Dänk 666
2011-04-28 19:30:03 UTC
Pabst brewing company is preparing to launch a new brand of malt
liquor called "Blast" which will be promoted by famous rapper, Snoop
Dogg. With an alcohol content of 12%, it is roughly 3-4x stronger
than regular beer, but what really has liberal do-good busybodies'
panties in a bunch is that it is fruit flavored, like the "Four Loko"
brand they succeeded in banning last year.
Four Loko was banned by the FDA on the grounds that caffeine was not a
safe food additive for an alcoholic beverage. Blast contains no
caffeine, putting it out of the reach of the FDA's authority. It's
alcohol content is the result of natural fermentation, just like wine,
and 12% is well within the range of most wines.
Banning malt liquor outright is problematic, since malt is used to
make all beer, and the "malt liquor" term is just a legal term to
differentiate this product from lower-alcohol beers. It would be
difficult to ban one fermented 12% beverage and not another, and
hypocritical to ban a 12% malt beverage preferred by the proles while
permitting a 12% Chardonnay preferred by the elite. Even size can't
be used, since both Blast and most wines come in 700-750ml containers.
There are also quite of a few brands of lower-alcohol malt beverages,
such as Mike's Hard Lemonade, Smirnoff Ice, Seagram's Coolers, Zima,
and so on, that contain around 5% alcohol, roughly the same amount as
beer. Like Blast, they are artificially flavored, often fruit-
flavored, so trying to ban Blast on this ground will not work without
banning all the other flavored malt beverages.
The last argument the liberal prohibitionists will try to use is that
Blast appeals to underage drinkers. This is true only so far that ALL
alcoholic beverages appeal to underage drinkers. There is no evidence
that liquor stores will scrutinize the ID of someone buying Blast less
than they scrutinize IDs of someone buying Bud Light or Jack Daniels.
http://beernews.org/2010/12/pabst-to-launch-blast-by-colt-45-products-next-year/
liquor called "Blast" which will be promoted by famous rapper, Snoop
Dogg. With an alcohol content of 12%, it is roughly 3-4x stronger
than regular beer, but what really has liberal do-good busybodies'
panties in a bunch is that it is fruit flavored, like the "Four Loko"
brand they succeeded in banning last year.
Four Loko was banned by the FDA on the grounds that caffeine was not a
safe food additive for an alcoholic beverage. Blast contains no
caffeine, putting it out of the reach of the FDA's authority. It's
alcohol content is the result of natural fermentation, just like wine,
and 12% is well within the range of most wines.
Banning malt liquor outright is problematic, since malt is used to
make all beer, and the "malt liquor" term is just a legal term to
differentiate this product from lower-alcohol beers. It would be
difficult to ban one fermented 12% beverage and not another, and
hypocritical to ban a 12% malt beverage preferred by the proles while
permitting a 12% Chardonnay preferred by the elite. Even size can't
be used, since both Blast and most wines come in 700-750ml containers.
There are also quite of a few brands of lower-alcohol malt beverages,
such as Mike's Hard Lemonade, Smirnoff Ice, Seagram's Coolers, Zima,
and so on, that contain around 5% alcohol, roughly the same amount as
beer. Like Blast, they are artificially flavored, often fruit-
flavored, so trying to ban Blast on this ground will not work without
banning all the other flavored malt beverages.
The last argument the liberal prohibitionists will try to use is that
Blast appeals to underage drinkers. This is true only so far that ALL
alcoholic beverages appeal to underage drinkers. There is no evidence
that liquor stores will scrutinize the ID of someone buying Blast less
than they scrutinize IDs of someone buying Bud Light or Jack Daniels.
http://beernews.org/2010/12/pabst-to-launch-blast-by-colt-45-products-next-year/