But even after controlling for nearly all imaginable variables — socioeconomic status, level of physical activity, number of close friends, quality of social support and so on — the researchers (a six-member team led by psychologist Charles Holahan of the University of Texas at Austin) found that over a 20-year period, mortality rates were highest for those who were not current drinkers, regardless of whether they used to be alcoholics, second highest for heavy drinkers and lowest for moderate drinkers.

…

These are remarkable statistics. Even though heavy drinking is associated with higher risk for cirrhosis and several types of cancer (particularly cancers in the mouth and esophagus), heavy drinkers are less likely to die than don’t drink, even if they never had a problem with alcohol. One important reason is that alcohol lubricates so many social interactions, and social interactions are vital for maintaining mental and physical health. As I pointed out last year, nondrinkers show greater signs of depression than those who allow themselves to join the party.

Moral of this story: DRINK MORE BOOZE!

2009-2011 budget: $134 million, generated by sales, fees and fines. Here’s the breakdown: $9.7 million, 67 employees for purchasing, wholesale and support; $18.3 million, 104 employees for public safety; $14.9 million, 59 employees for support services, which includes administration; $82.3 million agents’ compensation and $8.9 million merchant fees. OLCC returned $172 million in proceeds to state and local government for the 2009-2010 fiscal year.

In other OLCC news, Oregon Senator Floyd Prozanski (D-4) is proposing a change to the legislation preventing Oregon homebrewers from consuming their product outside of their homes, an issue that came to head this year (haha, get it?) when the DOJ interpreted the existing legislation regarding the consumption of homebrewed alcohol to mean the end of the homebrew competition at the Oregon State Fair. The legislation is being drafted, and will likely be considered in January, when the legislature gets to start having fun with the state budget again:

Christie Scott, a spokeswoman for the Oregon Liquor Control Commission, said her agency has looked into numerous ways to work within the confines of the law while allowing home brewers to continue sharing their beers and ales beyond where they were brewed. But none of the possible solutions have been practical.

…

“The only real solution to getting this change is changing the statute, and that is exactly what we’re working with Sen. Prozanski on,” Scott said.

Prozanski said he’s taking the lead in the Legislature on finding a solution.

…

Prozanski said it will spell out clearly what Oregonians can and cannot do with the beer, wine, hard cider and other home-made alcohol they produce. The goal is to return to the way such beverages could be enjoyed before the Justice Department’s new interpretation of the law.

“What’s been going on for decades should be permitted,” Prozanski said.

All this anti-OLCC press will certainly be a motivating factor in the midterm elections coming up in the fall, specifically since Republican candidate Chris Dudley is making it a campaign issue.

In a legal opinion made public today, the Oregon Department of Justice has concluded that amateur home brewers lose their exemption under state law that they be licensed as a manufacturer when their home brewed alcoholic liquor is consumed outside the home.

The law in question is ORS 471.403(1), which states:

No person shall brew, ferment, distill, blend or rectify any alcoholic liquor unless licensed so to do by the Oregon Liquor Control Commission. However, the Liquor Control Act does not apply to the making or keeping of naturally fermented wines and fruit juices or beer in the home, for home consumption and not for sale.

Due to the DOJ’s lack of transparency, I’m having trouble finding the actual memo. Beernews.org has some more on the story, including some clarification on how the issue came to light. Also see this article from the Oregonian.

The law is vague, and was born out of a post-Prohibition era attempt to regulate the newly-legal booze flow. Legislators and law enforcers wanted to keep a close watch on the consumption of alcohol. They wanted to regulate it harshly. It isn’t that much different than what’s happening now, right? The OLCC wants to manage every drop of hard alcohol in this state, to, as they put it, prevent over-saturation. They claim to have the best interests of Oregonians in mind, all the while raking in $172 million for the state, most of which goes into the general fund. And let’s not forget last year’s Bend OLCC controversy.

