TV used to be lousy with Peanuts specials. They started in 1965, with the beloved A Charlie Brown Christmas, and there used to be about one a year into the ‘80s, when they slowed down and, well, got not so good. Apple scooped up the specials back in 2020, with plans to make new shows. Now they’re working on a new movie — the gang’s first since the pretty good one from 2015.
Per Variety, the as-yet-untitled film will follow Snoopy, Charlie, et al. as they go on, per Apple, “an epic adventure to the Big City.’ Which big city? Maybe it’s an amalgam of a bunch, as in Babe: Pig in the City. Along the way they’ll be “ learning the true meaning of friendship, while meeting some surprising new friends along the way.” The story, if not the script, is credited to Peanuts creator Charles Schulz’s son Craig, his son Bryan, and Bryan’s writing partner Cornelius Uliano, keeping it all in the family.
It’s good news, and maybe it’s good enough to make up for one sad development: This year the aforementioned Christmas special won’t air on ABC, as it did for decades. There is a very popular Change.org petition to get it back on the airwaves this year, but that might not be enough to fix rights issues, which is what’s keeping it off the air. At least those with an AppleTV+ subscription can watch it at their leisure, along with plenty of other classic Peanuts specials, like that one where Charlie spends the New Year’s school break lugging around a giant copy of War and Peace, which is honestly a good way to spend the holidays.
(Spoilers for The Iron Claw will likely be found below.)
The cast of A24’s The Iron Claw has commenced promotional touring after the project secured a SAG-AFTRA strike exemption to do so. The means that we’re gonna hear many anecdotes about in-the-ring training and diets that Zac Efron, Jeremy Allen White, Harris Dickinson, and Stanley Simons endured to portray the jacked-and-tragic Von Erich brothers in a wrestling biopic. The first three on that list got a raging start in an Entertainment Weekly feature shoot, and you really should follow the link to see them eat ribs in slo mo while rubbing sauce all over their shirts.
I’ve got no clue how they maintained serious faces while doing so, but that’s one reason why they are professionals. Additionally, the group of course discussed how many thousands of calories per day they ate to maintain wrestling physiques. Let’s just say that Efron has done this before (for Baywatch), but the experience was a novelty for White. Even though he’s surrounded by food on The Bear, he’s not necessarily a Chef stuffing food in his face for fun. The avocados and waffles sound delicious, but everything else sounds monotonous. Yet The Bear‘s notoriety helped the team:
White shakes his head at the memory of their diet. “I was just eating frozen turkey patties and avocados and protein shakes and waffles and almond butter,” he says. Sometimes the four brothers would go out to dinner, and together, they’d order a minor mountain of food.
“Jeremy, thankfully, had just done The Bear,” Simons, 22, says of the culinary TV star. “So, we’d go to restaurants and [the employees] would be like, ‘Oh my gosh, it’s Jeremy!’ and bring out a free dish. We were eating a lot.”
Yes Chef? It would appear so, and we will be able to see how well they bulked up when The Iron Claw arrives in theaters on December 23. In the meantime, go enjoy this Yellowstone-esque photoshoot from EW.
With over three and a half decades under its belt, “The Simpsons” have more than few recurring bits that fans have come to expect—Bart’s cheeky chalkboard writing during the opening sequence, Homer arguing with his brain, greeting every Halloween season with a new “Treehouse of Horror” episode, just to name a few.
However, one of the show’s longest running gags has seemingly come to an end.
In a recent Season 35 episode titled “McMansion & Wife,” Homer and Marge go next door to visit their new neighbor Thayer, who greets Homer with a handshake.
“Whoa, that’s quite a grip,” Thayer remarks, to which Homer boasts, “See, Marge? Strangling the boy paid off,” referring to his impulse to yell “why you little!” while putting his hands around Bart’s throat.
But then Homer, apparently reformed, looks back to Thayer, saying, “Just kidding, I don’t do that anymore. Times have changed.”
Watch the moment below:
In a new Simpsons episode, Homer Simpson reveals that he stopped strangling Bart as times has changed. pic.twitter.com/LUR06RbqbY
Homer strangling Bart has been a staple of cartoonist Matt Groening’s iconic show since its humble debut as a series of animated shorts on the “Tracy Ullman show”, inspired by the real temper of Groening’s father. While he never actually strangled Groening, he would get so mad that it “felt like the next move sometimes.”
Over the years, “The Simpsons” would address Homer’s penchant for violence, especially in Season 22’s episode titled “Love is a Many Strangled Thing,” where Homer takes a “fathering enrichment class” and gets strangled by a much larger man (played by Kareem Abdul Jabbar).
Traumatized, Homer isn’t able to perform his standard punishment on his son. That is, until Bart pranks him with a whoopee cushion in the following season.
