred years ago or more.
One of the differences is that these days you see more efforts to communicate to these immigrants in their native languages. Some folks see this as a bad thing, that immigrants should be required to learn English before getting a job, receiving government benefits or being served in a restaurant or grocery store. Most of these people have no idea how hard it is to learn a new language as an adult, or how hard many of these new immigrants labor to learn English. Yet we take cheap shots at immigrants for their lack of facility with the language, when our own ancestors were in the same boat.
Monday, January 18, 2010
Pat Robertson and Pacts With The Devil
Just when you thought Brit Hume was bad with his "my religion is better than Tiger's religion" pronouncement, along comes Pat Robertson of 'The 700 Club' to declare that Haiti pretty much got what they deserved because they won their freedom from the French by making a deal with the Devil and are now reaping the consequenses. It wasn't clear from his remarks whether he thought that God sent the earthquake in response to this satanic pact, or the Devil was causing it (which would mean that he was reneging on his side of the pact). This is the same guy who thought that Hurricane Katrina caused the destruction in New Orleans due to legalized abortion and gays. The fact that there are gays in all fifty states and abortion is legal in the whole country didn't seem to faze him. (maybe God should have smitten Iowa, since they legalized gay marriage last year).
Now if your theology is such that your god kills people en masse for some categories of transgressions, where do you draw the line? It seems to me that there are a lot of things that would fall within the biblical parameters of sin and therefore worthy of earthquakes and hurricanes. How do you keep track?
Now if your theology is such that your god kills people en masse for some categories of transgressions, where do you draw the line? It seems to me that there are a lot of things that would fall within the biblical parameters of sin and therefore worthy of earthquakes and hurricanes. How do you keep track?
Running Up the Score
Why is scoring a lot of points sometimes bad? I read this morning how, when the Minnesota Viking were up 27-3 with less than two minutes left, they scored another touchdown, and were agressively criticized by a Dallas Cowboys player for "running up the score". Isn't that the whole point of the game? To score as many points as you can while preventing the other team from scoring any? Should the Vikings have let the Cowboys score one of their own so that they'd feel better about themselves?
Friday, January 15, 2010
What is Patriotism?
This article is a result of my having hijacked a couple of well-meaning facebook statuses urging people to "support the troops" and politicized them. I stand by my opinion, but was out of line expressing that opinion where I did. I apologized to the two who were affected by my ill-considered words.
The second thing that I need to make clear before I proceed with my rant is that my firstborn son is currently serving as a Naval Petty Officer at Guantanamo. My youngest son told me the other day that he intends to join the Naval Reserves. I love both of these young men and am extremely proud of the decision they each have made to serve our country. The pride and respect that I have for them extends to all of our service men and women; they do a tough job.
During the administration of President George W. Bush, many on the Republican side of Congress, as well as many conservative talk show hosts put forth the proposition that any criticism of the administration's policies in Iraq and Afghanistan was unpatriotic and even worse, undermined our troops and put them in further harm, somehow enboldening our enemies. They claimed that one could not support then troops without supporting "the mission", i.e. the President and his administration. With this position, I strenuously disagree.
For one, I do not accept the premise that lack of unanimity at home makes our enemies better able to kill our soldiers, or more likely to attack. The enemy that we are currently "officially" dealing with fanatically hates our country, our culture, the dominant religion (for that matter, all religions other than Islam) and needs no further excuse to execute acts of terror to further their aims. Another premise that is put forth is that dissent at home demoralizes our fighting men & women, damaging morale. I have two answers to that. One is that these troops are from here. Surely they encountered opposition to the war before they ever left and understand that dissent is an important part of a healthy and free society. Second, even if our soldiers don't agree that dissent is healthy, surely they would view opposition as a misguided minority that doesn't understand what war is all about and whose opinion is unimportant. I have yet to hear about any service men or women who were demoralized over any opinions expressed in the civilian sector.
Lack of evidence of any harm to the troops done by dissent leads me to conclude that it's merely a ploy to strengthen the position of the party in power. Which causes me to wonder if the right wing is still a staunch supporter of the war now that a Democrat is Commander-in-Chief. These folks who painted any questioning of adminsistration motives as un-American and treasonous, do they now stand 100% behind the current President?