A government organization with ultimate power over a popular commodity is dangerous, self-serving and a horrible precedent for the state of Oregon to set. Popular opinion is turning, though, was more and more people have been expressing their opinions. Maybe the revolution is starting. Maybe Oregonians are going to start fighting back, taking what’s been rightfully ours all along.

I don’t know, maybe I’m just drunk.

The Oregon Liquor Control Commission was recently asked whether certain public competitions involving home made alcohol products were in compliance with the law. We provided guidance to the State Fair and other licensees which stated that such competitions were not authorized because they did not fall within the requirements of this statute ORS 471.403 clearly states that the Liquor Control Act (including the requirement for a liquor license) applies except for beer “brewed in the home for home consumption and not for sale”.

In consultation with the Department of Justice, we have received an initial analysis of the statute regulating home brewing (ORS 471.403) which also indicates that the law only allows for consumption of home brews in the home. The home brewers lose their exemption to craft brew without a license when the home brew is consumed outside of the home.

For all you Oregon State Fair-goers, this means no more home brewed creations to tickle your taste buds. From KATU News in Salem:

The irony is the Oregon State Fair has been holding this home brew competition for years under the same law that is now being interpreted to make the competition illegal. And this in a state known for its microbrews. For example, Oregon is the second largest producer of craft beer in the U.S. and Portland alone has more breweries than any other city in the world, according to the Oregon Brewers Guild.

I don’t know what the deal is here. Oregon’s beer culture is one of the largest ways we draw people into this state and provides important stimulus to our depressing financial situation.

Incidentally, this falls right around Sen. Ron Wyden’s announcement that he will be co-sponsoring legislation to reduce craft beer taxes in Oregon, something he hopes to have in place by the end of 2010:

The bill being discussed by Senator Wyden would reduce the excise tax on breweries producing fewer than 2 million barrels a year. The tax would be reduced from $7 to $3.50.

Oregon brewing, responsible for $2.3 billion dollars a year, is an industry that Senator Wyden identified as a key player in getting Oregonians back to work.

It’s interesting to see the different priorities coming from different offices in the state, especially as this ruling from the OLCC and the DOJ is a shift in interpretation from the past 22 years of the home brew competition’s existence. I’m curious to see how it plays into this fall’s elections as well, as I’ve been told that Oregon gubernatorial candidate Chris Dudley is all about privatizing liquor distribution in this state. Like Dudley, I have little patience for state agencies that seek to parent said state’s citizens while raking in $172 million a year.

“Tyler,

I appreciate you writing me back. To clarify a few things 1) I am not ignorant and 2) I never said ASUO members have never been discriminated against. I did say that most of you are probably not taking this situation seriously because based on who the Pacifica forum is gearing hatred towards most of you would not classify. I think it was very unprofessional for you to say and I quote “how dare me” and that I should be ashamed of what I said. I think it is truly sad that some of the ASUO members have to thought twice about an issue that is blatantly wrong. I think it is ironic that from what I said in my e-mail that you would have the audacity to claim that you are scared of me. It is too bad that this issue probably will not be resolved until someone gets hurt. I do apologize for saying that nothing has been done about this issue because I know most of you do understand and that you are trying to find a solution. I will not be contacting you on any other circumstances and I do appreciate your time because I know you are very busy. I did contact Student Affairs and I have falsely accused ASUO Senate members in that the policy decision making is not left up to you completely in that the President makes final decisions. Thank you again for your time.

Phylicia Haggerty”

At this point in time, since Griffin hasn’t responded to Haggerty (or hasn’t forwarded us his response) we might as well take a swing at this one. Let’s start with her first e-mail, one which is astoundingly hilarious in its authors minute grasp of rational thought, or a basic concept of the U.S. Constitution.

It begins with:

“I wish you could all sit back and take this situation personally, but you cant because your not the one being hated against.”

There are two kinds of ASUO Senators. “Heart” voters, and “head” voters. Luckily, we have quite a few “head” voters on the ASUO–you know, ones who allow for debate and discussion instead of simply responding to such e-mails with “Oh yea? Well fuck YOU!” I’m guessing Haggerty is a “heart” voter. You know, the kind of person who would call me “follically challenged.”

