Tesla and Ford Deal a Game Changer?

If you have been following the EV race at all, it is clear that most major automakers are turning to EV technology in some fashion or another, with some electrifying their entire fleets and others electrifying portions of them.

Regardless of anyone's opinion about the entire idea from a political or practical standpoint, before you know it, and rather quickly, we're going to be seeing many more electric vehicles on our nation's roadways.

The biggest hurdle, beyond whether or not we have the power grid capacity to keep up with the massive future additional demand for electricity, is where you can charge your car? Especially if one intends to take a longer road trip, which currently requires quite a bit of forethought and planning since EV charging stations are not nearly as ubiquitous as traditional gas stations.

Tesla has been working to change this and they have good reason to do it. If there is more widespread access to charging stations for their cars, they potentially can sell more cars. And to date, Tesla currently owns the largest number of chargers in the country.

Enter Ford, a company that I have said stands a good chance to become a strong competitor in this sector of the auto industry due to the vehicles they are making and the appeal of them. The Ford F-150 Lightning and the Mach-E Mustang both have strong consumer appeal, offering utility on the truck side and performance and driving experience on the Mach-E side. One has to consider that even if you are not yet quite onboard with the idea of owning an electric vehicle, the Mach-E is pretty slick.

Part of the issue with charging stations is that all other automakers except for Tesla use a universal charging apparatus and Tesla has a proprietary one. Meaning, if you are driving a Ford Mach-E and you need a charge, you can't use a Tesla charging station to do it.

When I praised Rivian over Tesla, I considered two things. One, that Rivian's vehicle offerings look better and offer more of a driving experience. While Tesla appeals to a more environmental conscious and tech interested crowd, Rivian appeals to drivers much in the same way most traditional automakers do. Plus two, Rivian chargers are the same as all other automakers have chosen to use.

For those reasons, I have considered Rivian to be a better, more appealing stock market play over Tesla, and based on my thoughts about Ford being a strong contender in the EV race among traditional manufacturers, I prefer Ford over the others.

Granted, I have owned Ford stock for many years and Ford has always appealed to me in this sector anyway. The thinking that Ford can have a strong chance to become bigger in EV is just an added bonus.

That all said, Ford and Tesla are now talking about teaming up in the charger space. Ford says it prefers Tesla's charging technology and will work to encourage all other automakers to make the switch as well to what Tesla uses. 

Starting in 2025 Ford will outfit their electric vehicles with the NACS system, or North American Charging Standard that Tesla uses. In the meantime, current owners of Ford EV's can buy an adaptor for a couple hundred dollars to use NACS chargers as well.

Will those adaptors also be available to other EV owners? I would say it is likely that they will be.

I still hold the opinion that from a driving experience viewpoint as well as overall body style, Tesla cars are simply behind the curve. Frankly, in my opinion, they're just ugly. At least for now. And they are still more technology driven than driver driven. They are still appealing to a select group of people, in my view, limiting Tesla's growth just a little bit based on that.

But when it comes to charging technology and increasing the availability of charging access across the country, I think Tesla wins that race if it happens that NACS technology becomes the standard. And if Ford goes that way, which it will, it might encourage other automakers to follow suit, especially since Tesla would be the one doing most of the work of getting more chargers out there for people to use.

In fact, it comes to mind that at some point Tesla may not focus as much on being a carmaker as it might focus on becoming a charging behemoth similar to what oil companies became to gas cars. Can Elon Musk and Tesla become to EV charging what John D. Rockefeller and Standard Oil become to internal combustion engines?

The possibility is out there. And it changes my mind just a little bit about whether or not I see Tesla as a possible company to own. In this space overall, Tesla for me would remain a strong #3 in my portfolio, if I choose to buy shares, with Ford being #1 and Rivian being #2. But I think it is an idea worth considering. 

If Tesla at some point owns the majority of charging infrastructure, that's going to bode very well for Tesla as a whole and I think it is something to watch very closely for the foreseeable future.

This is not without some consideration that the biggest hurdle of all is going to be for Rivian. It has to ramp up production and delivery. It has to successfully launch its coming R2S line. And it has to break free somehow from their exclusive commercial vehicle deal with Amazon so they can sell their commercial vehicles to other businesses.

Still, I think Rivian has legs and I think they can make some very good inroads here.

In summary, I happen to think that Tesla may be positioning itself well not so much as an automaker, but in becoming the go-to when it comes to fueling the entire concept of EV now and in the future. If they can bag NACS and it becomes the universal standard to all EV charging, that's a game changer.

