I thought there were only nice people to the north

On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 09:07:05 +1100, dechucka wrote:

> If beer is to cold you can't taste it which is why fosters etc should be
> served icy cold. In general with beers the darker and heavier it is the
> warmer it should be served. The coldness in a pilsner style accentuates
> the crisp hops taste while serving darker beers slightly warmer
> accentuates the volatile esters which give those beers their flavours.
> Here are some suggested serving temperatures
> http://www.tastebeer.com.au/beer/133 I must admit that these are a bit
> warm for me I would knock of 2 to 3 degrees for the lighter beers and 5-6
> degrees for the darker beers when I serve my home brew or boutique beers (
> the serving temp for the dark ales IMHO is extremely high )

I know the theory / reasoning behind it, but living in a warm climate, I
want *all* my beers cold... If figure there are two beer temperatures --
ice just starting to form and ice clogging up the bottle opening... I
prefer the former...

On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 01:59:05 -0600, Grumman-581
<grumman581-rec-scuba@spambob.net> wrote:

>On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 23:54:11 -0500, Mike from Ottawa wrote:
>
>> Yeah, but I hear you've got some good ones, too. Just not the
>> mass-produced piss. Same story here.
>
>So, what is the best of the Canadian beers? Any good dark ales up there?

You can find porters, Upper Canada makes a dark ale, and Sleeman's,
too. I tend to drink the darker ones during the winter. Each region
has its own micro-breweries. At pubs, I often go for a Kilkenny,
Boddington's or Smithwick's.

Sleeman's is making a good IPA right now, with more of a punch than
Keith's.

>> I really appreciate the Bavarian Purity Law of 1516
>
>Wasn't that what started WW-II?
>
>> We do enjoy our cold beer. I lived 6 months in Oz, and, regardless of
>> the heat, every pub had frosty-cold beer. Damn civilised, that. Again,
>> too many of them were mass-produced, but there's nothing like a really
>> cold beer on a hot day.
>
>Yep, that's one thing that I liked about the Aussies... They knew what
>temperature to keep their beer at... The Brits and their warm beer just is
>*wrong*... I like a Guinness, but I want it *cold*...

I've had Guinness in Ireland -- those sly ones keep the best stuff at
home. I tried it again in England, Wales & Scotland, but it just
didn't taste the same. Ditto for this continent. Now that I've been
spoiled, I usually can't face a Guinness here.

"Grumman-581" <grumman581-rec-scuba@spambob.net> wrote in message
newsan.2007.12.12.22.25.49.766000@spambob.net...
> On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 09:07:05 +1100, dechucka wrote:
>
>> If beer is to cold you can't taste it which is why fosters etc should be
>> served icy cold. In general with beers the darker and heavier it is the
>> warmer it should be served. The coldness in a pilsner style accentuates
>> the crisp hops taste while serving darker beers slightly warmer
>> accentuates the volatile esters which give those beers their flavours.
>> Here are some suggested serving temperatures
>> http://www.tastebeer.com.au/beer/133 I must admit that these are a bit
>> warm for me I would knock of 2 to 3 degrees for the lighter beers and 5-6
>> degrees for the darker beers when I serve my home brew or boutique beers
>> (
>> the serving temp for the dark ales IMHO is extremely high )
>
> I know the theory / reasoning behind it, but living in a warm climate, I
> want *all* my beers cold... If figure there are two beer temperatures --
> ice just starting to form and ice clogging up the bottle opening... I
> prefer the former...

Fair enough, 36/38 degrees outside and following a day of spraying or
fencing or whatever I enjoy a couple of icy cold ones probably a Melbourne
Bitter. However sitting down at a BBQ or in front of an open fire or
watching the rugby or cricket on the TV I prefer a more "sophisticated" brew
(shit that sounds snobby) and with those I prefer them served a bit warmer
so I can taste their characteristics. I don't give a monkeys how people
drink there beer or what they drink, I drink it my way others do it theirs.
I am not the beer police I wouldn't dare tell other people what to do just
suggest they may like to try something different or maybe point out the
benefits and advantages of doing it a different way

