Roger Baylor/ABusch

That's all well and good. Did you bother to look at the ad? It says that Mitch Daniels and Scott Walker are fascists, and that NABC has the machines to kill them (metaphorically one hopes). You and Mr. Baylor are certainly welcome to present another interpretation, but it looks pretty clear to me.

Actually, it does not say that.

The ad does say that we at NABC feel Wisconsin's pain, because we have one, too (in Indiana): Mitch Daniels. Walker's name is not mentioned. The word "Republican" is not mentioned, either. The ad closes by saying that we make liquid antidotes to fascism. In between the words, the "these machines kill fascists" logo appears, one that we've been using for about seven years, long before Walker was governor.

Steve H's comments illustrate the subsidiary intent of the ad: It's a Rorschach test, and the amusement comes from watching as what's not there is the part seen and decried.

BTW, apologies for not responding sooner; I'm on vacation, and trying to avoid the laptop. I also forgot my LRF password, and cannot log on from my iPhone, LOL.

That's all well and good. Did you bother to look at the ad? It says that Mitch Daniels and Scott Walker are fascists, and that NABC has the machines to kill them (metaphorically one hopes). You and Mr. Baylor are certainly welcome to present another interpretation, but it looks pretty clear to me.

Actually, it does not say that.

The ad does say that we at NABC feel Wisconsin's pain, because we have one, too (in Indiana): Mitch Daniels. Walker's name is not mentioned. The word "Republican" is not mentioned, either.

The ad closes by saying that we make liquid antidotes to fascism. In between the words, the "these machines kill fascists" logo appears, one that we've been using for about seven years, long before Walker was governor.

I'll just leave it for folks to look at your ad and decide for themselves.

Steve H's comments illustrate the subsidiary intent of the ad: It's a Rorschach test, and the amusement comes from watching as what's not there is the part seen and decried.

Interesting. For a Rorschach test to be useful, there must be more than one possible interpretation.

Roger, what is your interpretation of your Rorschach Test? What aspect or characteristic of Mitch Daniels did you mean to emphasize? Which aspect or characteristic of Mitch Daniels do you find painful? Which aspect or characteristic of Mitch Daniels would impel you to empathize with Wisconsinites for having to endure a similar plight with their, your words, "gubernatorial pain"?

And obviously a Rorschach test is not useful without an analysis and diagnosis. So please Herr Doktor, based on my response and your considered analysis, diagnose me.

Some could be offended because of the aggressive tone, it scares people off to express their opinion.

Some could be offended because of the aggressive tone, it scares people off to express their opinion.

I'm sorry if you are offended.

Having read Mr. Baylor's comments for some time, clearly he can take it. Some could even say that he is fishing for it.

Steve.... It's not me, I do not offend that easily. I just shake my head, and wonder.
However, there are others on this forum who get offended, and are skiddish about posting as a result of Mr Baylor's strong opinions.

I think Walmart is what did it for me years ago. They moved in to small towns, waving the American flag. So, until chains weren't such an issue.
I can't really afford local clothing stores but don't buy that many new clothes. I will buy at consignment stores - so those are local stores selling chain goods. Hmm.
And NABC sells their beer in Whole Foods. A chain. Hmmm.
Anyway, there are very few things that I am extreme about - too many people for that.
I avoid Walmart. Haven't bought anything in one for maybe 10 years.
Don't go to Bullitt Co. Racism.
Dennys. Racism.
My small boycotts.
My only complaint about our restaurant scene in Louisville is that I don't have enough time, money,high enough metabolism, to enjoy them.
I don't really take Roger's comments too serious. I don't know if. I do tend to lean left regarding social issues. I'm in the middle on finance. I keep myself out of debt. Used cars. Never moved up - same house for 35 years.
Interesting discussion.
I do spend ALOT less time on the internet than I use to.
I check the CJ, this page, one UL forum, the South Walton/30A forums, facebook - family and friends only plus I do like to 'like' sites:-)
The internet like automobile drivers has become an unpleasant place to venture for very long.
Ellen

Heather Y. , I assume you are referring to Roger's "aggressive tone", yet in reading this particular thread the aggression certainly seems to be aimed at Roger. In particular, Steve H., Annemarie M, & Dan E have all been fairly aggressive in their tone on this particular thread.

I personally find it entertaining to hear/read the various interpretations of the "these machines kill fascists" phrase.

A novel approach to those so offended by the "death to chains /pro-local" approach may be simply to ignore the message.

Shawn

You win Shawn! Your right, sometime you have to ask yourself, "do I want to be right"?, or do I want to be happy"? I choose the latter.

Heather Y. , I assume you are referring to Roger's "aggressive tone", yet in reading this particular thread the aggression certainly seems to be aimed at Roger. In particular, Steve H., Annemarie M, & Dan E have all been fairly aggressive in their tone on this particular thread.