Like the way I write or the things I write about? Follow me on Facebook to keep up with the latest writing from all the places where I write.

Writing Update: May 25th 2023

Is this just more wasted space? Shameless promotion? I guess it is a little bit of both. I try to keep The Springboard here as "serious" as possible. That may be an overstatement, of course. But hey, this is my blog and I guess I get to make the rules.

I frequently promote my Facebook page where I compile a lot of the things I write about here and in other places. That's partly since I write a lot and I write in several places, and of course, if people like what I have to say or the way I write, I want to have a one-stop place where they can find more of me.

As such, I thought maybe it would be a good idea to occasionally share links here as well to other posts elsewhere that you may find some interest in. From more serious stuff to rambles to me trying to be funny. And I do mean trying.

If nothing else it helps to keep the page updated, and AdSense gets to advertise, why can't I?

Here are some of the more recent things I have posted in various places that you might want to give a quick read to. If not, no harm no foul. All I can do is let you know they are there and the rest is your choice.

Nonetheless. Onward and upward and here we go.

First Camp of 2023 on the Books

Does Anheuser-Busch CEO REALLY Get the Boycott?

Why We Can't All Be Rich

He Shot a Man in the Behind for WHAT?

One Stock I Have Trouble Owning

Where Was I, and How the Hell Did I Get There?

Can We Call Trump's Election Claims Lies if we Don't Know the Truth?

Busting Down the Barriers of Writing

What Do You Think About the J.K. Rowling Controversy?

And for this one, that's a wrap. I may post links once or twice a month depending upon how much new material is out there to share. And I hope I have not wasted anyone's time. That's all folks, and I will see you on the other side.

Media Reporting of LGBTQ+ Movement is Wrong

The manner in which the conservative backlash toward transgender and identity and the whole LGBTQ+ movement is being portrayed in the media is just more propaganda and false reporting. I would say the media is missing the point, but that's not the case at all.

The media knows exactly what they are doing.

And that's the same thing they always do. They are installing a narrative. The story is not the reaction by conservatives to handing Dylan Mulvaney a can of Bud Light beer with his picture on it. The story is not the reaction to Pride offerings in Target stores. 

The story is the force feeding of woke and cancel culture, which is a minority viewpoint, onto the majority. The story is forcing this ideology onto children. The story is forcing the majority of people to be forced to conform to a fringe societal view.

The fact is that there is only one thing that the LGBTQ+ community wants, and that's for everyone else to simply sit down and shut up and accept their viewpoint, or else.

Conservatives have simply had enough. And I think even to suggest that it is only a conservative movement is also false. But that's part of the narrative. That's what the media wants us all to believe, that in order to have a viewpoint that is different from the LGBTQ+ community and movement, one must be a conservative.

I think there are actually many liberals and independents also tired of it. Based on the impact and the numbers, I think only the latter must be true.

The fact is that the proper way to report any stories about any backlash toward transgender and identity and LGBTQ+ issues is this way. "A large portion of the American people are pushing back on the forced push of LGBTQ+ ideology."

Because that's what is really happening.

Granted, it may be that it is more likely that one with a conservative viewpoint will have a stronger opinion on the issue. However, it is not the whole story and certainly it is not a prerequisite to be a conservative for standing against these things.

Part of the issue is that what people are being asked (and I use the word "asked" very lightly here) to do is accept, without question, whatever it is that the left and woke and cancel culture wants and simply fall in line. People are being forced to be confrontational just because. 

If you think that taking down a statue of Robert E. Lee is wrong, you must be a racist. If you think that boys should only use boy's bathrooms, you must be a homophobe. If you think it is okay to enjoy a pour of Aunt Jemimah syrup on your pancakes, you must be in support of white supremacist movements. If you think that transgenderism should not be present in schools, you must be insensitive to LGBTQ+ issues.

I could go on, but I think anyone is aware what these issues are that are involved with woke and cancel culture.

What's being missed in the discussion, but again not by the media because they know exactly what they are doing as I mentioned earlier, is that other people simply have a difference of opinion and it so happens to be that MOST people disagree with woke and cancel culture.

Sure, one can make an argument that sets this movement alongside the Civil Rights Movement. At that time, it could have been argued that most people were of the viewpoint that blacks were inferior people and not entitled to the same rights as everyone else.

At that time, that majority viewpoint was wrong.

