Recently in beeeeeeeeeeeeer! Category

i sold my kegerator yesterday. it sat in the kitchen, unused, for 2 years prior to that. i tell anyone who asks that the kegerator killed my interest in homebrewing. before the kegerator, i'd brew, and bottle, and put the bottles in the closet, and brew again, and again, until my closet was full, and then i'd find another closet.

i never really had to drink the beer.

but with the kegerator, i had to drink beer, 5 gallons of it at a time. throwing parties was too much trouble and i never really had the kind of friends that would come over, hang out, and drink beer. in fact, i myself would never really hang out and drink beer. so, the beer piled up, i couldn't brew any more until i drank gallons over gallons, and the hobby died.

and then i started biking on weekends, and that really killed it extra dead.

so now the kegerator's gone and we have a nice kegerator sized hole in our kitchen space. what will it become? i am excited to see.

for the first time ever, really, i got involved in local politics. but not my local politics, those of menlo park. and the issue that compelled me to attend a city council meeting 15 miles from home, from 7pm to 10pm (and that was leaving early), was not universal health care, or gay marriage, or war with iran. no, i was there to oppose BevMo.

ultimately, my side lost. at first, i thought the opposition was on very shaky ground. the city lawyer explained that the nature of the council's job last night was to act not as legislators but as a jury, applying the facts to the law. the law stated that the use permit must be granted to bevmo if the services offered were necessary and convenient, and further, that the permit applies to the land, not the occupant, so it was not fair for the council to consider who was moving in, only that the occupant would be selling booze. that, at least, is my understanding of the conditions.

after the opening speeches by the city council's staff, who had found no reason to oppose, the opposition spoke, and brought to light the fact that there are already 17 liquor stores in menlo park, twice as many as neighboring palo alto (which, it was not said, is fer chrissakes a college town!), all of which are within 3 miles of the proposed location, and further, that the census tract (i guess that's a zoning term) in question allowed 3 liquor stores but already had 5.

now, the law said that the use permit may be granted if the shop was necessary (obviously not, if viewed as Yet Another Liquor Store) OR convenient. convenience, one opposer noted, is a slippery slope: it sure would be convenient to have a liquor store on EVERY corner!

the CEO of BevMo was actually there, and spoke, and seemed to be a very poor public speaker. there were passionate people on both sides with varying levels of articulation. one pretty well spoken supporter was in favor simply because bevmo carries more and better specialty sodas than he can get locally. several bevmo employees got up and recited the company line that they "did not consider bevmo to be a liquor store", and a following opposer derisively referred to bevmo as a "glassware vendor".

the public spoke for well over 2 hours. it was noted that more people in menlo park sent in letters of opposition to bevmo than actually voted in the recent election, some 3500 people, which seems to me like more than 20% of residents (3499 resident letters, i told hops, since i am not a resident).

by the end of it, i felt some sympathy for the council, who obviously had a tough choice to make. the opposition position was fundamentally anti-free market and protectionist, and not supported by current case law, while the bevmo position is pretty clearly in opposition to the image which keeps menlo park a destination on the peninsula, not to mention that it was unclear that bevmo would bring either jobs or tax dollars to the city. not to mention, 20 percent of residents supported the (possibly illegal) protectionist stance.

true to my word, i certainly won't be going to menlo park's bevmo, since to get there, i must currently drive by two larger bevmos. last week, i was in burlingame's bevmo, and, failing to find any top-shelf brandies, ended up in menlo park at beltramo's, where there were too many to choose from, even though the shelves were nearly bare from world series indulgence. i suspect that as bevmo's supporters said, beltramo's will do just fine, and the competition will actually make them better. i also suspect that after a couple of years of underpaying some poorly-informed young people and failing to differentiate themselves from the other 14 local purveyors of cheap wines, menlo park bevmo will be out of business.

course ya do!!!

it's been a darn long time since i've had a rye, tonight i'm on my next glass of High West Whiskey Rendezvous. It's supoib.

It is also bottle number 532 of batch number 42.

i shit you not, dear reader, i shit you not.

i paired wine with barbecue!

i'd been going about it all wrong: attempting to pair reds with the smokey good stuff. well, that's a mistake. it just doesn't work and anyone who says it does isn't eating barbecue.

last night i paired a nice, cheap morovino pinot grigio with the previously here-mentioned bourbon molasses ribs, and a bit of leftover goat. in other words, i paired it with both fake and real barbecue.

it was a fabulous match! chilly, fruity, sweet -- but not so sweet that it interfered with the sweet/spicy/smokey flavors on the barbecue. it was a true pairing, the wine and the food complemented each other.

i think it went okay with hops airplant or whatever sorry excuse for food she was eating, too, but i was too greased up by goat (goat is a fatty animal, there's no denying it) to pay much attention. i'm lucky i didn't drop my glass with my goatfingers.

could this be it? am i done with beer?

i haven't brewed any in almost a year, now. since beginning my "wine journey" last month, i've had nearly no beer at all. last night i went to an easter party at the captain's apt, where, of course, beer was served, but while tasting the rare beers (a batch 001 from russian river!) all i could think of: when's the wine on?

yes, the beers were good. oh boy, hops. and, uh, orange peels. but where were the strawberries, the blackberries, the tannins? oh my, the tannins, which i thought i hated, but, like brussels sprouts, now cannot get enough of?

at last, after slogging through three or four (rare!) beer tastings, i finally got to have some wine, a gifted, over-oaked california syrah -- and that was the beverage i enjoyed for the evening.

this morning i considered getting rid, finally, of my brewing equipment and my electricity-hogging beer fridges (to be replaced, of course, by electricity-hogging wine fridges).

one thing has remained constant, though, and gives me cheer in its constancy: want some rye? COURSE I DO!

i considered a consideration the other night, which, in the current economic climate, is perhaps too real a consideration to be taken lightly, that were i to lose it all, were i to need to sell everything just to put food on my table, i'd keep just one thing. my smallest, heartiest, most beloved shot glass, which found me in a thrift shop, having abandoned its former owner to find its way to me.

even were water all i could afford to fill it with, i would still meditate upon the count of its bubbles, and further, meditate upon who prior to me meditated upon the count of its bubbles.

seems good enough for now.

i like it!

i think Utahns should also be required to register when they buy beer at a store, and be subject to fingerprinting and 7 day waiting periods when purchasing wine.

I think that it is our duty as Californians to organize a campaign to interfere with the internal affairs of the state of Utah and majorly fuck their shit up.

It's an embarrassing rule that insults guests and makes the state look intolerant.

The state doesn't look intolerant. The state is intolerant. You should see what it's doing to the youth of the state. Heh.

i disappointed my lunchmates yesterday by not ordering a beer at lunch. i was the only one (besides He Who Wouldn't Ever Buy Beer) and that irritated and confused them.

today, i did buy beer with lunch. the difference? yesterday's beer would have been a sierra nevada. today's was a leffe.

i don't drink socially. i will drink in social situations, but i will not drink simply because others are drinking. this isn't a theory or a supposition, it has proven to be 100% true. if what's being served is boring or not to my taste, i'll have a water.

i end up feeling uncomfortable and awkward, but i spend 100% of my life feeling uncomfortable and awkward in one way or another. i mark the moment i realized i was not only okay with that, but proud of it as a part of my personalty as the moment i became an adult.

i went back for the other 3 in the 4-pack, saying to hops and the cashier, "i've never met a barleywine i didn't like".

whelp, now i have.

if you're reading this, and you're you-know-who, i've got barleywines for you.