« Obama should raise the stakes with more tact | ryoma's Blog | Catholics, African-Americans, women, latte drinkers... »
That Kool-Aid: So Much Tastier Than This Hateraide
I drank the Kool-Aid. And it was good.
I started off as an equal opportunity “wait and see but I support all and any of the three” Democrat in this campaign. Leaned towards Edwards, whose policies I felt were the closest to my own, but tried to hold back on committing until I could take good measure of the whole bunch of them.
But I got drawn in. I admit it. That whole Obamenon made me feel like there was something special and cool going on there that I wasn't hip to, that I was missing out on. Something that I thought I might want to be a part of, but I didn't know enough about to know why yet.
It was like walking down the street and passing a kickass house party. I could tell everyone was having a blast, and I wanted to just walk up to the door and jump right into the fray.
And eventually, I did. I watched the S.C. speech. I went back and watched the 2004 convention speech again. And later, after going right up to the punch bowl feeling real thirsty, the Iowa victory speech pretty much sealed the deal for me.
I drank the Kool-Aid, and it was tasty. And for a while there I was having a great time.
Then the buzzkills started coming in:
“Latinos won't vote for a black guy.”
“Jesse Jackson won, too.”
"He wouldn't have been my pastor."
“It's 3 a.m.”
Man, talk about harshing on my mellow. What a drag.
----------
What I hadn't realized until much more recently was that not only was I not alone in my resentment of the way Hillary has been running her campaign. There are a lot of my fellow Obama supporters who are a lot angrier and a lot more worked up about it than me.
I've been a passive reader of TPM for a fairly long time, but only recently made an account and took my first steps in writing a couple meager blog entries. And then I started reading the comments, too.
Wow. There are some really, really defensive and pissed off Obama supporters out there (and in here). Maybe I'm just naive, but that really caught me off guard.
It seems to me that Hillary has really done an outstandingly successful job of pissing in our cheerios.
And the big problem with that is that it's a kind of campaign success for her, and not an insignificant one in my estimation.
She's turned our Kool-Aid into Hateraide.
She's turned our rising tide of hope, positivity, optimism and good vibes into a groundswell of thinly veiled resentment, not-veiled resentment, downright outrage, smug eye rolling, angry lashing back... and the like.
Proudly proclaiming “Yes we can!” has given way to sourly scowling “There she goes again.”
----------
Now, don't get me wrong.
All the negative feelings I'm describing, I've felt them – and voiced them – too. I'm not saying they're not justified in many cases.
But we don't seem to be very good collectively at letting go. We're worse grudge holders than we think we are.
And my big concern here is that the Hillary camp has successfully squelched some of our Obama camp mojo.
Just when we had it workin' so good.
And come general election time, we're going to need it. Because the same hopeful, positive qualities that have attracted undecided Democrats like me en masse to Barack Obama, and led them to “drink the Kool-Aid” and become not only Obama voters but Obama supporters who can and will help to spread that infectious optimism, those are the exact same qualities that are going to attract undecided independents and Republicans who will be necessary to tilt the general election in Obama's favor.
How many more people are going to want to join our party if we can't remember how to enjoy it again?
How many people will want to come drink the Kool-Aid if they notice that so many of us have stopped drinking it ourselves?
I started off as an equal opportunity “wait and see but I support all and any of the three” Democrat in this campaign. Leaned towards Edwards, whose policies I felt were the closest to my own, but tried to hold back on committing until I could take good measure of the whole bunch of them.
But I got drawn in. I admit it. That whole Obamenon made me feel like there was something special and cool going on there that I wasn't hip to, that I was missing out on. Something that I thought I might want to be a part of, but I didn't know enough about to know why yet.
It was like walking down the street and passing a kickass house party. I could tell everyone was having a blast, and I wanted to just walk up to the door and jump right into the fray.
And eventually, I did. I watched the S.C. speech. I went back and watched the 2004 convention speech again. And later, after going right up to the punch bowl feeling real thirsty, the Iowa victory speech pretty much sealed the deal for me.
I drank the Kool-Aid, and it was tasty. And for a while there I was having a great time.
Then the buzzkills started coming in:
“Latinos won't vote for a black guy.”
