Cheers to beers!

I'm sort of a beer enthusiast. I don't pretend to know everything there is to know about the craft. However, I do think I have a palate that can discern the good from the bad. I have become quite a fan of the Stone Brewing Company and am quite fond of most of their creations. Another disclaimer is that my tastes always seem to change dialectically. Here are my top ten.

1. Stone IPA *Note, the double IPA, Ruination, Arrogant Bastard, and Double Bastard basically build off of the IPA so I just put a catch all. I’m pretty into the ruination right now.
2. Sierra Nevada Pale Ale
My first true love when it comes to premium beers. Some day I hope complete a pilgrimage to the brewery.
3. Stone Smoked Porter
The Ritual Tavern down the street has a milk shake that they make from this. I'll keep you posted.
4. Sam Adams Boston Lager.
Best ‘corporate” beer.
5. St. Peter's Stout
I've come to the conclusion that Guinness is the bottom of the trough when it comes to stouts.
6. Young's Double Chocolate Stout
Exactly what I look for in a stout. Some nice notes of coffee and chocolate that isn’t over carbonated.
7. Humboldt Hemp Ale
The beer that introduced me to bitterness.
8. Fat Tire
Funny story
9. Pabst Blue Ribbon
The Working man's beer
10. Bud Light
Let's go padres!!!

Best Malt Liquor: King Cobra
King Cobra has a good balance between the malty taste of high alcohol content beers and a reasonably high alcohol content. I haven't found a malt liquor that doesn't have that lingering after taste that lasts like two days but this is the best I've found so far.

I know, I slack

I feel like a real dick cheese burger because I haven't been keeping up with this thing. In the coming weeks I will be posting a flurry of blogs to try to make up for it. One of which will be about my favorite beers. I'll keep you posted.

Class Strikes Again

I finished my MA in sociology last May and have just applied to 7 different PHD programs. I have received 4 denials so far and am beginning to realize that I may not get into any of the PHD programs that I applied to. One of the main reasons I am not getting in is because of low GRE scores. The only thing I have been doing, and can really do to maintain my sanity is to stop thinking in terms of the future and start thinking about where I am and where I came from. I've been keeping in mind that I'm not on a level playing field and that my class background still lingers.

It is amazing how hard it is to overcome the disadvantages we are born into. I always had this philosophy about how I need to be cognizant of the obstacles that are put in my way by social class. For one thing, the practice of tracking in public schools has always haunted me. Tracking is the practice of sorting students based on their "ability." In practice this separates the working class students from the more affluent students and puts them on the path to maintaining their class positions. I grew up in poverty, whether this is because of structural reasons or because of the decisions my parents made is beside the point. I didn’t make the decision. So my experience with tracking continues to affect my life chances. In high school, I was in the "workforce" track and was able to take two math courses, Algebra A and Algebra B, and graduate. These courses were the equivalent of Algebra 1, so suffice to say, math has always been a problem for me. Not that I don't understand it, I eventually found out it was a matter of preparation and not a learning disability. Short story long, I never took geometry or any other "ometry". In community college, I started at the beginning but eventually got up to statistics. I took statistics and did well and have since received at least a B on all the stats classes I took for sociology. In November, I had to take the GREs and of course didn’t do that great. Geometry was one of the major areas so I taught myself what I could but to no avail. I did crappy on the quantitative section.

I thought about this whole tracking thing because there is some frightening research on what it does when kindergartners are subjected to it. This sociologist, Ray Rist, observed a kindergarten class in the inner cities and the teacher divided the students into groups based on what he thought their ability was. The smart kids were at table 1, the average kids were at table two, and the "not so smart" kids at table three. Of course, in actuality these students were organized based on social class. A few years later, these kids were in 2nd grade and again the teacher divided the class based on ability and guess who was in the three groups. The same kids were in the same groups as they were in kindergarten. Of course, I don’t remember when it was that I may have been tracked. I was diagnosed with a few learning disabilities but I am now personally convinced that this was do to labeling. It's astounding to me how much my class background continues to affect my ability to become an academic as I have wanted to for some time. It seems that we have to realize that our disadvantages have a cumulative effect on no matter how far from home we are.

Race, Gender, Class and my hatred for Oprah.

I’m not going to go into too much detail. My hatred for Oprah is linked to my hatred for race, class, and gender oppression. These are things that she perpetuates by asking us to ignore them while they are structurally embedded into our social system. Of course, these things don’t really exist; just look at Oprah! I remember seeing a member of Mecha give a talk and he said “Oprah may be doing well but your mom probably isn’t.”

According to Italian Marxist, Antonio Gramsci, the ruling class in western countries controls the working class through the use of culture. Following Machiavelli, Gramsci thought that the rulers can either control people through consent or by force. Rather than having a police state you can just give the working class something to be happy about, something to do other than organize. It is my feeling that this what Rage Against the Machine meant when they said that there is a thin line between entertainment and war. What does this have to do with Oprah? Oprah is the epitome of ruling class hegemony. Further, She is held up as proof that the US is a meritocracy. Meritocracy is basically the myth that individuals advance in our society by waking up early, working hard, and making to-do lists. The first thing on my to-do list is to be born into a wealthy family. I know, I know, Oprah grew up in poverty and belongs to perhaps the most oppressed section of the population. None of that really matters. Growing up in poverty doesn’t make you any less of a tool for the ruling class. They are pretty good at plucking out those that are useful to them. I’m starting to sound a little too dogmatic so let me bring this to a more personal level.

Is it me or does Oprah see herself as a generous monarch that showers her adoring subjects with gifts to further the illusion that the great, malevolent, Queen Oprah cares about us. I get so enraged when people on the show are like “Oh my god! I am going to get to sit on a couch next to Oprah!” It seems like Oprah says things like, “Because you have been a loyal subject you may sit next to me as I handle the entrails of bad examples alongside the my scrub-clad minister of health; Dr. Oz.”

One thing good that I will say about her is that she represents the liberal wing of the ruling class. She is a cruise missile feminist and has undoubtedly helped Barak Obama’s campaign. (Note: I do not support Obama or any Republicans or Democrats) Despite her progressive credentials Oprah will never do anything to challenge the existing system because she has a stake in maintaining it. She will put a human face on it, but Oprah would never dream of doing anything eliminate oppression, because in my view, doing so would destroy the system that made her.