I have to disagree with you that high alcohol is a "flaw". Perhaps it is just a poor choice of words, but a flaw to me means something went wrong with the wine. Excess brett (some would say any brett), secondary fermentations are flaws, high alcohol is a wine-making decision. You may not like the style, but I wouldn't call it a flaw. Also, the comments you quote aren't the best things you can say about high alcohol wines. Those are comments that defend the alcohol level by stating you can't taste the alcohol (if you could taste the alcohol, it might qualify as a flaw). If you read those same reveiws, you will also hear comments about being full-bodied, smooth texture, very fruit forward, heavily extracted, and long-finish, which are all charecteristics of many high alcohol wines. To compare a wine with 15% alcohol to Everclear at 95% is absurd. And drinking a wine with a 2% higher alcohol level doesn't necessarily make one a frat boy.
Many traditionalist hate high alcohol wines. You might be surprised by a quote Adam Lee of Siduri wines posted on another board (with apologies to Adam):
"At 11.5% one makes barely passable wines, at 12% one makes decent, marketable wines, at 12.5% above average, at 12.75% they are lively, firm and ruby, at 13% and 13.5% one makes great wines; at 14%, 14.5%, 15%, and 15.5%, one makes altogether exceptional, incomparable wines."
No, this wasn't written by Robert Parker. It is from J.-M. Duvault-Blochet, who was the owner of DRC for quite a few years in the pre-phylloxera period of the early - mid 1800s.
I like zins with 16%+ alcohol, but I'm not sure how I feel about high octane pinot noir. I've had nice ones, and I've had disappointments. Hmmm, maybe more research is required...