On Tuesday, Donald Trump posted on Truth Social that Anheuser-Busch made a very bad mistake with Bud Light, but it is not a woke company, and among other things, it helps farmers and employs veterans.  He then says, “Anheuser-Busch is a Great American Brand that perhaps deserves a Second Chance?  What do you think?”

I’m glad you asked, Donald.  My answer is no, not yet.  First, some other opinions.

On the same day Trump posted the above, Brandon Morse, writing for RedState and without mentioning Trump (the time stamp for Morse’s article is 2:15 P.M., while for Trump’s it is 3:30 P.M., so it appears that Morse posted first), claimed that A-B has done enough by firing the executives responsible for the ad, teaming with UFC, and hiring a “conservative-friendly comedian” as a representative.  Furthermore, realistically, a big company like A-B will not be destroyed, so it’s time to declare victory and end the boycott.  Nowhere does he mention the need for an apology.  Stephen Green, writing for PJ Media, is more neutral, acknowledging that A-B has not really apologized, but, referencing Trump, asks if it’s time to end the boycott.  Shawn Fleetwood, writing for The Federalist, claims in the title that “Trump’s Defense of Anheuser-Busch Undermines Conservatives’ Most Effective Boycott Yet.”  He wonders aloud whether “a top Anheuser-Busch GOP lobbyist ... hosting a fundraiser” for Trump next month or Trump’s financial investments in A-B has anything to do with Trump’s plea.  Fleetwood emphasizes that A-B has never apologized, both for promoting transgenderism — in fact, it continued to push it by sponsoring LGBT pride events — and for insulting its customers.  He says ending the boycott now would just embolden other companies to continue pushing radical leftism down our throats.

I couldn’t agree more.  The reality is that companies have decided they’d rather support groups pushing woke causes — even if it means smaller profits — rather than be singled out for withering criticism by a loud woke mob and a compliant MSM, as well as risk being blacklisted (which could sink the company altogether).  When the NFL gives $250 million to BLM and puts BLM logos on the field and helmets, is it because it shares BLM’s Marxist vision for America (just think what that would mean for NFL profits) and approves of wanton death and destruction, or is it because it’s just easier to pay mafia protection money?  When MLB moved the All-Star game out of Atlanta (hurting mostly minority businesses) shortly after President Biden said it would be a good idea, and Atlanta companies such as Coke and Delta joined the movement, is it because they really believed that Georgia’s sensible reforms minimizing election fraud would restrict Blacks and other minorities from voting?  Of course not.  Coke and Delta backed off after they sensed there might be a boycott against them.  Do all these companies pushing DIE training labeling all whites as racist believe it will eliminate racism, is good for morale and the bottom line?  Of course not.  These companies are starting to back off DIE only because of messy lawsuits charging them with violating the Constitution and civil rights laws.  A-B thought it was just another company pandering to the woke mob and was stunned to get burned.  Ending the Bud Light boycott now sends the wrong message.

I’ll add another reason not to end the boycott just yet.  We live in an era in which those with conservative or traditional values are not allowed to express genuine views that used to be mainstream and common sense just a short time ago without being labeled racist, getting removed from social media, and possibly losing their jobs.  Add in government-sponsored censorship targeting just this one side.  The stakes are too high.  Rather than forgive and forget, we should be increasing the penalties for corporate woke excesses so they think twice.

Is there anything Anheuser-Busch can do to get back in our good graces?  For starters, a sincere apology.  No, “We’re sorry we lost money” doesn’t cut it.  I don’t expect the apology to be one rejecting transgenderism outright, but it could be one in which the company says it is sorry it pushed support for an alternative lifestyle on consumers who may not share those views and will refrain from doing so in future, and it is so sorry the executive inappropriately insulted the customers and that the company did not repudiate her comments immediately.  I would also recommend changing the beer name slightly, say from Bud Light to Buds Light, the plural indicating the camaraderie of drinking bud(die)s and also an eternal reminder of the change we effected.  I think I’d be willing to forgive under those conditions.  I might even buy Buds Light.

W.A. Eliot is a pseudonym.

Image via Pexels.