But hold up a minute. Was that viewpoint actually the majority viewpoint? I think it wasn't. I think most people were actually on the side of the black community. Had that not been the case, I don't think the Civil Rights Movement would have been effective at all. It never would have worked.

And let's face it, there's one other thing about the Civil Rights Movement that is important to keep in mind.

The movement made sense!

But there is also another element here which I think is important to understand. That is that I have serious doubts that most genuine people within the LGBTQ+ community agree with most of this stuff. I think the genuine gays and lesbians and trans people simply want to be live their lives quietly just like everyone else on the other side.

So, the movement, to my mind, is entirely on the fringe. It is an agenda not to try to bring people together. It is a movement to portray a certain, defined group of people a certain way for the purpose of winning political favor. It is a movement designed to further pit people against each other and create division.

It's why anyone who speaks out against Bud Light or against gender neutral Potato Heads is automatically assigned as a conservative.

Frankly, I think the real woke culture is the vast majority of Americans, and I think that is an important distinction to make. It is not just conservatives waking up to the reality that all of this "woke" stuff is bad. It's the vast majority of the AMERICAN PEOPLE who believe this. And they are fighting back. 

They are fighting back for history to be preserved. They are fighting back to save the children. They are fighting back to stop the division. They are fighting back to simply say, "Let me enjoy my breakfast. Let me enjoy browsing through the aisles of Target. Let me enjoy my M&M's and enjoy a cold beer. Let me enjoy a sitcom or a movie. Let me enjoy a football game. And let me enjoy it all without all sorts of politics and innuendo injected into it."

That's the story the media is failing to report. And again, it's not that they don't know what the story is. They simply aren't interested in reporting it. 

Like the way I write and the things I write about? Follow me on my Facebook page to follow me around all the places I write, and around all the things I write about.

A Couple of Ways to Deal with This Inflation

While it is true that the April 2023 inflation numbers dipped to 4.9%—still relatively high—it's much better than when inflation hit its peak of 9.1% back in June of 2022. So, while the rate hikes that the Fed began a little over a year ago seem to be helping curb consumer costs a bit, we're not out of the woods yet and things still cost more.

Mortgages, for example, jumped from 2.6% to around 6.3% for an average 30-year fixed rate loan, and credit card interest has jumped to a record average of around 21%.

There is also the question of whether or not we may still see a recession. Something we have not seen yet, but most economists would suggest that between inflation and rising interest rates, it may be sure to come despite any effort by anyone to try to avoid it. And while a recession is not good, and it's not the end of the world, it would not come without some additional pain as layoffs would likely occur, further stressing American's bottom lines.

On the flip side of this, as rates have risen, so have offered interest rates on certain bank accounts. Savers are getting the biggest bang for their bucks, benefiting the most from banks that offer so-called high yield savings accounts. So, looking into some of them, especially online, may be worth looking into if you have some money tucked away somewhere not getting the best rates. It would be worth the time to shop around as well since not all high interest banks are good.

Ally Bank for example, offers a 3.75% current rate, and CD offerings are northward of 4.5%. That's quite a bit more than the national average of 0.39% even if 3.75% still doesn't come near to beating inflation, a key factor when determining how to get the best bang for your buck.

Capital One also offers 3.75%. Barclays is giving 4%. And there are several others. You can go online and do a quick search to find the best rates and do some bank comparisons.

Beyond that, you really have to know your prices when you shop, and you have to be quite a bit more vigilant about shopping around, even visiting multiple stores to get the best deals on most things—especially food and common household items.

Make shopping lists, maintain a good inventory, and stock up on good deals as often as possible. This will also help to determine where you shop based on who has the best price so you don't have to visit multiple stores all at once. When inflation is tugging at your purse strings, every penny counts more than ever.

Of course, a money related post from me would never be complete without mentioning investing. Dividends are a great way to create new money—it is literally income. And besides, you should be invested anyway. If you are not familiar with investing, a very valuable book to read, and well worth the time and money, would be The Intelligent Investor by Benjamin Graham. Creating money from money you already earned is a great way to at least hedge against rising costs.

One thing taking a significant bite out of people's pockets is also the cost of gas and diesel. Why not try to earn some cash back on some of that, and the Upside app lets you do just that. Plus, they also offer cash back on certain grocery stores and restaurants. I have used this app for some time and I have to tell you the savings do add up—and again, every penny counts.