It goes on:

“I know what you all look like and as far as I am concerned I believe there is only one person who looks like they would be hated against by this forum so I would not expect you to take this personally.”

Insert snarky comment comparing Haggerty’s writing of  “I know what you all look like”  to both the e-mail sent to Emma Kallaway and the reported PF member who told a group of students to “watch out at night” here.

“The first amendment is only applicable when it does no harm to others. Trust me, I have studied plenty of Supreme Court cases.”

I’m not sure what version of the Constitution Haggerty is reading. It’s probably the same one that guards you against unreasonable search and seizure unless the police really, really need to find something.

It gets worse with this next email:

“I think it is truly sad that some of the ASUO members have to thought twice about an issue that is blatantly wrong.”

That’s just it though–the issue isn’t cut and dry, wrong or right. Sure, the PF invited some holocaust deniers a few years ago, and this year they brought in people who think the Sieg Heil is socially acceptable. Those people are factually wrong. But their right to speak about those wrong facts is the real issue. It’s not whether or not the Nazis the PF invites are morally corrupt, but whether or not the morally corrupt are protected by the Constitution. Last I heard, there wasn’t a clause in the Bill of Rights that said you’re only entitled to protection if you’re a good person.

Haggerty’s e-mail, as Griffin pointed out in his  initial response, shows an unfathomable ignorance of the issue at hand, the efforts being made by the ASUO, and the governing laws of this republic (it’s even worse that Haggerty said she’s graduating from the UO with two degrees. Nobody said you had to be smart to graduate from college).

Let’s just move forward and look ahead to next week’s Rules Committee, shall we? I need some time to wash the dumb off of me.

Morality has never been hotter.

There has been a disturbing run of PSA’s on MTV lately (not to mention South Park syndication) that I am sure will throw Nancy Grace into a hissy fit.

Athinline.org is the website the MTV ads are pushing lately, and I’m sure that for some people the website does some good, so I won’t write it off completely. Most confusing about the advertisements, however, is their appearance on MTV itself – a channel which produces constant surveillance of celebrities and promotes the over-sexualization of precarious individuals.

Conversely, the website’s messages of “Anti-Sexting” (sexy-texting for those of you who don’t speak LE3T) and how to counter “Constant Messaging” doesn’t seem to coincide with the basic concept of MTV’s programming.

In any case, I’m glad that MTV has decided in recent years to run seemingly obligational, horribly contrived messages to their younger viewers preaching responsibility. It fits right in.

Now, who’s up for a wet t-shirt contest in Cabo? Spring Break is right around the corner.

Perfecting the Art

Just one month before the turn of the century, the Oregon Commentator was in some relative hot water over a front cover they had ran purporting then University of Oregon President Dave Frohnmayer to have died. Frohnmayer famously had a heart attack at a medical conference in Bethesda, Maryland but had escaped the ordeal relatively unharmed.

At the time, “Das Frohn” was rather upset about the cover, “Quite frankly, he was pissed off,” said then-OC editor Bill Beutler.

The comedic timing of the magazine had been a question, but the Commentator’s place ten years ago was clearly one of interest, to say the least.

The Birth of a Brew

In the Summer of 2001, the Commentator’s beloved mascot, Sudsy O’Sullivan, was introduced. Although he graciously turns away the notion that he is the “father” of Sudsy, former staffer Sho Ikeda is largely credited with creating the icon. As the story goes, Sho, Bret Jacobsen and Pete Hunt (the magazine’s publisher and editor respectively) were drinking at Rennie’s Landing when the idea for the anthropomorphic mug of pilsner was scribbled down on a cocktail napkin.

Using all the craft of the rudimentary search engines of the day (alongside Photoshop) Ikeda combined clip art of a mug of beer, the face from the Kool-Aid Man and the cigar-holding arm of “Baby Huey” from Who Framed Roger Rabbit? Ikeda unleashed a golden, frothy blessing upon the campus of the University of Oregon.

