Drinkhacker Reads -12.04.2013 – U.S. State Department Spends $180,000 On Alcohol

Label Shots Line-Up x3

We’re not big on the compiling of slideshow based listicles, as is the trend these days. However, we’ve come across two that would fit quite snugly under the header of “Weird Whiskey Ideas of 2013.” The first, from Glenmorangie, invites users to decide on the label for its latest in the Cask Masters series, Taghta (Gaelic for “chosen”). Fans can hop on over to the website and vote on their favorite label, all bold and risky choices: yellow and brown, brown and orange, or purplish! [Glenmorangie]

In Beamland, the new “I’m Beam” application also is a bit of a charming headscratcher. Users can download the app to create woodcut-styled portraits similar to those found on the side label of Beam bottles, amongst other knicknacks, including something ambiguously entitled “Beam Family Surprises.” Mmmmmmm… [Jim Beam]

image001Coming in January/February to a white dog shelf near you: Dickel No.1, which serves as the base juice for it Nos.8, 12, and Barrel Select editions. It’ll be bottled at about 91 proof and will retail for $21.99 for a 750ml bottle. Look for our review shortly. [Dickel]

Faced with the shutdown this past fall, the State Department racked up a liquor bill of $180,000 in anticipation of its inability to purchase spirits during the brief hiatus. This included a nearly $16,000 whiskey tab in Moscow. Why weren’t we invited? [Washington Times]

Elsewhere in the political/alcohol narrative, Sen. Charles Schumer continues his crusade to cut excise taxes on smaller microbreweries in an effort to… wait for it… help “job creators.” [WSJ]

And finally today, the New Republic asks: Do smart people drink more? We’d like to think so, but that’s just opinion. NR backs that up with the results of several recently published studies. [New Republic]

Similar Posts:

One Response to Drinkhacker Reads -12.04.2013 – U.S. State Department Spends $180,000 On Alcohol

  1. Word to the wise, Rob. The Washington Times is only marginally more respected than the National Enquirer. Don’t post their nonsense.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>