Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site fisher.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!akgua!mcnc!decvax!harpo!ulysses!allegra!princeton!astrovax!fisher!djl
From: djl@fisher.UUCP (Dan Levin  N6BZA )
Newsgroups: net.wines
Subject: Re: A (slight) defense of major American beers <c'mon!>
Message-ID: <124@fisher.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 21-Apr-84 03:39:59 EST
Article-I.D.: fisher.124
Posted: Sat Apr 21 03:39:59 1984
Date-Received: Sun, 22-Apr-84 08:36:13 EST
References: <384@opus.UUCP>
Organization: Princeton Univ. Statistics
Lines: 25

While I am willing to agree that American breweries are moderately
competent at producing what they so freely refer to as 'beer,' what
they are producing has about the same relationship to a good lager as
does Cold Duck to Domain Chandon.

The masses in this country enjoy consuming vast quantities of a pale,
rather watery beverage which is the result of partial fermentation of
various grains.  This 'beer' (insert your favorite generic brand name
here) is in the same class a very light lager,... almost.  A quick
comparison of a real lager (say Foster's or Dinkel Acker) with one of
these American brews will quickly show the basic differences. A real
lager, even a very light one such as St. Pauly Girl, has body, and a
depth of taste that is completely foreign to American brews.

While I realize that the public gets what the public wants, do me the
favor of admitting that when put up against a *real* lager, Bud hasn't
got a chance.  The fact that no porters, stouts, nor even good pale
ales are produced by major American brewers is only a sad testimonial
to the tastes of the American drinking public.

-- 
			***dan

{ihnp4 | decvax | ucbvax}!allegra!fisher!djl
The misplaced (you call *that* a mountain ?!?!?) Californian