On Feb 27, 1:02*pm, "F.O.A.D." wrote:
On 2/27/13 12:54 PM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote:





On 2/27/2013 12:50 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 2/27/13 12:48 PM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote:
On 2/27/2013 12:25 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 2/27/13 12:14 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 27 Feb 2013 09:38:53 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

Boxer said he has
evidence to corroborate the former employees' allegations, but
stopped
short of saying the beers had been independently tested.

That would seem to be the first step. Checking the alcohol content is
a trivial process. I wonder why they did not try to get independent
analysis.

I always assumed the bottle cost more than the beer and the contents
was pennies to them anyway

I know nothing about beer brewing or the expense attached to commercial
beer brewing. I do know the few times I "taste-tested" Bud's U.S.
brands, I thought they were ****y. A decade or so ago, I was at a
pavilion in Orlando, maybe at SeaWorld, where the makers of Bud were
offering free samples of all their beers. It was very hot that day, and
I got in line a few times. I didn't like any of the offerings.

It's not a snob thing. I'm not much of a beer drinker. If I have a
beer,
and I have a choice, I'll pick a Mexican or Japanese beer. I did have a
favorite "local" beer from Mexico, which is the only place I've ever
had
one, but I read somewhere the brand was "absorbed" by a bigger brand in
that country.

Cool story bro! However, it doesn't answer the question why they didn't
do a quicky check on the content? Guarantee if you were on scene, there
is something the union is looking for, it's not getting.

You should buy some bottle caps for your paranoia.

Nice insult (well, not really) but it doesn't answer the question why
they didn't do a quicky check on the content? Guarantee if you were on
scene, there is something the union is looking for, it's not getting.

You have no knowledge of the particulars of the situation in the brewery.

Neither do you, ****stick.