But now, Homer seems to have completely mended his ways. And while some longtime fans expressed disappointment, most are on board with the change.
“I knew my man Homer was gonna learn,” one person quipped on X, formerly known as Twitter.
This certainly isn’t the first time “The Simpsons” has made a few tweaks to adapt to the changing times. A prime example being in 2020 when Hank Azaria confirmed he’d no longer be voicing Indian convenience store owner Apu Nahasapeemapetilon after receiving criticism that the character perpetuated racial stereotypes.
It stands to reason that adapting to more modern views is essential for any long running television show. “The Simpsons” is no exception. And really, whether or not you consider the gag removal as necessary, we can probably all agree that it follows along with the Simpsons theme of mirroring—not to mention poking a little fun at—society’s ever shifting perspective.
There are a few big reasons why 70% of divorces in the United States among heterosexual couples are filed by women. Women have more economic opportunities than in decades past and are better positioned to care for themselves and their children without a husband’s income.
Another big reason is that even though the world has become much more egalitarian than in the past, women still bear the brunt of most of the emotional labor in the home. Gilza Fort-Martinez, a Florida, US-based licensed couples’ therapist, told the BBC that men are socialized to have lower emotional intelligence than women, leaving their wives to do most of the emotional labor.
Secondly, studies show that women still do most of the domestic work in the home, so many are pulling double duty for their households.
A TikTokker with two children (@thesoontobeexwife) shared why she decided to leave her husband of two decades and her story recounts a common theme: She did all the work and her husband did little but complain.
The video, entitled “Why women leave,” has received over 2 million views.
Y’all I laughed when I realized he truly does treat me better now then when he was trying to be in a marriage with me. How is this better?? How did I ever think before was ok?? #toxicrelationship #divorce #mentalloadofmotherhood #divorcetok #divorceisanoption #chooseyou #mentalhealth #mentalload #fyp #mentalload #emotionallabor
“So for the men out there who watch this, which frankly I kind of hope there aren’t any, you have an idea maybe what not to do,” she starts the video. “Yesterday, I go to work all day, go pick up one kid from school, go grocery shopping, go pick up the other kid from school, come home. Kids need a snack–make the snack. Kids want to play outside – we play outside.”
Her husband then comes home after attending a volunteer program, which she didn’t want him to join, and the self-centeredness begins. “So he gets home, he eats the entire carton of blueberries I just purchased for the children’s lunch and asks me what’s for dinner. I tell him I don’t know because the kids had a late snack and they’re not hungry yet,” she says in the video.
She then explains how the last time he cooked, which was a rare event, he nearly punched a hole in the wall because he forgot an ingredient. Their previous home had multiple holes in the walls. Dr. Gail Saltz, a psychiatrist and host of the Power of Different podcast, says that when punch walls it’s a sign that they haven’t “learned to deal with anger in a reasonable way.”
“Anyway, finally one kid is hungry,” the TikTokker continues. “So I offered to make pancakes because they’re quick and easy and it’s late. He sees the pancake batter and sees that there’s wheat flour in it and starts complaining. Says he won’t eat them. Now I am a grown adult making pancakes for my children who I am trying to feed nutritionally balanced meals. So yes, there’s wheat flour in the pancake mix.”
Then her husband says he’s not doing the dishes because he didn’t eat any pancakes. “Friends, the only thing this man does around this house is dishes occasionally. If I cook, he usually does the dishes. I cook most nights. But here’s the thing. That’s all he does. I do everything else. Everything. Everything.”
She then listed all of the household duties she handles.
“I cook, I clean the bathrooms, I make the lunches, I make the breakfasts, I mow the lawn, I do kids’ bedtime. I literally do everything and he does dishes once a day, maybe,” she says.
I HAVE OFFICIALLY FILED FOR DIVORCE 🎉 #divorce #divorcetok #toxicrelationship #divorceisanoption #fyp #mentalhealth #chooseyou #iamenough #iwillnotbeafraid #mentalloadofmotherhood #emotionallabor
The video received over 8700 comments and most of them were words of support for the TikTokker who would go on to file for divorce from her husband.
“The amount of women I’ve heard say that their male partners are only teaching how to be completely independent of them, theirs going to be so many lonely men out there,” Gwen wrote. “I was married to someone just like this for over 35 years. You will be so happy when you get away from him,” BeckyButters wrote.
“The way you will no longer be walking on eggshells in your own home is an amazing feeling. You got this!” Barf Simpson added.
You may think the Illuminati secretly rules the world, but it’s actually cats. Cats have been treated like gods since the start of human civilization, whether it was the ancient Egyptians or those of us in the modern world who would do anything for our furry friends.
And to conquer the world, cats need cutting-edge military technology. That’s why Suck UK creates awesome cardboard gadgets you can buy for your cats.