“Jesse Jackson won, too.”
"He wouldn't have been my pastor."
“It's 3 a.m.”
Man, talk about harshing on my mellow. What a drag.
----------
What I hadn't realized until much more recently was that not only was I not alone in my resentment of the way Hillary has been running her campaign. There are a lot of my fellow Obama supporters who are a lot angrier and a lot more worked up about it than me.
I've been a passive reader of TPM for a fairly long time, but only recently made an account and took my first steps in writing a couple meager blog entries. And then I started reading the comments, too.
Wow. There are some really, really defensive and pissed off Obama supporters out there (and in here). Maybe I'm just naive, but that really caught me off guard.
It seems to me that Hillary has really done an outstandingly successful job of pissing in our cheerios.
And the big problem with that is that it's a kind of campaign success for her, and not an insignificant one in my estimation.
She's turned our Kool-Aid into Hateraide.
She's turned our rising tide of hope, positivity, optimism and good vibes into a groundswell of thinly veiled resentment, not-veiled resentment, downright outrage, smug eye rolling, angry lashing back... and the like.
Proudly proclaiming “Yes we can!” has given way to sourly scowling “There she goes again.”
----------
Now, don't get me wrong.
All the negative feelings I'm describing, I've felt them – and voiced them – too. I'm not saying they're not justified in many cases.
But we don't seem to be very good collectively at letting go. We're worse grudge holders than we think we are.
And my big concern here is that the Hillary camp has successfully squelched some of our Obama camp mojo.
Just when we had it workin' so good.
And come general election time, we're going to need it. Because the same hopeful, positive qualities that have attracted undecided Democrats like me en masse to Barack Obama, and led them to “drink the Kool-Aid” and become not only Obama voters but Obama supporters who can and will help to spread that infectious optimism, those are the exact same qualities that are going to attract undecided independents and Republicans who will be necessary to tilt the general election in Obama's favor.
How many more people are going to want to join our party if we can't remember how to enjoy it again?
How many people will want to come drink the Kool-Aid if they notice that so many of us have stopped drinking it ourselves?
Advertisement
Nice first effort.
:)
April 14, 2008 7:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
Good post, very good point.
April 14, 2008 7:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
I agree that the kool-aid is far tastier.
I have supported Obama pretty much from the beginning, though back in winter '06/'07, I was still making my mind up between 'change' and 'experience'. I kind of liked the idea of Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Madeleine Albright, and all the others from the pantheon of the '90s being back in the White House. But, I made my choice and stuck to it.
By the end of December '07, I was beginning to see a slightly cynical campaign emerging from the Clintons - but it didn't bother me all that much: after all, Obama was still the underdog, and it seemed unfair to put our apparent failure to gain widespread support (at that point) purely down to Clinton's tactics.
But as '08 unfolded, pretty much since New Hampshire, the resentment grew and grew. The attempts to close down Nevada Caucus sites, and then claiming that caucuses were undemocratic, the racially-charged confrontations in South Carolina, the Kitchen Sink... right up to the point where it became clear that it was mathematically impossible for her to win a delegate victory, and that this pointless in-fighting was just harming Obama for the fall... I drank more and more hateraid.
Then, suddenly, I stopped. I gave up hating Hillary. It was exhausting for me, because I hated John McCain so much more, and couldn't really find it in myself to be pissed with two candidates at once. I just hoped that Clinton would keep it civil until she finally lost the race.
This is why the recent "bitter-gate" has not sent me into a tantrum - it annoys me, but only because it prevents us from enjoying the party, like you say. It just adds to the baggage that Obama will inherit, and have to start unpacking and sorting through once he is the nominee. For now, I'm more resigned than I am angry. Unless Obama somehow wins Pennsylvania, then I guess I'll just have to go back and listen to the Iowa Victory speech.
April 14, 2008 8:05 AM | Reply | Permalink
I agree with you about not hating Hillary. I find that I don't hate her as much as I thought I did. I pity her more than anything. She reminds me of that friend you've been friends with for so long who you don't like hanging out with anymore, usually because they're boorish or dull or both. You suck it up because you don't have to see the person that often. A few years pass and even though you exchange emails and the rare phone call, you try to remember what it was that got you guys hanging out together in the first place. Then you remember it was through a mutual, someone you both lost contact with years ago...that's the only glue holding you together.
