Buying Budweiser = John McCain for President

Read a very interesting Time Magazine article on Cindy McCain and her fortune. (http://www.time.com/time/politics/artic ... 48,00.html).
She is the daughter of a very wealthy AB distributor and is worth up to 100 million.

"Anheuser-Busch's political action committee was among McCain's earliest donors. Cindy McCain's father, James Hensley, and other Hensley & Co. executives gave so much the Federal Election Commission ordered McCain to give some of it back. McCain's campaign used Hensley office equipment such as computers and copiers, and Cindy McCain personally paid some of the campaign's bills.

Beverage industry analysts estimate Hensley's value at more than $250 million and its annual sales at $300 million or more. Hensley describes itself as the third-largest Anheuser-Bush wholesaler in the United States. It sold more than 23 million cases of beer last year and is among the nation's biggest beer distributors regardless of brand."


Did you know that the AB distributor here in Louisville is owned by AB in St. Louis? It is not a local business. DCE will not do business with AB nor carry any of their products.

good for you Matt

congrats

bad beer = bad politics ???

amazing how much money you can make with the government gives you a monopoly . . . er I mean a beer distributership.

$250 million selling crappy beer. wow.

Pardon me but how is this any different than Mr. Kerrey's wife's money from her parents family business? Democrats probably forget that she has much more money than the McCain's which all came from the Heinz corporation and that she loaned much money to the campaign and Heinz Corp. officers and the company itself donated much money to his campaign.

We all know that politics in America is totally controlled by money and candidates both democrat and republican bend over backwards to do whatever it takes to get donations. While I respect individuals commitment to supporting a particular candidate or party I don't believe it's correct for a business to not carry a product because of the political connection of a supplier. It is a disservice to their customers, and a potential loss of business for them. Boycotts never are affected in achieving their goals.

Boycotts never are affected in achieving their goals.

I'll disagree with you on the boycott issue, let's take a look back at South Africa. An effective boycott of SA by banks and the UN and other big businesses certainly was a leading factor in the downfall of apartheid. Closer to home let's look at MLK and the boycotts he led of segregated bus systems in Montgomery, Alabama. Ineffective? "In December 1955, when Rosa Parks, a black woman, was arrested for violating a segregated seating ordinance on a public bus in Montgomery, black citizens were outraged. King, fellow minister Ralph Abernathy, and Alabama's state chairman of the NAACP called a public meeting. African Americans were urged to boycott the segregated city buses, and the Montgomery Improvement Association (MIA) was formed. The boycott lasted over a year, until the bus company capitulated. Segregated seating was discontinued, and some African Americans were employed as bus drivers. When the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed that the bus segregation laws of Montgomery were unconstitutional, the boycott ended in triumph."

I don't carry AB products because of their politics - I don't carry them because they suck. It just so happens that I also don't like their politics. As a business owner it's my prerogative to chose who I carry and who I don't. My politics are reflected in my business.

If I lose business because I don't carry Budweiser products that is an acceptable loss.
If I lose business because of my political point of view that is also an acceptable loss.

My business is not simply a means to make more money it is essentially a representation of my spirit. I never viewed opening DCE as a way to get rich. If I wanted to do that I would have stayed in Germany where I was making 35,000 Euro a year doing PR for General Motors 3 days a week.

I don't drink Bud products and I won't sell them either. Won't be voting for McCain or any other republican either.

Pardon me but how is this any different than Mr. Kerrey's wife's money from her parents family business?

I'll take a stab at it: Heinz Ketchup actually has good flavor for ketchup?

hnz_ff_ketchup.jpg (6.71 KiB) Viewed 7557 times

Pardon me but how is this any different than Mr. Kerrey's wife's money from her parents family business? Democrats probably forget that she has much more money than the McCain's which all came from the Heinz corporation and that she loaned much money to the campaign and Heinz Corp. officers and the company itself donated much money to his campaign.

We all know that politics in America is totally controlled by money and candidates both democrat and republican bend over backwards to do whatever it takes to get donations. While I respect individuals commitment to supporting a particular candidate or party I don't believe it's correct for a business to not carry a product because of the political connection of a supplier. It is a disservice to their customers, and a potential loss of business for them. Boycotts never are affected in achieving their goals.

Apart from the fundamental error here that Theresa Kerry's parents owned Heinz, everything else about this message is wrong too. She wasn't born into the Heinz family. She was born in Mozambique, her father was a Portugese physician, and she was married (1966) to John Heinz who was elected republican senator to Pennsylvania in 1976 and who died in an airplane crash in 1991. By the time she married John Kerry, she didn't own any part of the Heinz corporation, although she did manage the family's charitable endowments, particularly in the area of environmental causes. That was pretty broadly covered during the campaign. Unfortunately, early on in the campaign the emal spams had spread so many falsehoods about Theresa Heinz Kerry that people apparently didn't feel it was necessary to bother finding out what the actual truth was.

Hey, I was just trying to add levity to a political discussion on a restaurant forum.

And for the record, Heinz is a better ketchup than Budweiser is a beer.

if it ain't 57 it ain't ketchup. unless it's blue Heinz. That's just gross.

Sorry, didn't mean to be pedantic (too late!...), but when gross errors come up in a public forum, I think they should be corrected. Elsewise, we all keep perpetuating untruths. There're enough untruths circulating without being a party to it by just letting it go. So, okay, pedanticism over for at least today....

Don't apologize for the truth, C. Devlin. That was great.
So, speaking of the power of $$, what about Obama's huge fundraising success? He's not making deals with millionaires, he's been able to attract over 1 million small donations from people that care about his campaign. No one's ever done that.
Even with all our problems, we are turning the corner to a new era. Look at our choices for President this year - a woman, a black man (biracial if you prefer), and an independent Republican with a compelling life story. You can probably guess my preference, but they are all honorable and capable. I have decided to be optimistic.

as budweiser is the standard for "Standard American Lager" (as stated by the BJCP), why such a bad rap? especially since they give you what they say they will on a consistent basis? sounds to me like a world class company and a world class product, irregardless of what someones marriage to a politician may have to do with it. just thought id throw it out there, for what it is, its right on point.... mcain or not. bud is still a great example of "Standard American Lager".

Boycotts never are affected in achieving their goals.

Politics aside, this quote is just a grammatical train wreck. What does this even mean? Did you mean effective?

[Robin Garr]

as budweiser is the standard for "Standard American Lager" (as stated by the BJCP), why such a bad rap? especially since they give you what they say they will on a consistent basis? sounds to me like a world class company and a world class product, irregardless of what someones marriage to a politician may have to do with it. just thought id throw it out there, for what it is, its right on point.... mcain or not. bud is still a great example of "Standard American Lager".

Well ... the ABA, as I recall, created the "Standard American Lager" category simply to give the major breweries a place to play in the annual Great American Beer Festival judging, mostly because these light, low-flavor beers couldn't compete against the micros in the standard craft-beer styles.

Boycotts never are affected in achieving their goals.

Politics aside, this quote is just a grammatical train wreck. What does this even mean? Did you mean effective?

Jeremy, I'm sorry my writing is not up to your standards! Due to a temporary disability it is necessary for me to use speech recognition software to write and sometimes it and I did not think the same! I will try in the future to write to your standards. Actually I thought this was a food forum not a English grammar forum but I will try to do better.