“These fun and playful toy houses for your cats are designed to add a sense of adventure to their daily lives about the house. Why spend an afternoon relaxing in a boring, plain old box, when there’s the opportunity to become a life saving fireman, thrilling tank driver or LA socialite?!”
“Sit back and have a giggle at your cat ‘doing human things’ and help keep them away from clawing your favorite sofa!”
“These cardboard playhouses come in various humorous designs; the Tank, the Catillac, the Fire Engine, Plane, and for those kitties with a bit more style, the Cabin and Tepee.”
“There’s no need to glue or tape and they easily fold away if you need a bit more space around the house.”
Just look at these guys having so much fun…
They even have a plane, every army needs an air force after all.
As you can probably imagine, people are loving the vehicles, though their cats are still turning them down for plain cardboard boxes. One customer writes:
“A few weeks down the line, they both play with it but not as much as the huge cardboard box I got for free from a supermarket… But I like it, so maybe that’s what counts! It does look impressive, with color printing on the inside and outside.”
And they don’t only do vehicles. Your cat could be a superstar DJ, too.
I was promoted a few weeks ago, which was great. I got a lot of nice notes from friends, family, customers, partners, and random strangers, which was exciting.
But it wasn’t long until a note came in saying, “Everyone knows you got the position because you’re a girl.” In spite of having a great week at a great company with great people whom I love, that still stung, because it’s not the first time I’ve heard it.
Every woman who works in tech — heck, likely every woman on Earth — hears “because you’re a girl” dozens, if not thousands, of times in her life.
It starts young, of course:
Why can’t I join that team? Because you’re a girl.
Why can’t I study physics? Because you’re a girl.
Then, the comments age with you.
Why can’t I manage that project? Because you’re a girl.
Why can’t I join that group? Because you’re a girl.
And after you’ve reached any level of attainment in a profession you love, the comments are used to minimize your success.
Why did you get that award? Because you’re a girl.
Why were you chosen to participate in that class? Because you’re a girl.
Like so many women before me, I have shaken off the comment.
I’ve gotten angry. I’ve gotten sad. I’ve doubted myself and my abilities. I’ve ignored it entirely. I’ve challenged it. I’ve recruited support from men and women I respect. Yet every time it stays there in the back of my mind, screaming for attention after every failure or setback.
But today is the day I’ve decided to change that.
I did, in fact, get the job because I’m a girl.
A girl who was called “bossy” growing up.
A girl who wasn’t afraid to play with the boys.
A girl who didn’t hesitate to raise her hand if she knew the answer.
A girl who stood up for other kids.
A girl who was always the first one to volleyball practice and the last to leave.
A girl who was told she was too assertive and aggressive to advance in her career.
A girl who went to MIT anyway.
A girl who asked her company to do more on diversity and inclusion and won’t stop pushing until it’s truly remarkable.
A girl who has made big mistakes, both personal and professional.
A girl who swings for the fences even when no one is watching.
A girl who puts in hours when other people are asleep
A girl who tells young girls how smart and strong they are.
A girl who hates to lose.
And a girl who won’t stand silently while people still use “because you’re a girl” as any limitation for girls who want to grow, challenge the status quo, and be something, anything, greater than society tells them they could or should.
So yeah. I guess you could say I got my job because I’m a girl, but not for any of the reasons you might think.
This story first appeared on the author’s Medium and is reprinted here with permission.
The legality of abortion is one of the most polarized debates in America—but it doesn’t have to be.
People have big feelings about abortion, which is understandable. On one hand, you have people who feel that abortion is a fundamental women’s rights issue, that our bodily autonomy is not something you can legislate, and that those who oppose abortion rights are trying to control women through oppressive legislation. On the other, you have folks who believe that a fetus is a human individual first and foremost, that no one has the right to terminate a human life, and that those who support abortion rights are heartless murderers.
Then there are those of us in the messy middle. Those who believe that life begins at conception, that abortion isn’t something we’d choose—and we’d hope others wouldn’t choose—under most circumstances, yet who choose to vote to keep abortion legal.
It is entirely possible to be morally anti-abortion and politically pro-choice without feeling conflicted about it. Here’s why.
There’s far too much gray area to legislate.
No matter what you believe, when exactly life begins and when “a clump of cells” should be considered an individual, autonomous human being is a debatable question.
I personally believe life begins at conception, but that’s my religious belief about when the soul becomes associated with the body, not a scientific fact. As Arthur Caplan, award-winning professor of bioethics at New York University, told Slate, “Many scientists would say they don’t know when life begins. There are a series of landmark moments. The first is conception, the second is the development of the spine, the third the development of the brain, consciousness, and so on.”