April 14, 2008 11:00 AM | Reply | Permalink
Although I can appreciate the overall sentiment of your post, I really have issues with the whole "drinking the Kool Aid" analogy.
Kool-Aid was used to induce people to commit suicide in Jonestown, Guyana, if you recall. So the phrase brings that connotation to mind. Drinking the Kool-Aid implies that someone is being duped.
As for the bring back the glee and "enjoyment" of the campaign, I think we can revert (back) to that after Hillary concedes. But in the midst of these captious, spurious attacks, I really don't think so. It is completely annoying to see the game she's running down. And for those who recognize that, it's totally appropriate to express anger and resentment.
Obama is not just some cool Black dude with no substance. And he is not a modern day "Mr. Happy". He is a complex and fiercely unique, renegade politician. He has the guts to march right into a fire and deal with ANY pertinent issue. In short, he is a man of uncompromising substance and depth. His speech from Steelton, PA last night demonstrated some of this fire. When under attack, Obama rises to the occasion better than anyone on the scene today.
One time Obama was on a TV talk show, and the subject of race came up. And he was asked is there a difference between "white and black patriotism". And he said no, there really wasn't. But whereas whites may look at America, and hear a marching band, blacks look at it and hear a jazz composition ... with blue notes.
Now that's some deep, profound shit.
No, I'd have to say "drinking" Obama is far more than having a mere cup of Kool-Aid. (and my vegetarians kinfolk may empathize with this) No, Obama's more like a cup of mixed green vegetable juice.
It may not taste great. But nutritionally, it's doing wonderment for your body. And giving you energy to boot.
So let's sip on some Green drink instead.
And set this country right.
April 14, 2008 9:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
I object to the drinking of green vegetable juice. But I agree that "drinking the Kool-Aid" has a way too negative meaning.
It's difficult to not speak out when I see Clinton aligning herself with the right. I content that she would not have hurt her campaign in the least if she had stood with Obama against the charge of elitism, as this would have furthered the fight to end the myth of Dem elitism. Instead, she picked up a gun and a shot glass and, with her 109 million friends, called him an elitist. Bad form. Bad for the party. Bad for Hillary.
I'm proud of Obama for defending himself in the Steelton speech. He's proving that he can stand up to the GOP attack machine, which for some reason people are afraid will wither him. I disagree. I also believe the GOP attack machine won't be as powerful as it once was, and that the left's plans to counter it will work.
We need another primary and fast. There's too much silly season time in between.
April 14, 2008 10:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
Carrot Apple Ginger then?
Regarding the GOP attack machine, McCain is going around saying he wants to have a respectful campaign. That he doesn't want 527s spreading muck and making personal attacks. So IF he's true to his word, then we can expect a campaign based primarily on the issues -- which Obama will win. If McCain is lying, however, it still won't make much difference, because his positions on issues are so antiquated and backward, that people will see his politics for what they are -- Stone Age.
April 14, 2008 11:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
Head to head, issue to issue, McCain doesn't stand a chance. Even if McCain lets the 527s spread fertilizer, Obama will still pound him on the issues, and it's proven that the bitter people want to talk about issues. Unlike Kerry, Obama will defend himself against silly charges and turn divisive talk back to the issues. Of this I have no doubt. I only wish Obama had just one foe to face instead of two right now. She saps the strength of the party.
Carrot apple ginger is fine. I appreciate your concern.
April 14, 2008 11:48 AM | Reply | Permalink
There's an awful agenda of work to do and the country doesn't stand a chance of even starting on it with those geezers leading. They're so locked into the old politics that they can't even see that we must get on the stick and make some massive changes in our entire culture. We've got the environment, the economy, race and religion, undoing the trespasses upon the constitution, changing the way we deal with nations across the globe, the way we eat, the way we keep ourselves healthy, the way we make ourselves sick. And those are just for starters.
If you think even the tiniest bit that either of those old guys can lead a resentful and skeptical populace to do the stuff it doesn't want to do, to change our excessive lifestyle and open our minds to all the "others" with which we will be dealing for the next 100 years, think again.