On top of that, doing everything you can to reduce debt at a time like this is paramount. As I mentioned earlier, credit card rates are tipping the scales at 21%. Not only should you pay some of that debt off to save pennies, but you should also be less inclined to use credit to offset expenses caused by inflation. Borrowing when rates are higher, and inflation is through the roof is a good way to compound the problem. So, simply don't do it.

While it may be a more difficult thing to accomplish, provided your company is not laying people off or otherwise enduring other struggles financially, this may be a good time to ask your boss for a raise. You'll want to do some analysis so you can present a reasonable proposal, but the fact is that businesses already understand the impact of inflation on their bottom lines and won't hesitate to raise prices to help get through it. You are as much well within your right to ask for more as they are.

Like the way I write or the things I write about? Give me a follow on my Facebook page where I post articles I write here and in other places. Want to send a donation to support what I do? You can PayPal me here.

Stop Calling Trump's Claims Lies When We Haven't Investigated the Truth

In reading some of the reporting about Donald Trump's recent CNN Town Hall meeting, which ran 70 minutes long on May 10th, I tend to have trouble with the constant assertion that, when Trump speaks about election fraud or stolen elections, that he is lying.

Maybe he is. Maybe the whole stolen election thing is a complete and utter falsehood. But at the same time, I have long said that there are many questions which have been asked, and you'd think that it would be at least a rather big concern for anyone who has an ounce of patriotism in their blood.

Why haven't we ACTUALLY looked into it?

Instead, all we have done, really, is to turn a blind eye, claim it as fact that it never happened, and leave it at that. Well, that and point fingers at so-called whacky mindless MAGA nuts. Okay, and silence anyone asking the question or suggesting it could have happened.

If there is nothing to hide, and the left wants to assert without question it is in fact a lie, why not use it as an opportunity to have an open and honest investigation to find out if it did in fact happen? Why would it not be paramount to at least try and set the record straight once and for all rather than simply wave a hand and deny it ever happened?

And maybe, just maybe, that's why Trump is still such a threat to the left and continues to be made into a target. Maybe that's why they continually want to shut him down and silence him, and maybe even get an indictment good and solid enough to bar him from being able to run for president ever again.

Because maybe he knows something, and maybe if he once-more has control of the Justice Department, he may have the means to actually prove that the election was indeed stolen.

Why else would they be going after Trump so hard? They (the left) supposedly won the hearts and minds of the American people. They got their way. Trump's out and they're in. So why so much effort and focus on the former president?

I mean, I will grant you, it's more conspiracy theory stuff. But I think it is still something to consider. The effort on the part of the left is just too heavy to deny there might be at least some reason behind it. If Trump posed no threat, they'd just leave him alone to enjoy a happy retirement in Mar-A-Lago and be done with him.

And about that lying thing, something Trump was accused of all throughout his presidency and continues to be accused of now. 

How many times have Trump's words turned out to actually be right?

Too many times to count. Yes. Trump embellishes. He always has. But are those really lies? Maybe we could call them simple tall tales. Okay, fine. He's guilty. But speaking of lies, how many times has Biden been caught in outright, verifiable lies? 

Again, too many times to count.

Why hold a "liar" to account who happens to actually be telling the truth a lot of the time and turn a blind eye to an actual, verifiable and certifiable liar?

The bottom line is that I am simply frustrated sometimes by the manner in which "news" is reported and with the assignment of certain words to suggest a true statement when in fact the statement is actually an opinion. "Trump is lying about election fraud and stolen elections" is not a fact. It is an opinion because there has never been an actual investigation to prove that an election was not stolen. 

So, we can sit here and argue all day about whether or not someone is lying. But until there is verifiable and incontrovertible proof one way or the other, all of it is conjecture. It's conjecture that it was stolen and conjecture that it wasn't.

The word "lie" does not apply here and nor should it.

Like the way I write or the things I write about? Follow me on Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/jimbauerwrites to find all the things I write about and places I write.

North Dakota Transgender School Bill

Regardless of where you happen to stand on transgender issues in general, I think most people can agree on one thing.

The entire movement has gotten way out of hand and especially involving children in the discussion is irresponsible and dangerous.

We can argue all day whether or not this is a fad, mental health issue, a true movement, an issue of rights, or even an issue of "free speech" as some in the movement have suggested. But the one thing that remains constant, in my view, is that it is not something we need to be introducing nor encouraging in schools. And North Dakota's governor, Doug Bergum, is right to address the issue in a recent bill that prohibits public schools and government entities from making it a requirement that teachers and other employees refer to students by their preferred pronouns. It also requires school officials to notify parents if a student is wanting to identify as transgender.