Dissent and the right to free speech is part of what our military protects. Both are a key part of what makes this country great and no dilution of those rights should be tolerated.
Initially I was a supporter of the invasion of Afghanistan, mainly because the former Taliban government gave aid, comfort and sancuary to Al-Quaeda. Mainly by using Special Forces and small elite units, we toppled that government. But what are we doing there now? propping up a corrupt President? What about Iraq. No connection to Al-Quaeda was demonstrated, no trace of weapons of mass destruction or indication that they would be used against us...yet still we invaded. We stayed with no clear plan and succeeded in seeding terrorists where none previously existed. Lies were told and intelligence faked to justify our invasion and I can't oppose this? And the current administration is shaping up to be not much better than the last.
Patriotism, loving and supporting one's country, is not blind jingism or mindless flag waving. It is a conviction to retain what makes it great and purge that which weakens it.
The second thing that I need to make clear before I proceed with my rant is that my firstborn son is currently serving as a Naval Petty Officer at Guantanamo. My youngest son told me the other day that he intends to join the Naval Reserves. I love both of these young men and am extremely proud of the decision they each have made to serve our country. The pride and respect that I have for them extends to all of our service men and women; they do a tough job.
During the administration of President George W. Bush, many on the Republican side of Congress, as well as many conservative talk show hosts put forth the proposition that any criticism of the administration's policies in Iraq and Afghanistan was unpatriotic and even worse, undermined our troops and put them in further harm, somehow enboldening our enemies. They claimed that one could not support then troops without supporting "the mission", i.e. the President and his administration. With this position, I strenuously disagree.
For one, I do not accept the premise that lack of unanimity at home makes our enemies better able to kill our soldiers, or more likely to attack. The enemy that we are currently "officially" dealing with fanatically hates our country, our culture, the dominant religion (for that matter, all religions other than Islam) and needs no further excuse to execute acts of terror to further their aims. Another premise that is put forth is that dissent at home demoralizes our fighting men & women, damaging morale. I have two answers to that. One is that these troops are from here. Surely they encountered opposition to the war before they ever left and understand that dissent is an important part of a healthy and free society. Second, even if our soldiers don't agree that dissent is healthy, surely they would view opposition as a misguided minority that doesn't understand what war is all about and whose opinion is unimportant. I have yet to hear about any service men or women who were demoralized over any opinions expressed in the civilian sector.
Lack of evidence of any harm to the troops done by dissent leads me to conclude that it's merely a ploy to strengthen the position of the party in power. Which causes me to wonder if the right wing is still a staunch supporter of the war now that a Democrat is Commander-in-Chief. These folks who painted any questioning of adminsistration motives as un-American and treasonous, do they now stand 100% behind the current President?
Dissent and the right to free speech is part of what our military protects. Both are a key part of what makes this country great and no dilution of those rights should be tolerated.
Initially I was a supporter of the invasion of Afghanistan, mainly because the former Taliban government gave aid, comfort and sancuary to Al-Quaeda. Mainly by using Special Forces and small elite units, we toppled that government. But what are we doing there now? propping up a corrupt President? What about Iraq. No connection to Al-Quaeda was demonstrated, no trace of weapons of mass destruction or indication that they would be used against us...yet still we invaded. We stayed with no clear plan and succeeded in seeding terrorists where none previously existed. Lies were told and intelligence faked to justify our invasion and I can't oppose this? And the current administration is shaping up to be not much better than the last.
Patriotism, loving and supporting one's country, is not blind jingism or mindless flag waving. It is a conviction to retain what makes it great and purge that which weakens it.
Monday, January 11, 2010
Top Ten Reasons to Attend a Certain Christmas...Holiday...Annual...Party
10. Broadway theme will include authentic rude New Yorkers.
9. Excitement of attending a non-holiday party in the midst of treacherous roads and life-threatening wind chills.
8. Prize drawing will include all expenses paid February dream week in Omaha with Scott Collins.
7. "Casino Night" eliminated, replaced by "Michael Vick's Dog Fight Night".