But let’s say, for the sake of argument, that a human life unquestionably begins at conception. Even with that point of view, there are too many issues that make a black-and-white approach to abortion too problematic to ban it.
Abortion bans hurt some mothers who desperately want their babies to live, and I’m not okay with that.
One reason I don’t support banning abortion is because I’ve seen too many families deeply harmed by restrictive abortion laws.
I’ve heard too many stories of families who desperately wanted a baby, who ended up having to make the rock-and-a-hard-place choice to abort because the alternative would have been a short, pain-filled life for their child.
I’ve heard too many stories of abortion laws doing real harm to mothers and babies, and too many stories of families who were staunchly anti-abortion until they found themselves in circumstances they never could have imagined, to believe that abortion is always wrong and should be banned at any particular stage.
I am not willing to serve as judge and jury on a woman’s medical decisions, and I don’t think the government should either.
Most people’s anti-abortion views—mine included—are based on their religious beliefs, and I don’t believe that anyone’s religion should be the basis for the laws in our country. (For the record, any Christian who wants biblical teachings to influence U.S. law, yet cries “Shariah is coming!” when they see a Muslim legislator, is a hypocrite.)
I also don’t want politicians sticking their noses into my very personal medical choices. There are just too many circumstances (seriously, please read the stories linked in the previous section) that make abortion a choice I hope I’d never have to make, but wouldn’t want banned. I don’t understand why the same people who decry government overreach think the government should be involved in these extremely personal medical decisions.
And yes, ultimately, abortion is a personal medical decision. Even if I believe that a fetus is a human being at every stage, that human being’s creation is inextricably linked to and dependent upon its mother’s body. And while I don’t think that means women should abort inconvenient pregnancies, I also acknowledge that trying to force a woman to grow and deliver a baby that she may not have chosen to conceive isn’t something the government should be in the business of doing.
As a person of faith, my role is not to judge or vilify, but to love and support women who are facing difficult choices. The rest of it—the hard questions, the unclear rights and wrongs, the spiritual lives of those babies,—I comfortably leave in God’s hands.
Most importantly, if the goal is to prevent abortion, research shows that outlawing it isn’t the way to go.
The biggest reason I vote the way I do is because based on my research pro-choice platforms provide the best chance of reducing abortion rates.
Abortion rates fell by 24% in the past decade and are at their lowest levels in 40 years in America. Abortion has been legal during that time, so clearly, keeping abortion legal and available has not resulted in increased abortion rates. Switzerland has one of the lowest abortion rates on earth and their rate has been falling since 2002, when abortion became largely unrestricted.
Outlawing abortion doesn’t stop it, it just pushes it underground and makes it more dangerous. And if a woman dies in a botched abortion, so does her baby. Banning abortion is a recipe for more lives being lost, not fewer.
At this point, the only things consistently proven to reduce abortion rates are comprehensive sex education and easy, affordable access to birth control. If we want to reduce abortions, that’s where we should be putting our energy. The problem is, anti-abortion activists also tend to be the same people pushing for abstinence-only education and making birth control harder to obtain. But those goals can’t co-exist in the real world.
Our laws should be based on reality and on the best data we have available. Since comprehensive sex education and easy, affordable access to birth control—the most proven methods of reducing abortion rates—are the domain of the pro-choice crowd, that’s where I place my vote, and why I do so with a clear conscience.
Nearly 12 percent of the U.S. population lives in poverty. That’s more than one in ten Americans—and the percent is even higher for children.
If you’re not up on the current numbers, the federal poverty line is $12,760 for an individuals and $26,200 for a family of four. If those annual incomes sound abysmally low, it’s because they are. And incredibly, the Trump administration has proposed lowering the poverty line further, which would make more poor Americans ineligible for needed assistance.
However, debates over the poverty line don’t even capture the full extent of Americans struggling to make ends meet. For many people, living above the poverty line is actually worse. These are the folks who make too much to qualify for aid programs but not enough to actually get by—a situation millions of working American families find themselves stuck in.
Amy Jo Hutchison is a single mother of two living in West Virginia, and a community organizer for West Virginia Healthy Kids and Families and Our Future West Virginia. She has also lived in poverty and been part of the working poor herself. In an impassioned speech, she spoke to the House Committee on Oversight and Reform about what poverty really looks like for working families—and even called out Congress for being completely out of touch with what it takes for a family to live on while they’re spending $40,000 a year on office furniture.
Watch Hutchison’s testimony here (transcript included below):
Ms. Hutchison Testimony on Proposed Changes to the Poverty Line Calculation
“I’m here to help you better understand poverty because poverty is my lived experience. And I’m also here to acknowledge the biased beliefs that poor people are lazy and the poverty is their fault. But how do I make you understand things like working full-time for $10 an hour is only about $19,000 a year, even though it’s well above the federal minimum wage of $7.25 an hour?