"Mike from Ottawa" <mev at tikaCANOE dot ca> wrote in message
news:l0o0m39stmt98r20vfva2v9u65va08lnra@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 01:59:05 -0600, Grumman-581
> <grumman581-rec-scuba@spambob.net> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 23:54:11 -0500, Mike from Ottawa wrote:
>>
>>> Yeah, but I hear you've got some good ones, too. Just not the
>>> mass-produced piss. Same story here.
>>
>>So, what is the best of the Canadian beers? Any good dark ales up there?
>
> You can find porters, Upper Canada makes a dark ale, and Sleeman's,
> too. I tend to drink the darker ones during the winter. Each region
> has its own micro-breweries. At pubs, I often go for a Kilkenny,
> Boddington's or Smithwick's.
>
> Sleeman's is making a good IPA right now, with more of a punch than
> Keith's.
>
>>> I really appreciate the Bavarian Purity Law of 1516
>>
>>Wasn't that what started WW-II?
>>
>>> We do enjoy our cold beer. I lived 6 months in Oz, and, regardless of
>>> the heat, every pub had frosty-cold beer. Damn civilised, that. Again,
>>> too many of them were mass-produced, but there's nothing like a really
>>> cold beer on a hot day.
>>
>>Yep, that's one thing that I liked about the Aussies... They knew what
>>temperature to keep their beer at... The Brits and their warm beer just is
>>*wrong*... I like a Guinness, but I want it *cold*...
>
> I've had Guinness in Ireland -- those sly ones keep the best stuff at
> home. I tried it again in England, Wales & Scotland, but it just
> didn't taste the same. Ditto for this continent. Now that I've been
> spoiled, I usually can't face a Guinness here.

Guiness outside Ireland is brewed differently to match the local tastes.
Here in Aus it is a lot more bitter than the Irish brewed product
>

On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 11:12:26 -0500, "Lee Bell"
<pleebell@bellsouth.net> wrote:

>Mike from Ottawa wrote
>
>>>> So you would arm the junkies?
>>>
>>>You read that somewhere in what I said, did you? Feel free to point it
>>>out.
>>>I can't find it.
>>
>> Your memory is fading. You wrote:
>
>> "Your families, mothers, grandmothers, fathers, grandfathers,
>> children, junkies and prostitutes or businessmen and housewives are
>> all at risk. Not only can the police not protect you, it's not even
>> their job to protect you. It's each citizen's job to protect
>> themselves, their way of life, and those around them."
>
>Perhaps it's your reading comprehension that's fading. Where's the part
>about arming the junkies?
>
>> Seems to me you included junkies in your self-defence line.
>
>Yep, it's your reading comprehension.

No, but maybe it's your writing comprehension. You don't understand
what you write. Or maybe you're just trying some obfuscation. Have
fun.

>> "The right to defense does not stop with the victim."
>> (So it must start with the victim, right?)
>
>Actually, yes, or are you of the opinoin that everybody that is not just
>like you has no right to defend themselves. After all, you're the guys that
>claim you have adequate means of defense without weapons, right? Did you
>forget that?

Defence from what? Squirrels, moose, what? I don't have any weapons,
nor do I believe I need them, and I'm not a hunter. Feel free to
carry all the firepower you want.

>> Your "warnings" are boring and patronising.
>
>Then stop reading and responding to them.

But who would tell you how patronising you are? I can't leave
everything up to Greg, John & dechucka.

>Your citizens are dead. Perhaps it's better to be bored and patronized.

Wow, I guess you just don't realise that prostitutes work alone.
Either you believe junky hookers should be armed or they should have
armed chaperones. Which is it? If it's armed chaperones, then you
must want some kind of legalised and regulated prostitution. Cool.

>> Try Western Europe, Australia, NZ, most western countries.
>
>OK, try them. Take a good look at what's happened the violent crime rates in
>those locations. Pay particular attention to the fact that, in the UK, it's
>even illegal to carry a knife now and citizens are not even allowed to
>defend themselves within their own homes. Pay real close attention to the
>backlash they're experiencing right now.

Fine. In 2006, our overall national crime rate hit its lowest point
in 25 years. That drop was driven by decreases in non-violent crimes
such as break-ins. Hard to believe it, eh -- most of us are not armed
at home, yet break-ins are dropping. Almost 30% of households here
have guns, but they're mainly hunting rifles. Violent crime has
remained unchanged since 2005. Ottawa's homicide rate is 1.8/100,000
in 2006. How's yours?

Our crime rates are close to those of Europe & Oz.

>> Right. You, the big proponent of self-defence. I found your quotes
>> above -- you can go Google the other proof. I don't have the time or
>> interest.
>
>You've not found a single quote that says what you claim, not one. The
>reason is obvious. I didn't say what you think.

Sure. So now you're a comedian.

>> Probably your only
>> reasonable strategy is to promote responsible gun ownership. Good
>> luck on that.
>
>It's spreading around the country. As we type, a majority of the states in
>the US have some kind of concealed permit process and, guess what, it's
>working. Violent crime is down. How's it doing in your country?

But aren't your violent crime stats much higher than most, if not all,
western nations? Why is that?