I personally find it entertaining to hear/read the various interpretations of the "these machines kill fascists" phrase.

A novel approach to those so offended by the "death to chains /pro-local" approach may be simply to ignore the message.

Shawn

The hypocrisy here is awesome. Roger consistently puts forth a hostile, aggressive message.

Now that others respond in the same fashion, you tell them that they are the ones being aggressive, and that they should simply "ignore" a message put forth specifically to rile people up...He clearly does not wish to be ignored, and, I would guess, enjoys the discussion. As do I.

Again, I disagree much more with the delivery of Roger's messages than the messages themselves. That said, he has every right to passionately state them in a public forum, just as others have the right to passionately disagree.

I, personally, do not usually take kindly to any approach that callously throws around words like "death" "kill" and "facists", when talking about food and beer.

That said, while I continue to disagree with him, Roger's contributions continually spark discussion, and therefore he is a valuable contributor to the board.

I would never want him censored. My issue continues to be that I think he puts an exceedingly negative, pompous, and inaccessible face on both the craft beer community and the eat-local movement, two things of which I am a huge proponent.

But, from a macrocosmic view, it's just people disagreeing on the internet. It isn't that deep.

I personally find it entertaining to hear/read the various interpretations of the "these machines kill fascists" phrase.

I proudly wear my "these machines kill fascists" t-shirt, even though Im pretty sure exactly who Roger and I define as fascists* is different (with some overlap). But then again, my politics are closer to Arlo than Woody.

*Orwell in the 40s said that "fascist" had become a useless word because everyone was anti-fascist**, they just used it to mean different things.

**Except those who specifically called themselves fascist

Dane E, I don't recall RB ever resorting to name calling on this board or any threads that he has used as direct avenues to attack specific members of this board.

Discussing a position or point of view is different to me than a direct attack on an individual.
Regardless of your position or opinion, you have the ability to choose to be riled up and call people names.

shawn

Shawn, thank you for your thoughts on codes of conduct and permissible discussion topics.

I disagree that a person who presents intentionally inflammatory statements is immune to criticism. If anything, I think Roger wants to promote discussion.

That said, after Robin's stern-but-loving admonishment, I agreed that that personal attacks are unnecessary.

If you would like to defend Roger's delivery rather than the man himself, I would be interested to hear it and discuss that, as I am always interested by differing viewpoints.

I'm not jumping in to this one, yet I believe this should be said:

I've had the pleasure of Roger's tutelage at the Kentucky Bartending Guild's monthly seminar. This is the place where the best get better.

There were a number of speakers and God bless thier hearts, they were hit with some very detailed and informed questions. I wouldn't want to be in thier positions.

Time and again, the speakers would point to Roger and say 'he knows.' Roger would chime in, wouldn't even pause for consideration, and blow the room out with his knoweledge of the subject.

But nobody knows everything- there were some questions he couldn't answer (without a computer handy.) This is where one saw his humility. He'd perk up, his head would almost turn as if to say 'good point- I never thought of it that way,' and he'd admit he didn't know the answer. I think he may have even taken the business card of a bar manager so that he could email him the answer later.

This was the toughest, most jaded room one could face- a few hundred years experience in one place. Yet everyone left there with a renewed passion for local brews. Excited about bringing local craft beers into thier bars.

Say what you want- it takes a great deal of drive and vision to get to that point. You can't look away from the road, so to speak. There ain't no days off when you're trying to make a difference.

So what, some of his words come off condescending. In person, he never comes off as such. Most of his humor is a tongue-in-cheeky kinda thing. You'd never even pick up on any of the supposed airs that people say he holds.

He doesn't really come off that way- just an encyclopedic lover of all things brewed.

So what, some of his words come off condescending. In person, he never comes off as such. Most of his humor is a tongue-in-cheeky kinda thing. You'd never even pick up on any of the supposed airs that people say he holds.

This is my exact impression of him, from meeting him in person once and learning about beer from him at a 6-8 person tasting. It's one of the things I dislike about the internet, that message board posters spend most of 5 pages bashing someone that they don't know personally. Post away, but it probably wouldn't hurt to actually go and talk to this guy that inspires such rage; he's just across the river (or not, depending on your particular location.) He struck me as pretty low key and humble. And I don't come close to being described as a beer snob - don't really care for or drink beer in general but was interested to learn about it and try some interesting tastes.

So what, some of his words come off condescending. In person, he never comes off as such. Most of his humor is a tongue-in-cheeky kinda thing. You'd never even pick up on any of the supposed airs that people say he holds.

He doesn't really come off that way- just an encyclopedic lover of all things brewed.

It's a cliche. Personal gentleman. Internet asshole.

Of course, his scribblings were even too much for LEO. They also subscribe completely to the whole Republicans=Fascist orthodoxy.