European Union leaders will consider imposing 25 percent tariffs on a range of US imports, including steel, clothes, and food, but not bourbon or other alcoholic drinks, following US President Trump’s decision to impose tariffs on imports from the EU.
I can’t say I’ve ever enjoyed the taste of a regular whiskey, top shelf or not. There is a difference. Granted, your comment is intended as baiting in this way.
Try a corn whiskey, some people don’t like Rye or the other grains, but the only distinction (again) between corn whiskey and bourbon is quite literally Bourbon is only bottled in the USA. That’s it. Nothing else.
The “baiting” is to find the Americans, they cling to bourbon is better, but it’s really not, it’s a corn whiskey, distilled in the USA. Americans are the only ones swooning over a marketing difference.
You can take aged Kentucky bourbon over to the UK, but you couldn’t bottle is as bourbon, that’s how stupid this distinction is.
Straight bourbon is required to be 51% corn, aged in chared oak barrels for at least 2 years, and must be at least 80 proof.
Of course none of that makes it better, because it’s just preferences like anything else anyway. But bourbon is its own thing.
Jack Daniels put whiskey on it’s bottles, don’t they?
Ya, that’s because it’s not Bourbon. Which kinda proves the point, right.
Yet it 100% is made to the bourbon minimal conditions. So it’s Bourbon, deceptively (strong word here for the lulz) labeled as whiskey?
Ya, kinda and it is a pretty funny answer. Jack uses a slightly different process called the Lincoln county process. Basically, they filter it through charcoal made from maple wood.
That still meets the requirements for Bourbon, but they wanted to have their own “Tennessee whiskey” definition that includes the Lincoln process. Although, I don’t know who else uses it other than them and Dickle.
So, ya, bourbon subset that doesn’t want to be called bourbon because it’s Tennessee whiskey. Lol.
Hey you just described the requirement of corn whiskey? Anyone can distill a spirit that could be called Bourbon, but they can’t, since it wasn’t bottled in the USA.
The only difference between a corn whiskey is bourbon is bottled in the USA, but try to make it sound better than it is. It’s a corn whiskey, bottled in the USA.
No, not all whiskeys are required to be fermented in a new charred oak barrels. That’s what produces the typical smokey flavor associated with bourbon. All bourbon is whiskey, but not all whiskey is bourbon. That’s like saying all other grain whiskey that doesn’t use corn is Scotch.
…
If you make an aged oak spirit in the UK, it would be a corn whiskey, that exact same spirit in the USA would be Bourbon.
Thank you for the being the stereotypical ignorant American who thinks bourbon is unique.
That’s it, it’s literally a USA ego thing.
Also, scotch is a terrible example, that’s another unique one, it’s made in Scotland only…. You really don’t know your whiskey history at all do you?
Yes, it must be made in the us. Scotch also has to be made in Scotland. But nobody is out here saying it’s Scottish ego. They just know the flavor profile of scotch. But you can make similar things elsewhere, true.
That’s because Scotland isn’t making it part of their identity like USA did dude….
Also, the USA has their own bullshit version, single malt whiskey. Of course they would try and copy while refusing to let others -.-
Lol, what? You are just riding on some xenophobia tip or something. You know the fact that there is a ton of American whiskey that is not called bourbon kinda disproves your whole prejudice, right? Whatever, keep stewing in it I guess.
I’m not passionate about bourbon nor am I a real drinker and thus the wrong person to pull into what is intended to be a heated discussion on it.
My original point is some people are and some of those people make policy decisions.