There really is only one choice here if we recognize that we must change, that we no longer have a choice, that we've utterly failed to behave with foresight since the first oil crunch, that our next generations require, not deserve but require, that we get on with it.
And there is still 23% of the electorate that believes none of this is even worth considering.
The two geezer candidates sure aren't going to bring them along. The younger one will have to work his butt off to even pry their little eyes open.
It's deeper into the mind than just Kool-Ade. And it's not "believing" either. It's understanding in your belly.
April 14, 2008 9:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
Very good post. Great comments.
Watch how Barack deals with this stuff:
He rises above it, lables it, then -- with humor and gentle mockery -- drives a stiletto into its heart.
This is like MLK at his best: provoke them to behave at their worst, then shine a light on that behavior for all to see.
The outcome? All but the most rabid and ignorant of their supporters then quietly fall away.
Isn't that what's been happening for better than 2 months now?
April 14, 2008 9:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
Buckeye, dh. You hit the nail right on the head!
April 14, 2008 10:16 AM | Reply | Permalink
Thing is, I don't mean to belittle people's distress, but you did say you just started commenting on blogs.
I've been doing this for over 5 years, all over the left side of the internet. I have yet to find one site where you don't have a dynamic of people with a shared position or belief or support for one candidate who fight the people who disagree. This is not special to this election, this web site or the people here.
But what you have to get in your heads, people, is that the only people who are paying attention are the ones who are already here. No one bases a vote on what they read some jackass say online, if they are sane.
This is all really just play - don't take yourselves so damn seriously. What happens here does not have much bearing on what is happening in general in real space as opposed to virtual.
Honest.
April 14, 2008 10:10 AM | Reply | Permalink
Merit sticker of choice for you toon, HTX!
If I had a nickel for every time I've read that someone is going to vote for a candidate that they don't support because they "don't like what they see in the comments section," I'd be rich enough to be one of Bush's cronies.
As for the premise of the original post, I agree and I disagree. I wrote about this a few weeks ago and I'll just reiterate it: A lot of Obama supporters feel a great degree of... heh heh hehe... bitterness and disappointment with the campaign tactics of Bill and Hillary because we fervently stood beside them through so much crap during the 90s. Was the impeachment a witch hunt? Absolutely. Was Bill Clinton a perjurer and serial-adulterer? Absolutely. We took our lumps for them because they were willing to take their lumps for us. But Hillary and her surrogates have been going out of their way to dump on Obama supporters at every available opportunity since Iowa, and they don't seem to realize that we are not all new voters, we are not all "reformed Republicans," and we are not all latte-sipping elitists.
Some of Obama's most fervent supporters voted once or twice for Bill and looked the other way when Hillary suddenly decided she was from New York when she wanted to run for the Senate. We work looking forward to a second Clinton Administration. And now we're being told that, because we support Barack Obama, we're misogynists who don't want to see a qualified woman elected President. For those of us who are die-hard Democrats, die-hard Progressives, die-hard Feminists, that is deeply, deeply offensive. When this started, it wasn't that we didn't like her, it was just that we liked him more and thought he would be a better candidate. Now, many of us don't like her and KNOW that he's a better candidate. Blame Penn. Blame Wolfson. Blame Bill. I'm looking at Hillary...
April 14, 2008 10:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
Thank you. Excellent post.
I took a lot of heat for supporting Bill through all that crap. And when it came to deciding this time, I weighed the replay and decided I'd use my money with another candidate. I didn't want the Clinton Drama Machine to rev up again, but darned if they didn't fill the tank with ($4/gal) gas anyway. The Clintons -- note that plural -- we would be electing THEM again. Both of THEM. I voted for him twice, and that's the end of my patience. Please, make her stop. I can't stand her grating, whiny, yelling any more. She blows her punchlines and repeats the lies time and time again. And if she's EVER shot a duck, I'll eat ... something. Oy!
April 14, 2008 8:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, I have to remind myself sometimes that blog commenters are not an accurate reflection of reality. If I don't, I can get terribly depressed.