6. New healthy alternative whole wheat prime rib.
5. Slide show contains subliminal message causing all members of the executive committee do the Electric Slide whenever someone uses the phrase "Be the Best at Getting Better".
4. Pre-party drug screening.
3. Night Crew
2. Hypnotist to auto-suggest that a certain store director is the mechanical bull from last year.
1. President's & Vice President's speeches to be lip-synched by that drunk guy from Hastings.
Saturday, January 9, 2010
Beer Review: Sam Adams Scotch Ale
Dark red-amber with a wimpy little head that died off quickly. Tea-like taste, not much "smokiness", even though that's what they promote. That being said, this is a solid, full-bodied brew with a strong malty base, not much in the way of hoppiness. Could be matched well with barbeque.Wednesday, January 6, 2010
Beer Review: Sam Adams Boston Ale
I'm of two minds on this one: I think that non-craft beer drinkers would like this one, and it's very drinkable, but there's nothing about it that jumps out at you. Pretty weak head, dissipating from about 1/4 of the glass down to a narrow ring pretty quickly. Not as dark as the Boston Lager, kind of a light amber-ish color. The malt outweighs the hops, but neither really dominates. I can imagine using this as a stealth brew to get some Bud & Miller drinkers to try to more complicated styles. Sssshhhhh.
Monday, January 4, 2010
Fox News Commentator Thinks Tiger Woods' Religion Not Good Enough
In a discussion about Tiger Woods on Sunday morning, Fox News' Brit Hume suggested that Tiger Woods ditch his Buddhist faith and become a Christian because Buddhism "...doesn't offer the kind of forgiveness and redemption that is offered by the Christian faith..." He went on to urge Woods to become a Christian so he could "...make a total recovery and be a great example to the world...".
In my not-so-humble opinion, this is wrong on several counts. First, is a news program the proper place for a game of "my religion is better (more true) than your religion"? If Fox News were a religion program, specifically a Christian religious program, I would say "no problem", there are church sponsored and Christian-oriented programs and infomercials all over the airwaves. These programs are for Christians and by Christians and don't masquerade as "news".
My second objection is the propriety of publically labelling another's faith as inferior. One of the things that make this a great country is the religious pluralism that is part of our national character. No one is required to join any particular religion, nor are those outside the established flock forced to pay an "unbeliever tax" or accept second class citizen status. Hume was indulging in, at the very least, bad manners.
Third, it is arguable whether Christianity offers anything in the way of helping someone in Woods' position to "...make a total recovery and be a great example to the world" that other religions, specifically Buddhism, do not. This doesn't mean that I'm saying that Christianity can't help Woods recover and be a great example, I'm sure that it can, it has, for many people. What I'm saying is that many faiths have ways and means to help people get through these kinds of situations, and Woods apparently already has a faith that he can turn to if he chooses.
And finally, religious faith, whether it be Buddhist, Christian or anything else, is no guarantee that a person won't 'sin' and it's not assured that a person of faith will be able to turn his life around with that faith; it all comes down to the individual.
In my not-so-humble opinion, this is wrong on several counts. First, is a news program the proper place for a game of "my religion is better (more true) than your religion"? If Fox News were a religion program, specifically a Christian religious program, I would say "no problem", there are church sponsored and Christian-oriented programs and infomercials all over the airwaves. These programs are for Christians and by Christians and don't masquerade as "news".
My second objection is the propriety of publically labelling another's faith as inferior. One of the things that make this a great country is the religious pluralism that is part of our national character. No one is required to join any particular religion, nor are those outside the established flock forced to pay an "unbeliever tax" or accept second class citizen status. Hume was indulging in, at the very least, bad manners.
Third, it is arguable whether Christianity offers anything in the way of helping someone in Woods' position to "...make a total recovery and be a great example to the world" that other religions, specifically Buddhism, do not. This doesn't mean that I'm saying that Christianity can't help Woods recover and be a great example, I'm sure that it can, it has, for many people. What I'm saying is that many faiths have ways and means to help people get through these kinds of situations, and Woods apparently already has a faith that he can turn to if he chooses.
