Doesn't matter, guys.
According to the Code of Federal Regulations, Chapter 5, Section 2a (Internet Forum Messages), the age statement on the message thread can be no greater than 51% of the most recent posting included.
Or something like that.
Have another bourbon!
Oh, and just to keep this on topic, a point Mike mentioned that I feel needs to be emphasized... President Taft's decision, in 1909, to clarify the Pure Food and Drug Act, was not just the Prez putting a spin on things, the way we'd expect today. I haven't read the entire document, but I do have (thanks, Mike) a copy of the portion that relates to the whiskey industry. It's pretty apparent that the President either knew a LOT about the whiskey business or had certainly taken the time to LEARN a lot before rendering his judgement.
He'd have made a great participant on this forum (if only he weren't quite so dead).
In his writings Taft describes, in detail, the way whiskey (as it was known in 1906) had developed and how it was currently (again, in 1906) being made. He understood the difference between straight whiskey, whiskey such as Early Times or Jack Daniel, cheap imitation whiskey, fine-quality rectified whiskey such as Julian or Drew might produce, and ordinary rectified whiskey such as Seagram's 7 Crown or Four Roses (the real one, not the bourbon with the same name), which was the most familiar type. Taft's decision was to overturn the original PF&D sanctions that forbade the use of the word "whiskey" to describe anything other than the expensive niche product that met the narrow description assigned to straight whiskey.