April 14, 2008 4:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Tena, if we don't find each other here, how will we form the core of people who lead the sheep towards the necessary change?
Unfortunately Mr. Obama is correct - the change will not happen if it's not lead from below.
We have the mechanisms to find each other, and soon it will be time for us to do more than drink. We're going to have to get off the pot, and, if we're courageous it will be sooner if Mr. Obama becomes President of our country.
if we're cowardly it will be 4 years from now.
So I say, let's keep talking and start planning how we're going to work together.
April 14, 2008 11:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes.
He has just about the best campaign I've ever seen. They do a great job of answering these smears every single time.
April 14, 2008 10:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think he is the most gifted politician I have ever seen work the trade. He has beat the Clintons silly on the trail and they still do not know what hit them. They still think he is a loser and we are fools even after watching him drink their milkshake without breaking a sweat or comprimising his ethics time and again.
April 14, 2008 10:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
He drinks it up!!!
April 14, 2008 10:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
Your elitism is showing - most of us rural types grew up with "bug juice", our families couldn't afford Kool-Aid.
/hopefully funny semi non-sequitur
April 14, 2008 10:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks to those of you with the kind words.
Yep, I'm new at this, so it's nice to hear.
BionicSoy, I completely agree with you about the use of the term Kool-Aid when it's used to belittle the validity of Obama supporters' views. I was just trying to subvert the analogy a little bit by playing with it and twisting it into something positive.
When I think "Kool-Aid" I prefer to think of it as the electric variety.
Anyhow, I guess if I could boil my point here down to one simple idea, it would just be that in the midst of all these ticky-tack campaign battles, it would be a mistake for us to lose sight of what makes the Obama campaign special, unique and necessary in this moment to begin with.
April 14, 2008 10:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
April 14, 2008 10:28 AM | Reply | Permalink
Sorry, but hate seems to be coming more from the Obama followers than HRC supporters.
HRC didn't say Latinos won't vote for a black guy... the polls did.
Jesse Jackson comment was not HRC's comment. I guess you think HRC is just an extension of Bill Clinton. That is sexist.
He wouldn't be my pastor... what is wrong with this? Wright is a problem for Obama.
3AM... I didn't care for this either. But she does havemore experience. As a senior citizen, I value that. Young folks sometimes think experience is a liability.
But the bottom line is:
That you find the election process distasteful thus far is telling me that you'll positively faint when the GOP goes after your guy.
I was turned off by the mania, and preachy quality of Obama's speeches. He can't keep the promises he is making.
April 14, 2008 11:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
If you're a senior citizen, Nell, as you suggested, I have some advice for you. You've had your whole adult life to choose past presidents. And the many presidents that your generation have chosen have resulted in the country we have today. And right now this country is in serious, serious trouble as a result. So isn't it about time that you step aside and let our generation choose the leadership that will most profoundly affect our lives for decades to come? And our children's lives? Just something for you and your generation to think about it.
Also, I notice that in your comment, you skipped over any discussion of NAFTA and Clinton's lies, Bosnia and Clinton's lies, all the goo gabs of money Clinton gets from lobbyists and drug companies, and the questions around the Columbia Trade Deal. Now isn't that supremely convenient.
April 14, 2008 11:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
That's not really fair. People are allowed to vote for whomever they wish, for whatever reason, and at any age. Older dems have made mistakes, sure, but they have also done much for the country.
Obviously, people on either side of the dem race will see fault in their opponent's supporters before they see it in their peers. It's natural. And yes, there is a generational gap in play here. That said, beating people up now won't help us in November.
Refute mistruths, but don't go for ad hominems. If you want to beat up old folks, go after McCain. :)
April 14, 2008 12:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually I do go after McCain quite regularly. But my comments here were not designed to "go after" old folks. What I am saying is, younger people are going to have to deal with the full consequences of any election result. So hypothetically, if ALL younger Americans voted for Obama, and ALL older Americans voted for Hillary, and let's say Hillary wins, and ends up becoming the president, the younger generations will have to suffer the full brunt of her policies for decades to come. Conversely, older folks have been voting for decades. They've decided the fate of this nation for decades past. They had their time and they reaped the results, good and bad, and I respect that as their right. But young folks are going to inherit the full mess and they should have a say in who will lead this country into the future. It's just something for folks of the older generation to consider when they think about casting their vote.
