Obama is a homebrewer

Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum

Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Status
Not open for further replies.
+1,000,000 This is the ONLY outcome that could ever come out of the POTUS furthering the hobby. I'd rather it get no mention at all.

Homebrewing legislation isn't perfect but the best way to destroy the hobby is for government to get involved in any way shape or form, other than pass legalization laws.
Politicians and bureaucrats have an innate desire to try and fix something that isn't broken. History has proven over and over and over that any government involvement in ANYTHING is a huge disaster.
I don't want Democrat or Republican or liberal or conservative hand prints on anything to do with homebrewing. I just want to able to do this and bet left the hell alone.
In the words of the Beatles "Let it be".
 
Homebrewing legislation isn't perfect but the best way to destroy the hobby is for government to get involved in any way shape or form, other than pass legalization laws.
Politicians and bureaucrats have an innate desire to try and fix something that isn't broken. History has proven over and over and over that any government involvement in ANYTHING is a huge disaster.
I don't want Democrat or Republican or liberal or conservative hand prints on anything to do with homebrewing. I just want to able to do this and bet left the hell alone.
In the words of the Beatles "Let it be".

Amen to this! This begins the "Leave my beer alone" movement. :mug:
 
Our Republican governor recently signed legislation that makes it possible for me to open my nano. I definitely think having a prez who likes beer and a first lady who likes fresh vegetables can't hurt the beer and local produce businesses.

Oh and guys...you can't tax a hobby to death.
 
I remember reading that George Washington brewed beer.

http://www.geekosystem.com/george-washington-beer/

Maybe because GW never actually lived at the WH?
Per the Blog...
""We have no record of beer brewing at the White House," Allman said.

William Ushong, historian for the White House Historical Association, concurs.

"I haven't heard of any beer brewing going on at the White House itself," Ushong said. "President Jefferson would be your likely candidate, given his epicurean taste."
 
Update- Read the bottom of the story. I'm a Hop Head:D

UPDATE, March 2: For all the serious Hop Heads who've e-mailed: Yes, President George Washington was a well-known homebrewer. President Washington is also the only president who never lived in the White House. He oversaw construction, which began when the first cornerstone was laid in October of 1792. But it was not until 1800, when the White House was almost completed, that its First residents, President John Adams and his wife, Abigail, moved in.
 
Oh and guys...you can't tax a hobby to death.

No? You don't think the government has the power to levy a tax on any and all malted grains or other "fermentables" or our precious hops sold to the general public? Think again.
 
You bring up some excellent points BUT it will never happen. At least through the normal legislative process. It might a big issue to some of us but it certainly isn't a big issue to most Americans or even Congress. As Denny pointed out the AHA has no plans to tackle this issue. I can see why since the AHA is part of the Brewers Association which represents commercial breweries. How are they going to explain to their BA members that they support legislation that could financially hurt the BA members?

Well, it's not quite the way you see it. The BA are BIG supporters of homebrewers. That's where a lot of commercial brewers, not to mention consumers, come from. I can pretty much guarantee you that the BA and commercial breweries in general, do not see homebrewers as competition. AAMOF, the same lobbyists that the BA uses also are fighting for homebrewers. I'm not at liberty to say exactly what's going on (other than it has nothing to do with selling homebrew) but the BA is solidily on the side of homebrewers.
 
Thanks for your response Denny! I have to wonder what kind of legal issues the AHA is going after, aside from the Alabama issue? I know many homebrewers would love to be able to sell a small amount of homebrew via a farmers' market or something similar. As an AHA member I would LOVE for them to support some sort of law/bill either on a state/federal level that would allow us to do this on a limited basis. It would be a great way for a potential new brewery to test the waters.
My feeling with a lot of homebrewing laws is that since they are rarely enforced nobody really has a big incentive to change them. It is only when they are actually enforced, like what happened in Oregon a few years ago, do people "wake up" and realize the absurdity and antiquity of these laws. Denny...I know you were instrumental in this change in the law. Thank you!! I was wondering though....previous to the new law was the Oregon Brewers Fest just plain ignorant of the law, or was it a case of "don't ask, don't tell, or just that it never was enforced so nobody really cared.
 
There was no homebrew served at OBF (AFAIK), so it was not an issue. There were several homebrew contests, like the State Fair, that had run for many years before someone looked at the law and realized that transporting homebrew outside of the home wasn't legal.
 
No? You don't think the government has the power to levy a tax on any and all malted grains or other "fermentables" or our precious hops sold to the general public? Think again.

Ha, yeah I guess they do but I just think it's kind of unlikely. The only way I could ever see that happening is if homebrewing became something every beer-drinking household did, which would be really cool I think.
 
That beer probably cost $1000/ bottle to make.

whha%253Asouza.jpg
 
No? You don't think the government has the power to levy a tax on any and all malted grains or other "fermentables" or our precious hops sold to the general public? Think again.