A Campus Mourns

Sudsy’s story briefly turned dark in 2004 as an article (“The Death of… Sudsy!” 5/24/04) reported that the mascot had died in an attempt to make himself into a gigantic boilermaker for the alcoholic staffers. The true “King of Beers” was gone, and without an immediate replacement, the Commentator began a search for a new mascot. Fortunately for students Sudsy was re-brewed the following school year, as he rose from the grave and returned to his former position.

Go Fuck Hirself

In the Fall of 2004, transperson and  ASUO Sentator Toby Hill-Meyer was being interviewed for a Daily Emerald piece about a performance he’d done at the EMU. Hill-Meyer wished to be referred to by the gender neutral pronouns “ze” and “hir” as he did not associate himself with one sex or the other.

The Commentator playfully jabbed at the ridiculousness of the situation, one where Hill-Meyer had made his own sexual confusion a campus-wide topic by his own doing (it should be noted that Hill-Meyer’s request was followed by the Emerald for the entire year, as much was to be written involving him as he was an ASUO Senator). In any case, the Commentator ran several “OC Asks” with Hill-Meyer as a participant where he talked about “hate crimes” “lawsuits” and the like.

The situation escalated when the Commentator’s PFC tag, Mason Quiroz, actively took part in an effort to defund the magazine. Media coverage about the Commentator being an “active perpetrator of hate crime” turned the ASUO against the Commentator, and led to a show trial (really, a funding meeting) at which opponents of the Oregon Commentator showed up with purple arm bands in goosestepping similarity.

The Commentator was, however, funded for the upcoming year. It probably didn’t help that the main plaintiff against the OC, Hill-Meyer, waffled when asked a direct question by the ASUO members regarding the Commentator’s purveyance of hate crime. Once again, the Commentator proved to the campus that free speech was not to be infringed upon, and that content was not a basis for funding (or defunding).

Defending Those Who Will Not Defend Themselves

The front cover of the Oregon Commentator in which all 12 of the Mohammad cartoons ran. Spring, 2006.

As the Jyllands-Posten Mohammad cartoon controversy ran wild in 2006, the Oregon Commentator, in an effort to open the discussion about printing the cartoons, printed all twelve of the “offensive” cartoons themselves. One of the only western media outlets to do so, the Commentator saw little reaction to their reprinting of the cartoons. That is, until the Student Insurgent got hold of it.

For some unexplicable reason, the Student Insurgent printed several cartoons in their May 2006 issue of Jesus Christ in several “radical” poses – with a massive, pink boner, as a helicopter, as a woman (and pregnant) etc. The editorial in the Insurgent suggested that this was to “teach the Commentator a lesson” and to “see what it felt like to have their deity impugned”.

Jesus packing some serious heat on the front cover of the Student Insurgent. March, 2006.

Of course, the Commentator is not a Christian organization, and individually the members of the Commentator have typically been ones with little or no religious designation. Quite simply, the Commentator staffers were not, as the Insurgent had hoped, offended by their “artwork”. In fact, upon reading the editorial in the Insurgent, then editor-in-chief Ian Spencer asked his staffers, “Do these people have no reading comprehension skills at all?”

What followed was a national clusterfuck of epic proportions. A former Commentator editor, Owen Brennan, was working as a producer for Bill O’Reilly’s O’Reilly Factor at the time, and wanted the editor of the Insurgent, Don Goldman, to appear on the show. When Brennan asked Commentator editor emeritus Tyler Graf to contact Goldman, the leader of the “anarchist collective” was dismissive of the invitation, “Why the fuck would I want to go on there [the O'Reilly Factor] and get yelled at?” he told Graf.

Mustering all the courage he could, Graf was invited to appear in place of Goldman – and in defense of the Insurgent’s right to free speech (however idiotic and misplaced) – on the show with Mr. O’Reilly. And indeed, he did get yelled at.

