The column on malt liquor misses a few items: historical and otherwise. Malt liquor, unlike say a Barleywine or a Russian Imperial for just two examples, tends to have less body because they often use various means to pump up the abv (alcohol) other than malt. Some of the worst ones are simply pumped up using quickly fermented sugars: even corn sugar. The result is often higher alcohols that can be annoying to quite nasty.
MLs have a bad reputation in the States for another reason: in the 70s the African American communities; often the slums not the more upscale communities, were hit with plenty of ads that really suggested “drink this and you’ll get drunk faster.” Terrible press ensued, and IMO was well deserved. Unfortunately other brewers, like FX Matt, got caught up in the fray, despite the fact they had enough class NOT to target that community.
If you really want to experience beer with a bit more punch the best bets would be Imperial IPA, Russian Imperial, Barleywine, Strong Scotch Ale, Belgian Strong: just to mention a few. They are more likely to have the body and the complexity to support a higher abv. Take a risk if you wish on ML: there are a few good malt liquors… but there are also more than a few which are simply just pumped up regular beer that pushes that style into an abv where, taste-wise, it really doesn’t belong.