I don't think so....a tax on honey, sugar, potatoes, rice, and any other fermentables would be DOA especially in this anti tax environment we live in today. A tax on hops would only make people grow their own and sell any excess on the black market.
 
Please keep your f**ing politic's out of my beer forum! Thank You!

Yes, that's a nice reminder.

Let's remember that facts are good, but we're to keep political remarks and comments out of our beer forum. The rules of our forum are clear on that.

For example, you can give a fact:

"The President of the US is Obama and a Democrat."

You CANNOT comment or say "I think all Democrats are bad" or whatever.

So for those who cannot talk facts without dragging political opinions into this discussion, please refrain from posting. Thanks!
 
The bottle somone put a picture of is kind of cool I would not mind having one of them. I hope whoever our next President is keeps the brewing at the whitehouse going.
 
But don't politicians make laws? ;)

True ...but what if the people just ignored the homebrewing laws? What is the point in making laws if no one follows them and nobody enforces them?
 
Yes, that's a nice reminder.

Let's remember that facts are good, but we're to keep political remarks and comments out of our beer forum. The rules of our forum are clear on that.

For example, you can give a fact:

"The President of the US is Obama and a Democrat."

You CANNOT comment or say "I think all Democrats are bad" or whatever.

So for those who cannot talk facts without dragging political opinions into this discussion, please refrain from posting. Thanks!

This thread was started with political opinion.
 
Ok, I'll bite and play a little devil's advocate. As much as I'd love to be able to sell my homebrew, wouldn't any law that that allows such sales to home brewers also place an unfair restriction on commercial brewers? Mind you, I'm not worried about our dear friends at BMC, nor am I worried about the bigger craft brewers such as Stone or Dogfish. The guys I do worry about are some of the much smaller outfits that I enjoy. I know that some states have a tiered approach to their taxation, similar to our federal income taxes. This allows the smaller brewers the ability to compete by keeping their tax bills lower, helping to offset the costs associated with not being a larger brewery (not sure of the technical term, economy of scales maybe?). While the process for starting a brewery with respect to the feds and state alcohol controls sounds excessive, from what I've read, can't this just be viewed as a barrier to entry that everyone must pass. In a sense, it's a public protection in itself, as the process and fees keep the jokers that my produce potentially harmful product out of the market (please spare the "nothing in beer can kill you" comments, as I die a little inside every time I taste a crappy beer). Don't know about you, but I'd be damn angry is some clown sold me a bottle bomb that put my eye out. That's what my Red Ryder Carbine-Action Two-Hundred-Shot Range Model Air Rifle is for. Laws requiring breweries to have some sort of insurance or bond would ensure that if Jokey McAssclown's over carbed backyard Continuously Hopped Quad Imperial Baltic Farmhouse Bier de Garde happened to render me a cyclops, there would be something to go after, or some measure of recourse other than accepting his '85 Trans Am as payment for my eye.

Oh, and I disagree that the President has no legislative authority. The Pres has clear veto powers, and most President's in the last 50 years have acted as their party's de facto leader. If it's his agenda, his party will find a way to take it up in Congress. And the President, like anyone else, can write a bill, but must have it sponsored by a sitting member of Congress. This is usually how the budget is introduced every year. Seeing that he knows a few more Congressmen than I do, I would say his legislative authority is much greater that the average (sigh) man.

Ok, proceed on shred aforementioned arguments.
 
I agree with what you said. But.....

I think the fed and state controls; atleast originally were established to collect taxes on liqour and more to protect the public from illicit moonshine (which can kill you) than homebrew.

And even if there were a bill it probably wouldn't go anywhere. Congress can't hardley get a budget together let alone get a homebrew bill through.
 
Actually you made a case for why homebrewers or anybody who makes a product should be able to sell it with a minimum of restrictions. Why to sell beer must there be so much licensing, fees, and just general red tape. This starts at the local level and goes all the way to the federal level. I agree that beer could be a potentially harmful product if sold to persons under the age of 21. As far as going after a brewer who makes a bad product...well they won't be selling much beer once people find out. The market would take care of itself.
 
was just coming in here to post this... bastard! :p haha just kidding
 
Obama was at the Iowa State Fair yesterday. He bought a round for everyone over 21 in the beer garden tent.

After that they started chanting . . . 4 MORE BEERS!
 
Awesome.

I live in the 2nd reddest state in the union (Thanks, Oklahoma!) so it does not matter 1 iota whether i vote or not or especially for whom for president, but he's got my vote. Again.
 
It may well be old news but still pretty cool. Is he doing the brewing or one of his kitchen staff? Any photos around here of his brewery?
 
I was about to do a rolling eyes smilie, but you invoked mod power to delete the comments. :)

I personally think it's pretty cool. Whatever your opinion of him, having a fellow home brewer as president is kind of interesting, assuming he's the one actually doing the brewing. I think he seems like the kind of guy who would enjoy doing the brewing himself, though, so that's what I am going to keep telling myself.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top