I want to tell you about a single mom I met who was working at a gas station. She was promoted to manager within 30 days. She had to report her new income the DHHR within 60 days. Her rent bumped from $475 to $950 a month, she lost her SNAP benefits and her family’s health insurance, so she did what poor people are forced to do all the time. She resigned her promotion and went back to working part-time, just so she and her family could survive.
Another single mom I know encouraged her kids to get jobs. For her DHHR review she had to claim their income as well. She lost her SNAP benefits and her insurance, so she weaned herself off of her blood pressure medicines because she—working full-time in a bank and part-time at a shop on the weekends—couldn’t afford to buy them. Eventually the girls quit their jobs because their part-time fast food income was literally killing their mother.
You see the thing is children aren’t going to escape poverty as long as they’re relying on a head of household who is poor. Poverty rolls off the backs of parents, right onto the shoulders of our children, despite how hard we try.
I can tell you about my own with food insecurity the nights I went to bed hungry so my kids could have seconds, and I was employed full time as a Head Start teacher. I can tell you about being above the poverty guideline, nursing my gallbladder with essential oils and prayer, chewing on cloves and eating ibuprofen like they’re Tic Tacs because I don’t have health insurance and I can’t afford a dentist. I have two jobs and a bachelor’s degree, and I struggle to make ends meet.
The federal poverty guidelines say that I’m not poor, but I cashed in a jar full of change the other night so my daughter could attend a high school band competition with her band. I can’t go grocery shopping without a calculator. I had to decide which bills not to pay to be here in this room today. Believe me, I’ve pulled myself up by the bootstraps so many damn times that I’ve ripped them off.
The current poverty guidelines are ridiculously out of touch. The poverty line for a family of three is $21,720. Where I live, because of the oil and gas boom, a 3-bedroom home runs for $1,200 a month. So if I made $22,000 a year, which could disqualify me from assistance, I would have $8000 left to raise two children and myself on. And yet the poverty guidelines wouldn’t classify me as poor.
I Googled ‘congressman salary’ the other day and according to Senate gov the salary for Senators representatives and delegates is $174,000 a year so a year of work for you is the equivalent of almost four years of work for me. I’m $24,000 above the federal poverty guidelines definition of poor. It would take nine people working full-time for a year at $10 an hour to match y’all’s salary. I also read that each senator has authorized $40,000 dollars for state office furniture and furnishings, and this amount is increased each year to reflect inflation.
That $40,000 a year for furniture is $360 more than the federal poverty guidelines for a family of seven, and yet here I am begging you on behalf of the 15 million children living in poverty in the United States—on behalf of the one in three kids under the age of five and nearly 100,000 children in my state of West Virginia living in poverty—to not change anything about these federal poverty guidelines until you can make them relevant and reflect what poverty really looks like today.
You have a $40,000 dollar furniture allotment. West Virginia has a median income of $43,000 and some change. People are working full-time and are hungry. Kids are about to be kicked off the free and reduced lunch rolls because of changes y’all want to make to SNAP, even though 62 percent of West Virginia SNAP recipients are families with children—the very same children who cannot take a part-time job because their parents will die without insurance. People are working full-time in this country for very little money.
They’re not poor enough to get help. They don’t make enough to get by. They’re working while their rationing their insulin and their skipping their meds because they can’t afford food and healthcare at the same time.
So shame on you. Shame on you, and shame on me, and shame on each and every one of us who haven’t rattled the windows of these buildings with cries of outrage at a government that thinks their office furniture is worthy of $40,000 a year and families and children aren’t.
I’m not asking you to apologize for your privilege but I’m asking you to see past it. There are 46 million Americans living in poverty doing the best they know how with what they have and we, in defense of children and families, cannot accept anything less from our very own government.”
In addition to Hutchison’s testimony, a coalition of 26 patient organizations, including the American Cancer Society Action Network, American Heart Association, and United Way, wrote a joint letter opposing the proposed lowering of the poverty line, stating:
“The current Official Poverty Measure (OPM) is based on an old formula that already does not fully capture those living in poverty and does not accurately reflect basic household expenses for families, including by underestimating child care and housing expenses. The proposed changes to the inflation calculation would reduce the annual adjustments to the poverty measure and therefore may exacerbate existing weaknesses, putting vulnerable Americans – including those with serious and chronic diseases – at great risk. Further lowering the poverty line would also give policymakers and the public less credible information about the number and characteristics of Americans living in poverty.”
The availability of bourbon — or any spirit for that matter — can sometimes be a fickle beast. There are bottles of bourbon (sometimes amazing stuff) that sit on every shelf around the country. Then there are bottles of bourbon that you’ll just never see on liquor store shelves. That doesn’t mean that those bottles aren’t “available,” strictly speaking. They’re out there, just not in the first places you’d think to look.