In his essay in By the Barrel: 25 Years of the Oregon Commentator, Graf remarked of the situation, “The Insurgent had its opportunity, and in a fit of infighting, decided to slink away into the shadows, like cowards. Looking back on it, it’s obvious the Insurgent collective didn’t actually believe in what they printed, and they had no rationale for it, unlike the OC with its editorial and pictures of the Mohammad cartoons. They were only interested in provoking a response.”

Drew Supports Rape Culture

In one of his fan-favorite editions of “Graphs by Drew” then-staffer and current OC editor-in-chief concocted a particularly hilarious “Odds by Drew” for Valentines Day 2008. The “Odds” gave examples of what you could give to ladies and the odds you would get laid depending on what you gave them. The graph looked like this:

• A box of chocolates  1:4
• Roses  1:2
• A bottle of KY Intrigue  1:50
• 40’s of 2-11  1:1

Katie Hulse, a member of the Siren (the women’s center’s magazine) found this highly offensive and expressed her concern in a letter to the Emerald that was not printed (for obvious reasons found below). Fortunately for her, she was able to turn her letter into an article for the Siren, “ ‘Odds by Drew’ perpetuates a rape culture and climate, and actively furthers the stereotype that the smart and powerful women at the University of Oregon and everywhere else are at the disposal of men… I urge the ASUO senate to re-examine their funding of this periodical…”

Cattermole’s response was perfectly measured in the next issue of the Commentator, and he responded to Hulse directly, “I see you’re a big fan of my work. Only someone who has too much time on her hands (or loves my odds) could write and 800 word letter about one sentence. Clearly I was way off in thinking that 40’s returning the best odds was a cheap joke. No, it’s definitely a sign that rape is cool.”

The ridiculousness of the situation didn’t escalate from there, but clearly the Commentator is still the victim of overreaction just as much as it was in 2000 as in 2008.

The Decade Ahead

The Commentator has gone through much in the last decade. Several important events, although meaningful, have not been mentioned here. To list them in full would take up too much space, and would be almost impossible to report. Upon examination of the Commentator at the turn of the century, it is clear that the OC is, as 2009 turns to 2010, still an instigator of discussion and a magnet for ideological bombshells from those in the PC movement.

We are still the targets of death threats. We still get called “racists”. We are still the leading contrarian viewpoint on campus. I can only imagine, after reflecting on the last 25 years and the last 10 years individually, that the Commentator will continue on for the next 10 years in the same role it has played – introducing meaningful conversation about campus topics while the Emerald prints Sudoku and the Voice writes about hipster bands.

It’s a labor of love, but someone’s got to drink it. Here’s to the next 10 years.

If you would like to know more about the history of the Oregon Commentator, please contact us about our book: “By the Barrel: 25 Years of the Oregon Commentator”

There was an article in today’s New York Times that detailed a new video game REO Speedwagon released today titled REO Speedwagon: Find Your Own Way Home. The article has its ridiculous moments, my favorite was this:

“I remember the first time I saw a pinball machine with Kiss,” [REO Speedwagon's manager] added. “This is a 21st-century version.”

The game wouldn’t sound so ridiculous if the screenshot given with the article didn’t look like my grandmother’s bridge club had been painted into a Thomas Kincaid print.

Personally I’m just waiting for a GG Allin-themed video game. I can see it now: Murder Junkies

A button to shoot up herion

B button to smash your head with a bottle

X button to defecate in your hand

Y button to throw

I for one am thoroughly outraged at the under representation of one very important part of the holiday season.

Christmas, Hanukkah, Kwanzaa, Korean present wrapping traditions…

Where is winter solstice?

GAP understands me.

1. At the Alamo

2. Inappropriate usage.

3. Sportin’ some fresh new gear.

4. Dinner at the riverwalk.

5. Tim Dreier stopped by in time to pay our bar tab.

6. Suit up!

7. Reading other CN publications.

8. A Veteran’s Day Parade

9. Conference

10. Swing music at TEXAS II with new friend “The Keneyon” and Xavier from PSU.

11. Sometimes you just need to read the writing on the wall.