The bill goes a bit further to say that students identifying as another gender cannot use a preferred bathroom without the consent of a parent or guardian.

Frankly, I think this is as simple as calling it a common sense bill. Somewhere along the line schools almost everywhere have tried to assume the role of the parent and remove the parents from the equation altogether when it comes to a variety of issues, including transgenderism.

And there's a reason for that, of course. It's all about liberalism, which permeates public schools and the agenda of curriculum, and a strong desire by school officials to push their agenda onto children. It's indoctrination, simple as that. Their message is not resonating with most right minded, thinking adults, and rather than work on those minds, why not work on the impressionable minds of children which can be easily shaped and molded and manipulated.

And of course, they want to do this as much "under the radar" as possible. Because they know parents, at least most parents, object to almost all of this agenda. Pushing politics, CRT and all kinds of other liberal causes and issues really should have no place in the classroom, and left unchecked, teachers and administrators would do it, and do.

Naturally, there is pushback from the other side on this. And about that free speech issue. That's one of the things the opposition to the bill are talking about. "This may infringe on an individual's right to free speech." Never mind the right of others to not be forced to call someone else by a desired pronoun if they don't want to. That would be free speech also, but according to the opposing side it is relabeled as bigotry or insensitivity.

What is also a bit concerning, if not alarming, about the opposition's response to the bill is that they fear that "students may be subject to dangerous repercussions from an abusive parent." This is outright blasphemy considering an "abusive" parent will simply be deemed one who does not condone nor conform to the demands of those who encourage transgenderism. 

Throughout all of this movement the one thing that has been apparent is that the rights being infringed upon are the parent's rights to guide and rear and address personal matters and concerns with their children through religious guidance, psychology and via other medical professionals.

The bottom line is that we have to protect the children, and parents have a right to know not only what is being taught in their schools, but what our kids are being exposed to in terms of information. And we, as parents, also have a right to disagree with the manner in which certain things are taught or explained, as well as to have a say in what the agenda of teachers and administrators happens to be. 

Parents have a right to know when Jonny scrapes his knee on the playground or when Jonny decides, via whatever influences or catalysts, he wants to be Josephine instead. And parents also have a right to understand what things happened that may have caused the scraped knee or imbedded the idea that being a boy was no longer desirable.

What irritates me more than anything is the vilification of anyone who has anything to say or does anything to oppose the movement. And Bergum is being, and will be, vilified for sure. Yeah, the movement is the minority without question, and that is not to suggest the minority should not be able to stand up for or speak out against opposition. But, it is the way it is done that becomes the bigger issue.

You are vilified to the point of being an evil person who must be abolished from the face of the earth for simply having a different viewpoint—which is the majority viewpoint by the way. And the media certainly does their part to drive the point home and make a strong effort to not just call out opposers, but literally destroy them through false reporting, misrepresentation of the news, and other shaming tactics.

Either way, I do think the majority of the American people are paying more attention than anyone thinks, and as I have said before about the strong pushback against woke and cancel culture, and the force feeding of LGBTQ+ issues, I find it encouraging and refreshing.

It's about damn time!

The majority has been silent for far too long and the left and their agenda has gotten way more attention than it ever has deserved. That's coming to a head and finally the majority is shouting louder and pushing harder than the minority should ever have been allowed to.

Like the way I write or the things I talk about? Keep up with all the places I write on Facebook.

Facebook Settlement: To File a Claim or Not

If you have been keeping up with the news, there's all this hype over the massive settlement in a case against Facebook over privacy matters that's making its rounds. If the settlement is approved, there's apparently $725 million that's up for grabs.

Is it worth applying? I guess that's a yes and no answer. I mean, the math makes it look like mostly just a big waste of time, and frankly the only ones who will get rich from this whole thing will be the lawyers. You have to keep in mind a few things about the totality of what's actually up for grabs.

For one thing, we can assume that the lawyers are going to keep about 33% of the loot, unless they have negotiated a different amount. Assuming it is 33%, that removes $239.25 million from the money for the claimants.

Ah, but there will also be other fees the lawyers will likely want to recoup. How much would that be? I have no idea. But let's assume it's $50 million just for good measure. We now have a balance of $435.75 million. 

Still a staggering amount of money. Even though Facebook has billions of users, claims are only open to people living in the United States, and that's currently about 239 million users. So, let's say all 239 million religiously submitted their claims and everyone gets their cut.

