OT - The REAL Drinking Thread

Submitted by mdoc on

Have new ideas about a drink called the "Assisted Suicide"?

Just find your favorite beer in a far away location?

Wife leave you alone for the night to go to the New Kids / Backstreet Boys concert?

Mourning/celebrating/ambivalent about the passing of a great/terrible/polarizing local figure?

ALL FOUR (I feel ya)? 

If it's okay with you, Zone Left, BRING IT ON!

Mitch Cumstein

June 3rd, 2011 at 8:15 PM ^

I saw a billboard the other day for Labatt lime.  Obviously trying to get in the Miller chill/BL lime market for the summer, but Labatt doesn't seem like that kind of beer to me, not sure why.

Jeffy Fresh

June 3rd, 2011 at 9:46 PM ^

Bud light limes taste like Unicorn sweat.  They make for a funny feeling when I pee the next day though, anyone else have that?  And no, it is not chlamydia.

Waters Demos

June 3rd, 2011 at 8:43 PM ^

Reading your posts - you come off as a smart dude I've known for a long time. 

Funny - my personal view is that many of us (or at least some of us) spend time here because we're either unwilling or unable to form actual relationships with other human beings.  So this is our next best thing, and it's arguably better because it doesn't require us to take on any additional obligations (who wants obligations - social or otherwise?) 

Sprite and vodka, with a little King Crimson mixed in (mix of "Red" and "Larks Tongues in Aspic"). 

BTW - thanks to Brian, who apparently hates these, but does not direct his mods to shut 'em down.  I can respect that. 

Waters Demos

June 3rd, 2011 at 10:05 PM ^

Yeah - we can have women - that's a worthwhile obligation (assuming the constellation of male superficiality lines up).

Dudes though . . .  Internet hugs suffice for me.

BlueDragon

June 3rd, 2011 at 10:41 PM ^

Your point on the constellation of male superficiality struck a chord with me.  It's almost like being less intelligent is an advantage in a bar scenario with competition for femalez.  I assume that was what you were talking about, but as always, I might be wrong.

Smoove B on The Onion is one of my unofficial heroes for his over-the-top antics.

Waters Demos

June 3rd, 2011 at 11:12 PM ^

But to your point, I agree.  If it's women in bars you seek, less intelligence = less shame = better chance to pick up hot body with less in way of brains.  There are other types with more brains that you're less likely to find in bars.  And I've found that for those types, it all begins with benign friendship.  That's likely your best inlet.

But male superficiality (by that I mean: male capacity to be attracted to female for whatever random, arbitrary reason; and also to be repelled by female for similarly random/arbitrary reason) is a law of nature IMHE. 

And if that law is satisfied - well, the benefits outweigh (perhaps only temporarily) the expenditure of effort and  the bullshit associated with the commitment (and there is inevitably bullshit and commitment). 

JimLahey

June 3rd, 2011 at 11:24 PM ^

The idea that smart girls are harder to get than dumb ones is debateable IMO. Read Tucker Max (regardless of your opinion on him he gets alot of ladies) and Neil Strauss, they will both tell you that smarter girls are actually easier to get. Some of the smartest girls I know are emotionally unstable and have low self-esteem. Also, they have chip on the shoulder syndrome ie. eager to prove their worth and overcome bias. I'm no expert, but I went to a University that you guys would make fun of the same way you do to MSU, and now I go to Harvard Law. I can honestly say that there is no difference at all in the difficulty of snagging women in both situations.

Zone Left

June 3rd, 2011 at 10:05 PM ^

I prefer it to them and it is generally considered to be the next step up of bourbon.

I really prefer bourbon to whiskey or scotch for its peppery aftertaste. Howeva, I think I'm in the minority.

SanFrancisco_W…

June 3rd, 2011 at 10:45 PM ^

They believe it's 50/50 between Pryor and Tres. They lean more towards Pryor being the root of their problems. They said everyone cheats and I brought up the point point that if everyone cheats you can't blame Pryor...this made them think a little more. They still, however, believe they will only lose one game this year. It's actually hard to disagree with them.

Zone Left

June 3rd, 2011 at 10:52 PM ^

Find two losses on their schedule. It's not easy.  Michigan might be their third most likely loss (after Nebraska and Penn State IMO) and I don't think either of them will be elite. Without Tolzien, Wisky is going to have issues and Miami in Miami with a new coach isn't very intimidating.

Barring huge suspensions, OSU has another great year set up for them unless something weird happens.

SanFrancisco_W…

June 3rd, 2011 at 11:24 PM ^

Tough to day it's "set up" for them. They will most likely start Bauserman, Miller, and one more QB in their first game. Miller is a stud. Rod Smith is going to be a great RB. OSU is gone be pretty solid next year, and probably the next 2-3 years. We are gonna have to wait until these sanction to take effect before we see a big difference.
<br>
<br>I am not sure how we will compete with them next year. It will be interesting to see how Hoke uses Denard. I think they hold a strong edge on us to be honest. I think we are a good year away from being legit contenders against them.

clarkiefromcanada

June 4th, 2011 at 1:18 AM ^

That team (if Braxton Miller is QB) will find a way to lose to both Nebraska and Penn State.

Also, I think Tressel was a better 'game day' coach than he is being given credit for given his current situation. This is a rudderless ship in Columbus these days and it will show in the autumn.

It will be pleasant when we beat them by 3 touchdowns in November with GMat's defensive philosophies making the defense "passable" by then.

BlueDragon

June 3rd, 2011 at 8:32 PM ^

I have until midnight to finish this lame chemistry paper.  We've been beating this project deader than a dead horse for weeks and weeks.  I'm ready to finish it and then get my friday night relaxation on.