In fact, I think of myself like the Walter Sobchak of the whiskey world. But instead of severed toes, I can get you any bottle, dude. For a price.
Today, we’re pivoting away from the rare and high-end and toward the “easy to find.” For this blind tasting, I’m focusing on bottles that are on shelves nationwide for a fair retail price. To be very clear, this isn’t necessarily about cheap or “affordable” bourbon either. This is about what’s actually available on the shelf (pretty much) universally. That means that I’m grabbing a mix of small-batch bourbons, bottled in bonds, and single barrels. And since we’re talking about nationally available bourbons, we’re talking about whiskeys made in Kentucky and Tennessee, since the lion’s share of American whiskeys (especially the widely-distributed expressions) are made in those two states.
Four Roses Small Batch Kentucky Straight Bourbon Whiskey
Evan Williams Bottled-In-Bond Kentucky Straight Bourbon Whiskey
Jim Beam Single Barrel Kentucky Straight Bourbon Whiskey
George Dickel Bourbon Whisky Handcrafted Small Batch Aged 8 Years
Jack Daniel’s Old No. 7 Tennessee Sour Mash Whiskey
Russell’s Reserve Kentucky Straight Bourbon Whiskey Single Barrel
After the blind tasting (poured by my ever-patient lady), I’m going to rank these bourbons based on taste alone. This is simply about what tastes the best so let’s dive right in and find the best bourbon for you to buy.
Also Read: The Top 5 UPROXX Bourbon Posts Of The Last Six Months
Nose: The nose on this is very fruity with a mix of bruised peach, red berries (almost like in a cream soda), and apple wood next to a plate of waffles with brown butter and a good pour of maple syrup that leads to a hint of cotton candy.
Palate: The sweetness ebbs on the palate as vanilla frosting leads to grilled peaches with a crack of black pepper next to singed marshmallows.
Finish: The end is plummy and full of rich toffee next to a dash of cedar bark and vanilla tobacco.
Initial Thoughts:
This is great bourbon. I can see sipping this easily. It’s deep, nuanced, and has a nice warmth at the end.
Taste 2
Zach Johnston
Tasting Notes:
Nose: There’s a light sense of rickhouse wood beams next to that mild taco seasoning on the nose with caramel apples, vanilla ice cream scoops, and a hint of fresh mint with a sweet/spicy edge.
Palate: The palate opens with a seriously smooth vanilla base with some winter spice (especially cinnamon and allspice) next to a hint of grain and apple pie filling.
Finish: The end leans towards the woodiness with a hint of broom bristle and minty tobacco lead undercut by that smooth vanilla.
Initial Thoughts:
This is another really nice bourbon pour. I love the depth and feel of walking through an old rickhouse with a glass of whiskey in my hand.
Taste 3
Zach Johnston
Tasting Notes:
Nose: The nose on this feels classic with a bold sense of rich vanilla pods, cinnamon sharpness, buttered and salted popcorn, and a good dose of cherry syrup with a hint of cotton candy.
Palate: The palate mixes almond, orange, and vanilla into cinnamon sticky buns with a hint of sour cherry soda that leads to a nice Kentucky hug on the mid-palate.
Finish: That warm hug fades toward black cherry root beer, old leather boots, porch wicker, and a sense of dried cherry/cinnamon tobacco packed into an old pine box.
Initial Thoughts:
This is pretty good too but a little all over the place. This feels like it was made for cocktails. It’s just an innate sense.
Taste 4
Zach Johnston
Tasting Notes:
Nose: There’s a welcoming aroma of butterscotch, blackberry, toffee, and fresh honey next to a real sense of pitchy, dry firewood.
Palate: The taste drills down on those notes as the sweet marzipan becomes more choco-hazelnut, the berries become increasingly dried and apple-y, the toffee becomes almost burnt, and the wood softens to a cedar bark.
Finish: A rich spicy and chewy tobacco arrives late as the vanilla gets super creamy and the fruit and honey combine on the slow fade.
Initial Thoughts:
This is deep and pretty delicious overall. The butterscotch note with a berry vibe is prominent and very enticing.
Taste 5
Zach Johnston
Tasting Notes:
Nose: Soft and sweet apple and cherry woods greet with a good dose of sour red berries dusted with brown winter spices, especially clove and nutmeg.
Palate: The palate leans into soft and salted caramel with a hint of those berries underneath while the spices get woodier and a thin line of green sweetgrass sneaks in.
Finish: The finish is silky and boils down to blackberry jam with a good dose of winter spice, old wood, and a hint of vanilla tobacco.
