What are you talking about? 12 oz. of Guinness Extra Stout has 153 calories, while the same amount of Bud Light has 110. The Guinness has almost 50% more calories.
Yes, I realize that drinking even a 20-oz can of stout isn’t the same sort of food-energy hit as, say, drinking a milkshake, and also that “light” beers aren’t really very “light” calorie-wise.
“Scotch Buy” Generic Safeway (grocery store) 3.2%.
I “win”.
All of them.
All the beers.
Oooh, I like this. Dunno where you got it from but I’m stealin’ it.
Can’t say my days in St. Petersburg were particularly hard, but the Baltika brews were always present when I was hanging out with my Russian friends. I’ll always have a soft spot for the No. 6 Porter.
Well, that’s the Extra Stout. The far more popular Guinness Draught (also a stout) is 126 calories.
Yeah, pub draft Guinness is not the extra stout. Guinness had an advertising campaign here in the States, at least, toting their relatively low calorie content. Here is an example of it with the tagline “Guinness: Only 125 calories.”
It is not a heavy beer in that sense, but it should not be too surprising, as it’s only 4.2% alcohol, and doesn’t have much in the way of residual sugars. It has only two more calories per 12 oz serving than a Michelob Light.
I was being facetious; I know that they don’t come from the same production line. The Fact is that Budweiser, Molson, and Fosters are all pale lagers which taste similar enough for it not to matter very much. Maybe I have a Philistine’s palate, but I can’t say that one is vastly superior; they are all fine beers if you’re thirsty, hust not terribly different. Iit is a bit much to claim that Molson way better than Bud.
To most Australians’ credit, they are quick to deny Fosters, perhaps too quick. Of course, I have to roll my eyes that some bars and stores think Stella Artois is 3x the quality of Budweiser because it’s 3x the price. It’s European, you see.
Fun fact: Michelob Ultra, the beer that advertises itself as sooo much lower in calories than BudMillerCoors, is 96 calories. That damned unhealthy Coors Light is… 102. Both 4.2%. It’s the 6 calories that make the difference, I suppose. So if you drink 83 beers a day for a week, then the Coors will make you gain an extra pound! (The carbs are 2.6 vs. 5.0, although I’m not sure that matters as much).
I used to commute via foot ferry from Port Orchard, Washington to Bremerton in the very early 80’s. After I got off work at midnight I would stop off at the local tavern by the pier for an ice cold Rainier Not-So-Light before I got on the ferry ride home.
This thread has inspired me to do a sequel of sorts.
Coleman and Julian?
I know the line, but sex in a canoe sounds has always sounded like a boatload of fun to me. Here is a belated winky smiley: 
I’m not going to argue for Foster’s and Molson, but I will say that I was once like you with regards to lighter beers. To my palate which had been configured on insanely flavorful US micros, all that Euro piss-water tasted pretty much the same as domestic piss-water to me. But then I spent some time in central Europe and, after spending the first few days bemoaning the lack of the IPA’s and porters I usually drank, I had some sort of taste epiphany and now some of my favorites are lagers and pilsners. I can definitely tell the difference between a Stella and a Bud now. Definitely not worth three times the bucks, but Bud is usually already in a price bracket above the PBR/Oly/High-life price range and so at least in my neck of the woods European macrobrews are only slightly pricier.