And finally, religious faith, whether it be Buddhist, Christian or anything else, is no guarantee that a person won't 'sin' and it's not assured that a person of faith will be able to turn his life around with that faith; it all comes down to the individual.
Fox News Commentator Thinks Tiger Woods' Religion Not Good Enough
In a discussion about Tiger Woods on Sunday morning, Fox News' Brit Hume suggested that Tiger Woods ditch his Buddhist faith and become a Christian because Buddhism "...doesn't offer the kind of forgiveness and redemption that is offered by the Christian faith..." He went on to urge Woods to become a Christian so he could "...make a total recovery and be a great example to the world...".
In my not-so-humble opinion, this is wrong on several counts. First, is a news program the proper place for a game of "my religion is better (more true) than your religion"? If Fox News were a religion program, specifically a Christian religious program, I would say "no problem", there are church sponsored and Christian-oriented programs and infomercials all over the airwaves. These programs are for Christians and by Christians and don't masquerade as "news".
My second objection is the propriety of publically labelling another's faith as inferior. One of the things that make this a great country is the religious pluralism that is part of our national character. No one is required to join any particular religion, nor are those outside the established flock forced to pay an "unbeliever tax" or accept second class citizen status. Hume was indulging in, at the very least, bad manners.
Third, it is arguable whether Christianity offers anything in the way of helping someone in Woods' position to "...make a total recovery and be a great example to the world" that other religions, specifically Buddhism, do not. This doesn't mean that I'm saying that Christianity can't help Woods recover and be a great example, I'm sure that it can, it has, for many people. What I'm saying is that many faiths have ways and means to help people get through these kinds of situations, and Woods apparently already has a faith that he can turn to if he chooses.
And finally, religious faith, whether it be Buddhist, Christian or anything else, is no guarantee that a person won't 'sin' and it's not assured that a person of faith will be able to turn his life around with that faith; it all comes down to the individual.
In my not-so-humble opinion, this is wrong on several counts. First, is a news program the proper place for a game of "my religion is better (more true) than your religion"? If Fox News were a religion program, specifically a Christian religious program, I would say "no problem", there are church sponsored and Christian-oriented programs and infomercials all over the airwaves. These programs are for Christians and by Christians and don't masquerade as "news".
My second objection is the propriety of publically labelling another's faith as inferior. One of the things that make this a great country is the religious pluralism that is part of our national character. No one is required to join any particular religion, nor are those outside the established flock forced to pay an "unbeliever tax" or accept second class citizen status. Hume was indulging in, at the very least, bad manners.
Third, it is arguable whether Christianity offers anything in the way of helping someone in Woods' position to "...make a total recovery and be a great example to the world" that other religions, specifically Buddhism, do not. This doesn't mean that I'm saying that Christianity can't help Woods recover and be a great example, I'm sure that it can, it has, for many people. What I'm saying is that many faiths have ways and means to help people get through these kinds of situations, and Woods apparently already has a faith that he can turn to if he chooses.
And finally, religious faith, whether it be Buddhist, Christian or anything else, is no guarantee that a person won't 'sin' and it's not assured that a person of faith will be able to turn his life around with that faith; it all comes down to the individual.
Sunday, January 3, 2010
Beer Review: Sam Adams Noble Pils
Noble Pils is the new Spring seasonal from Sam Adams, replacing White Ale. made with five varieties of "noble hops", noted for their low bitterness and high aroma. As advertised, this is a very "non-bitter" brew, smooth, crisp, clear, just as you'd expect from a premium pilsner. This refreshing lager poured a tall head, about half a glass worth, and retained it for quite a while. It's one of the clearest brews that I've seen, with a subtle lemon aroma, and a faint peppery aftertaste. Noble Pils is definitely a winner.
Friday, January 1, 2010
Seasonal Beer Review: Winter Hook
Pours with a dinky little head that dissipates quickly; dark red in color; taste of roasted malts with a smidgeon of citrus. Kind of thin for a winter ale; drinkable, but not especially memorable.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)