Initial Thoughts:
The nose is very light but this finished strong. If I was being super critical, I’d call that slightly unbalanced. That said, this ended so strongly, I can forgive the light nose.
Taste 6
Zach Johnston
Tasting Notes:
Nose: There’s a lovely nose at play with soft taco mix spice next to creamy vanilla, caramel-dipped cherries, a hint of pear skins, and plenty of nutmeg.
Palate: The palate has a minor note of cornbread muffins next to cherry-vanilla tobacco with a dash of leather and toffee.
Finish: The end leans into some fresh gingerbread with a vanilla frosting next to hints of pear candy cut with cinnamon and nutmeg.
Initial Thoughts:
This is really good classic bourbon. It’s not overdone or overpowering but it gets the job done.
Taste 7
Zach Johnston
Tasting Notes:
Nose: The nose opens with classic notes of vanilla sheet cake, salted caramel, wintry mulled wine spices, and a sense of cherry pie in a lard crust next to a hint of dried corn husk, old broom bristle, and dark chocolate pipe tobacco.
Palate: The palate layers in floral honey and orange zest next to sticky toffee pudding, old leather, and cherry tobacco layered with the dark chocolate with this lingering sense of coconut cream pie lurking somewhere in the background.
Finish: The finish leans into more woody winter spices (especially cinnamon bark and nutmeg) with rich toffee and cherry-chocolate tobacco braided with dry sweetgrass and cedar bark.
Initial Thoughts:
Damn, this is excellent too. The beginning, middle, and end are all bold yet refined.
Taste 8
Zach Johnston
Tasting Notes:
Nose: The nose opens with creamy vanilla next to spiced tobacco with plenty of apple pie vibe and winter spices with a butter underbelly.
Palate: The palate has a light bran muffin with a molasses vibe next to vanilla/nougat wafers that then lead to peach skins and gingerbread.
Finish: The end leans into the nutty chocolate and vanilla wafer with a touch of orange zest, marzipan, and mint tobacco with a hint of garden-store earthiness.
Initial Thoughts:
This was fine. It’s clearly something from Tennessee thanks to the vanilla wafers (think Necco Wafers) and the earthy close.
Taste 9
Zach Johnston
Tasting Notes:
Nose: Buttery banana bread with walnuts and raisins (with a hint of the cardboard box they came in) next to bright red cherry and fresh tart apples dominate the nose with a light hint of old cinnamon powder next to the faintest hint of chewing tobacco.
Palate: The palate is thin, there’s no getting around that thanks to the proofing water. But it also presents as a lush banana milkshake cut with fresh vanilla and dusted with nutmeg and plenty of apple and cherry pie with very mild oakiness.
Finish: The proofing water amps up on the finish as the flavor washes out, leaving you with a sense of an empty apple pin tin, hints of banana bread, and an echo of cherry pipe tobacco.
Initial Thoughts:
This starts so strong but then sort of peters out by the end. That leads me to believe it’s a mixing bourbon. Oh, and it’s also very obviously Jack Daniel’s thanks to that bold fruitiness from top to bottom.
Taste 10
Zach Johnston
Tasting Notes:
Nose: Vanilla cream spiked with orange oils and sprinkled with toasted coconut mingle with spicy oak and buttery cake on the nose with an underpinning of winter spices by way of a sour mulled wine.
Palate: The palate opens with easy notes of marzipan, subtle dried roses, vanilla pods, more winter spices, and singed cherry bark.
Finish: The end arrives with a sense of Almond Joy next to cherry tobacco dipped in chili-infused dark chocolate with a flake of salt and a pinch of cedar dust and old leather saddles.
Initial Thoughts:
This has an excellent nose that carries the profile to a wonderful finish. This is a prime sipper.
Part 2 — The Bourbon Ranking
Zach Johnston
10. George Dickel Bourbon Whisky Handcrafted Small Batch Aged 8 Years — Taste 8
The whisky in the bottle is the same Dickel Tennessee whiskey but pulled from barrels that leaned more into classic bourbon flavor notes instead of Dickel’s iconic Tennessee whisky notes. The barrels are a minimum of eight years old before they’re vatted. The whiskey is then cut down to a manageable 90-proof and bottled.
Bottom Line:
This is perfectly fine bourbon. That earthiness on the finish is going to be an acquired taste for some (and may even remind some drinkers of a rye). In the end, I’d mix this into cocktails.
9. Jack Daniel’s Old No. 7 Tennessee Sour Mash Whiskey — Taste 9
This is classic Jack Daniel’s made with their iconic mash bill of 80% corn, 8% rye, and 12% malted barley. That mashed juice is then sent through massive column stills before it’s slowly dripped through 10 feet of pebbly sugar maple charcoal, which is also made on-site at Lynchburg, from local lumber. After that, the whiskey is left alone for up to five or six years across Jack Daniel’s vast warehouses before batching, proofing, and bottling.