I'm not saying they don't have a right to vote for whoever they want. I'm just opening up another dimension of thought into how that decision might be made.
And I make the same argument to older people who will vote for McCain simply because he is "of my generation".
April 14, 2008 12:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
I probably should have italicized those sentiments rather than putting them in quotations, as I was actually paraphrasing/summarizing the gist in most cases.
But all of them (including the idea that Latinos won't vote for a black candidate, voiced by Clinton pollster Sergio Bendixen) were views that emerged from the Clinton camp, albeit not strictly from Hillary herself.
And I think it's very unfair and misguided of you to accuse me of sexism in that regard, not to mention that it shows you are missing the point of my post:
It is factually accurate to say that all of those ideas were recognized, fairly or not, as having come out of the Hillary camp, and that all of them stirred reactions of anger and resentment among Obama supporters.
It's the reaction to these types of things that my post is concerned with. And I'm not arguing whether that reaction is fair or not, just recognizing that it exists, and raising a concern about us dwelling too much on negatives.
April 14, 2008 12:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
She does not have more experience unless you count her husband's experience as hers. That would be truely sexist.
April 14, 2008 3:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hillary would be ready on Day One if the Inauguration was held on December 24th. That would give her a day to utilize her experience and decorate the White House Christmas tree.
April 14, 2008 7:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
No, I think Bill Clinton is currently an extension of HRC. Is that sexist, too?
It's pretty arrogant for a white woman to state what she would do were she a black man. She could have just as easily been as graceful as Gov. Huckabee, saying that if she'd been through what Rev. Wright had she might be angry too. Except Hillary doesn't do graceful.
She doesn't have more experience than Obama as an elected official. While being first lady obviously counts for something, she officially did very little other than ceremonial stuff. The one policy that she did have (health care), she badly bungled. Then there's the little matter of her dodging snipers in Bosnia.
April 14, 2008 9:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Excellent post and many excellent comments as well.
April 14, 2008 1:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
No Hater-aid here, just whole lot of "yes we can".
April 14, 2008 2:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Haterade, Trolls Love It!"
April 14, 2008 3:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Still drinking the Kool-Aid.
Actually as a long-time supporter, I really only got Kool-Aid deep in the last couple weeks.
April 14, 2008 4:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
You damn right that people are getting pissed off. Hillary is relaying on the lowest scum of society to push Obama off but she won't admit it. She's trying to drudge up old animosities and hatreds to let them do her dirty work for her.
April 14, 2008 5:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
It is the worst kind of racism. Using racism that you know is wrong to futher you political ambitions. Is there no level so low that she will not stoop to it.
April 14, 2008 6:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
By definition of the term, a black person can't be racist.
But, when BHO walked out on the (Abe Lincoln served here) steps and announced "I am a black man,and I'm running for President of the United States", and "our time has come", how do you spin that?
He is so elle-quainte, and so condosendimongolus
,but like he says "to know me is to love me".
I believe you'all rally do.
April 14, 2008 7:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
"By definition of the term, a black person can't be racist."
Is that supposed to be a joke? If not, please buy a dictionary, or use one of the many online dictionaries. It only takes five seconds to look up a word.
I consider Barack by far the best candidate. But if he becomes president, he will not be able to do anything without the active support of the public. We'll get the government we deserve, one way or another.
April 14, 2008 10:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
I do. You want to know why? Because I've never had a candidate who made me feel so good about him. Just that simple.
Oddly enough, I keep reading other people, like Bill Richardson, who say the same thing. He might seem too good to be true, but the fact is, he's not. He is what he seems to be and I haven't ever had a candidate like before and I do, I love him for it.
April 14, 2008 8:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
What Obama is not... an elitist.
What Obama is... an intellectual.
There's a difference. One gets to be an elitist by being privileged. One gets to be an intellectual by being smart.
April 14, 2008 10:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hillerade, with just the right bitter-whiskey touch to sip in the duck blind while you're hunting down your small town dinner.
April 14, 2008 11:12 PM | Reply | Permalink