Is Yuengling a “shitty” beer, as City Paper contributor Warren Rojas alleged in last week’s paper? Reader Edward C. Moore, writing in with an elaborately calligraphed letter, disagrees.
Penning his feelings from a seat by the beer tap at Capitol Hill’s Mr. Henry’s restaurant, Moore alleges that City Paper has libeled a “reasonably priced” lager to favor trendier beers. Notably, Moore doesn’t offer the same defenses for other beers Rojas tagged as “shitty,” including near-hometown favorite National Bohemian.
Here’s Moore’s full letter, sic throughout:
I object to Warren Rojas’s libelous characterization of Yuengling as “shitty beer.” Yuengling is a tastey, reasonably priced accessible lager. As I possess a vulgar tongue, I do not favor the qualities City Paper writers seek on beers: pretense, obscurity, expense, and trendiness. My taste, therefore, maybe flawed. I am so as John pulls another $4.00 Yuengling for me,
Edward C. Moore.
What say you, hop hogs? Was Pennsylvania’s beloved Yuengling unfairly pegged as a shitty beer, or should Moore stick to calligraphy and leave beer prose to the pros?
Editor’s note: The ink was blue and glittery. As in, the ink itself had tiny flecks of shiny material in it. It glittered.