Bottom Line:
This starts with such boldness and then just kind of disappears by the end. That’s too bad because it’s pretty damn good up to that end. You can easily mix cocktails with this one. Use it as a building block.
8. Four Roses Small Batch Kentucky Straight Bourbon Whiskey — Taste 5
Four Roses Small Batch Bourbon is a blend of four whiskeys. The blend is split evenly between the high and mid-ryes with a focus on “slight spice” and “rich fruit” yeasts. The whiskey is then blended, cut with soft Kentucky water, and bottled.
Bottom Line:
This was the opposite — the nose was so light and faint and then built toward a great finish. Again, use this as a building block for cocktails.
7. Knob Creek Small Batch Kentucky Straight Bourbon Whiskey Aged 9 Years — Taste 3
This is Jim Beam’s small batch entry point into the wider world of Knob Creek. The juice is the low-rye mash aged for nine years in new oak in Beam’s vast warehouses. The right barrels are then mingled and cut down to 100 proof before being bottled in new, wavy bottles.
Bottom Line:
This was even-keeled (if a little warm). This is a great candidate for whiskey-forward cocktails where the bourbon is the star of the show.
Heaven Hill makes great whiskey, especially inexpensive bottled in bonds. This “b-i-b” is tailored for the Evan Williams flavor profile. Still, this is Heaven Hill, so we’re talking about the same mash bill, same warehouses, and same blending team as beloved bourbons like Elijah Craig and Heaven Hill releases. This is simply built to match a higher-end Evan Williams vibe.
Bottom Line:
This is another really good bourbon (with an amazing price tag). I would still lean toward using this for whiskey-forward cocktails, but 100% would drink this over a glass full of ice.
This expression takes standard Woodford Bourbon and gives it a finishing touch. The six to eight-year-old bourbon is blended and moved into new barrels that have been double-toasted but only lightly charred. The whiskey spends a final nine months resting in those barrels before proofing and bottling.
Bottom Line:
This is where we get into the true sippers. This is deeply hewn and has a diverse and fun flavor profile. Pour it over a big rock and enjoy a slow sip.
4. Jim Beam Single Barrel Kentucky Straight Bourbon Whiskey — Taste 7
Each of these Jim Beam bottlings is pulled from single barrels that hit just the right spot of taste, texture, and drinkability, according to the master distillers at Beam. That means this juice is pulled from less than one percent of all barrels in Beam’s warehouses, making this a very special bottle at a bafflingly affordable price.
Bottom Line:
This is so good for what it is (especially price-wise). This is Jim Beam at its best for $20. Drink it however you like to drink your whiskey.
This is Elijah Craig’s entry-point bottle. The mash is corn-focused, with more malted barley than rye. The whiskey is then rendered from “small batches” of barrels to create this proofed-down version of the iconic brand.
Bottom Line:
This always surprises me in blinds. It’s just good f*cking bourbon and I kind of forget that in my day-to-day. Buy a bottle and drink it in every application.
This is a high water mark of what standard Wild Turkey can achieve. The Russells select the “honey barrels” (those special barrels that are as much magic as craft) from their rickhouses for single barrel bottling. The resulting whiskey is non-chill filtered but is cut down slightly to proof with that soft Kentucky water.
Bottom Line:
This is another whiskey that’s just f*cking delicious. It’s bold and warm and spicy and sweet. It’s BOURBON in all caps! I love this stuff over a big rock when I can sip it slowly.
Michter’s really means the phrase “small batch” here. The tank they use to marry their hand-selected eight-year-old bourbons can only hold 20 barrels, so that’s how many go into each small-batch bottling. The blended juice is then proofed with Kentucky’s famously soft limestone water and bottled.
Bottom Line:
I’ve been pretty effusive about the last few bottles of bourbon on this list. So it’s fair to ask what makes this bottle stand out. It’s refinement. This is big and bold and delicious like the rest of them but this has a refinement and nuance that helps it stand above the crowd — in a very clear way.
Yes, I’d sip this neat or on the rocks. But this will also make a killer cocktail. That’s versatility.
Part 3 — Final Thoughts on the Bourbons
Zach Johnston
Honestly, there wasn’t a bad bourbon on this list. And you can get every single one of them. It’s a good time to be a whiskey drinker, folks.
In the end, the top six are all winners. The top three are stellar. The Michter’s is the one to get, especially if you’re looking for the perfect bottle to up your sipping game while also upping your cocktail game.
This website uses cookies to improve your experience. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish. Cookie settingsACCEPT
Privacy & Cookies Policy
Privacy Overview
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these cookies, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may have an effect on your browsing experience.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.