On Dec 12, 11:04 am, "Lee Bell" <pleeb...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> George Cathcart wrote:
> >> If, as some here claim, JOF has no right to tell Americans what to do,
> >> what gives Lee or any other American the right to tell Canadians what
> >> they should do? If John's government, which is democratically elected,
> >> as far as I know, has decided to restrict his opportunity to carry
> >> firearms, and John is okay with that, what business is it of Lee's, a
> >> resident of Florida who pays no taxes in Canada and has no say and no
> >> vote there?
>
> For someone that specifically asked to be put in my blocked list, you
> certainly have a lot to say to me.
>
> First, I've never told Canadians what to do in their own country. What I
> have done is warned Canadian citizens, you know, our allies and sometime
> friends, that the path they are on is high risk. I've tried to point out,
> again and again, that it's been tried repeatedly and has never worked out
> anywhere. I've warned that it's not working anywhere right now and that the
> increasing instances of violent crime in Canada are likely to be at least
> partly because the country is systematically disarming it's citizens and
> that it will continue to get worst as the country continues down that road.
>
> If that's what your citizens want, it's fine with me. Just make sure I don't
> ever seen you, or John blaming us again for the rising violent crime rate in
> your country.
>
> Lee

First, for someone who claimed to have put me on his killfile, you
certainly seem interested in what I say. Second, you cleverly snipped
out the post I was responding to, which was not from you but from
Chris Guynn, which is why I spoke of you in the third person (i.e.,
"Lee" instead of "you."). Here's what Chris said:
> I don't presume to speak for Lee, but my interpretation is that he wants you
> to have the opportunity to carry firearms, not the directive to.

Chris was speaking to John (the "you" in his sentence). Since you
didn't deny that Chris's interpretation was accurate, my question
remains, why is it okay for you to advise Canadians about their laws
and politics, but John has no right to offer his advice to Americans?
At least John has visited the U.S., many times, and I'd be willing to
bet John knows more about the U.S. than you know about Canada.

This has nothing to do with which of you, if either, is right. It's
all about a very uneven playing field. And, as we've discussed before,
you don't own the playing field.

gc

On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 23:03:22 -0500, Mike from Ottawa <mev at tikaCANOE
dot ca> wrote:

>On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 21:32:56 -0600, Grumman-581
><grumman581@DIE-SPAMMER-SCUM-gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Mike from Ottawa wrote:
>>
>>> BTW, Molson sucks. As does Labatts.
>>
>>Caribou piss...
>>
>>http://uncyclopedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Beer
>
>That's some pretty nasty anti-Canadian stuff on that site -- at least
>they gave Merkan beer a roughly equal bashing.
>http://uncyclopedia.org/wiki/American_beer
>
>BTW, you simply cannot play hockey while plastered. I tried once.
>
>I had taken a girl out & ordered a pitcher of beer. She didn't want
>much, so I drank most of it (waste is ungodly). I dropped her off at
>a subway stop and went and played hockey. Whle warming up, I ran into
>a goal post.

Besides. The boys hate when you puke on the ice.

>I've never since had a drink before a game. Afterwards is a different
>story...

JF

On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 17:30:13 -0500, Mike from Ottawa <mev at tikaCANOE
dot ca> wrote:

>On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 01:59:05 -0600, Grumman-581
><grumman581-rec-scuba@spambob.net> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 23:54:11 -0500, Mike from Ottawa wrote:
>>
>>> Yeah, but I hear you've got some good ones, too. Just not the
>>> mass-produced piss. Same story here.
>>
>>So, what is the best of the Canadian beers? Any good dark ales up there?
>
>You can find porters, Upper Canada makes a dark ale, and Sleeman's,
>too. I tend to drink the darker ones during the winter. Each region
>has its own micro-breweries. At pubs, I often go for a Kilkenny,
>Boddington's or Smithwick's.
>
>Sleeman's is making a good IPA right now, with more of a punch than
>Keith's.
>
>>> I really appreciate the Bavarian Purity Law of 1516
>>
>>Wasn't that what started WW-II?
>>
>>> We do enjoy our cold beer. I lived 6 months in Oz, and, regardless of
>>> the heat, every pub had frosty-cold beer. Damn civilised, that. Again,
>>> too many of them were mass-produced, but there's nothing like a really
>>> cold beer on a hot day.
>>
>>Yep, that's one thing that I liked about the Aussies... They knew what
>>temperature to keep their beer at... The Brits and their warm beer just is
>>*wrong*... I like a Guinness, but I want it *cold*...
>
>I've had Guinness in Ireland -- those sly ones keep the best stuff at
>home. I tried it again in England, Wales & Scotland, but it just
>didn't taste the same. Ditto for this continent. Now that I've been
>spoiled, I usually can't face a Guinness here.

The flavour is like licking stainless steel.

JF

On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 08:07:43 -0600, "Chris Guynn"
<chris.guynn@gamil.com> wrote:

>Fosters: Australian for bad beer.
>
We were able to buy Swans for a while here. Even it was better.

JF

On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 22:25:02 -0600, dazed and confuzzed
<dedmann@comcast_remove.net> wrote:


>Because JOF advocates disarming everyone, Us citizens included?

Your lack of comprehension is world class. Where and when have I ever
advocated disarming everyone. I gotta see a cite on that. Produce it
or admit you just lied for effect.

JF