Everyone gets $1.82 respectively.

Of course, not everyone is going to submit a claim. In fact, the actual number of claimants may be only around 10%. That's 23.9 million users staking a claim on this settlement. So, if that were to be true, claimants might now receive $18.23 each.

I have estimated that somewhere around 50 million people might actually go through the process and fill out the form when all is said and done. That would mean $8.72.

Regardless of how many people fill out the claim form, the bottom line is that none of the money will be felt by anyone at all except the lawyers who collect the lion's share and Facebook who has to pay the settlement.

I suppose if there is any rationale whatsoever to actually staking your own claim it's that if you leave your money on the table, someone else will simply get a bit more for their troubles.

Like the way I write or the things I write about? Follow me on Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/jimbauerwrites to follow the other places I write.

Make Sure Bud Light Boycott Really Bites In

Most of the time when conservatives boycott something, the impact is short-lived, for whatever reason. I think most conservatives just eventually move on. I mean, don't get me wrong. It's a good quality to have, and a lot of times conservatives don't really participate in boycotts all that much anyway—although we will be apt to participate in more focused support for certain companies who follow certain principles and do the right thing.

Think Hobby Lobby and Chick-Fil-A.

But the Bud Light controversy is sticking, and conservatives across the country are sticking it hard to parent company Anheuser-Busch InBev, not just leaving Bud Light on the shelves and refusing to order the beer in bars and restaurants. They are sticking it to their other brands as well and simply not buying any of the beers made by Anheuser-Busch. 

No doubt the pain is being felt. The company is losing billions of dollars in revenue each week and meanwhile, other beers like Miller Lite and Coors Lite are flying off the shelves.

There is even a beer that was launched being monikered Ultra Right, that is being contract brewed somewhere in Northern Illinois, created by Seth Weathers, a former director in Georgia in 2016 who headed up former president Donald Trump's campaign.

It should be noted that it was initially going to be contract brewed by Bent River Brewing, but company president Nick Bowes declined to brew it after he saw what the marketing would be for it. Perhaps conservatives should take note of Bent River as well?

Because again, as I have asked multiple times before, is business about money or politics? And if you want to inject politics into your business plan, maybe that should have an impact on your business? Good or bad mind you. Certainly, Ultra Right would be doing that with their own beer brand. And being marketed as an unwoke beer is certainly a political statement if there ever was one.

By the way, I should point out that Miller Lite and Coors Light are American beers of course. But the company that produces them are no longer American, and while that doesn't necessarily matter in light of the Bud Light controversy, perhaps just keeping that somewhere in the back of the mind is something to think about.

As far as large American breweries go there's Yuengling and the Boston Beer Company to consider. Boston Beer makes Sam Adams. Yuengling says they aren't woke. Boston Beer has not currently taken any position.

As far as the boycott is concerned, I think the message being sent needs to be a clear one. We are tired of this woke crap being shoved down our throats and being forced to submit to it. In other words, we can't just go back to business as usual when it comes to Anheuser-Busch InBev. In order for the message to have long legs it needs to serve as a warning and poster child for any other company who wants to engage in woke politics that their best move would be to cease and desist. Otherwise, businesses wanting to engage in such antics will simply calculate their short-term losses to maintain appeasement for the minority groups wanting to push their politics on everyone else.

In other words, businesses will be allowed to simply have their cake and eat it too.

At least for now it appears that this boycott will have a lasting impact. But it's also way too soon to assert that as a reality. And it's not about necessarily punishing or bringing down a company. It's simply about making it clear that businesses need to know their customers and simply stick to branding and selling products and leave the rest up to advocacy groups to have their say. It's to say that if you decide to cow-toe to minority pressures while alienating your core customers to accomplish it, there will be a price to pay for it.

Even if Anheuser-Busch backtracks and apologizes to save their business, I think conservatives need to say no. It's not enough. Your last move was the final straw. It's what broke the camel's back. We have to determine whether or not the apology is really genuine. We have to know that they really got the message. And other businesses need to be all too aware that if they decide to go the direction Bud Light and Anheuser-Busch did, there's not going to be an easy way out of it.

What's the old saying? You shouldn't have to say sorry to one's you love. Beyond that, sorry doesn't always cut it. And in this case, perhaps it shouldn't.

Like what I have to say or like the way I write about it? Follow me on Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/jimbauerwrites to follow all the places I ply my trade on.