A new survey conducted by Forbes Advisor delved into the pampering habits of dog owners across the United States. The survey, which included responses from 10,000 dog owners across the nation, aimed to determine which states boast the most indulgent pet parents, taking into account various aspects of canine care, from health prioritization to birthday celebrations.
Florida emerged as the leading state in terms of spoiling its dogs, with a remarkable 66.5% of respondents confessing to spending more on their dog’s health and grooming than on their personal well-being. In addition to this financial dedication, 43.5% of Floridian dog owners admitted to pushing their dogs in strollers, while a staggering 54% regularly organize birthday parties for their four-legged companions.
The following states rounding out the top five in the survey were Alaska, Washington, Colorado, and California, each showcasing a high level of devotion to their canine companions.
On the opposite end of the spectrum, the survey highlighted the states where pet owners tend to spoil their dogs less. Oklahoma claimed the title for the least indulgent, followed by Indiana, Wisconsin, Idaho, and New Mexico. South Carolina also made the list of states where dogs receive relatively less pampering from their owners.
In New Mexico, which tied South Carolina at 45th out of all other states, 39.5% of dog owners brought their dog on vacation, 40.5% prepared homemade dog food or treats, and 11.0% pushed their dog in a stroller.
Forbes Advisor further identified the top five ways in which pet parents pamper their dogs. Topping the list was the practice of taking family photos with furry friends, with 58.7% of respondents nationwide admitting to this indulgence. Additionally, 53.7% expressed their love for pampering through the purchase of dog clothes.
Health care for dogs emerged as a significant aspect of canine indulgence, with 45.8% of respondents acknowledging that they allocate more funds to their pet’s health and grooming than to their own. Some dog owners even go above and beyond by preparing homemade meals for their dogs, with 45% engaging in this practice. Moreover, 43.2% have treated their dogs to restaurant-quality treats, underlining the extent to which some pet parents go to ensure their furry companions enjoy the finer things in life.
Following the weeks-long outrage over Bud Light’s woke campaign featuring transgender activist Dylan Mulvaney, the executive responsible for the Mulvaney campaign is taking a “leave of absence” from the parent company, Anheuser Busch.
Ad Age reported that the senior executive of marketing since 2022 “has taken a leave of absence, the brewer confirmed, and will be replaced by Todd Allen, who was most recently global marketing VP for Budweiser. Heinerscheid did not immediately respond to an email requesting comment.”
The outlet further reported, “The brewer has also streamlined its marketing function to reduce layers “so that our most senior marketers are more closely connected to every aspect of our brand’s activities,” a company spokesperson said in a statement, adding that “these steps will help us maintain focus on the things we do best: brewing great beer for all consumers, while always making a positive impact in our communities and on our country.”
Heinerscheid recently addressed the conflict on the Make Yourself At Home podcast, saying Bud Light’s previous marketing was “fratty” and “out of touch.”
She said, “This brand is in decline, it’s been in decline for a really long time, and if we do not attract young drinkers to come and drink this brand, there will be no future… it’s like we need to evolve and elevate this incredibly iconic brand. What does evolve and elevate mean? It means inclusivity… it means having a campaign that’s truly inclusive and feels lighter and brighter and different. And appeals to women and to men.”
Since the Dylan Mulvaney fiasco erupted on social media, the company has lost approximately $6 billion in valuation, with other brands that have not alienated their customers, such as Yeungling, seeing a significant bump in sales.
While Anheuser-Busch’s brands suffer amid its Bud Light partnership with transgender influencer Dylan Mulvaney, one American beer company is surging with beer sales.
D.G. Yuengling and Son, which is America’s oldest brewery, started in 1829, is owned by Dick Yuengling, a Trump supporter.
The news broke of Yuengling’s support for Donald Trump in 2016 when Eric Trump toured the manufacturing facility in Pottsville, Pennsylvania in October of that year.
“Our guys are behind your father,” Yuengling said to Eric Trump. “We need him in there.”
Despite leftists launching a boycott of the company at the time, Yuengling’s sales were not significantly harmed. Dick Yuengling said there was “nothing noticeable” about declines in sales, adding that they were only “down a little.”
“Look,” Yuengling said, “we survived Prohibition. We survived two world wars when you couldn’t get any grain. We’ll be fine.”
Now, the company could be doing even better than “fine” amid massive boycotts of Anheuser-Busch products costing the beer giant billions in market valuation, while boycotters are flocking to Yuengling’s beer as a refuge from the “woke” beer brand.
In 2022, Anheuser-Busch unveiled a new logo that looked eerily similar to Yeungling’s successful logo of many years. Yeungling wrote in reply, “Cool new Eagle. We’re flattered. Yuengling, America’s Oldest Brewery, established 1829.”
This post originally appeared on the Piñon Post’s sister publication, Patriot Vibe.
The results from the Association of Statisticians of American Religious Bodies’ (ASARB) 2020 U.S. Religion Census report show a growing trend for people of faith in New Mexico.
According to the data in the report, there were 1,111,977 “adherents” (churchgoers) in the state. That is a 7.26 percent increase from 2010’s report, which showed 1,031,198 adherents.
Despite congregations dwindling from 2,447 in 2010 to 2,405 in 2020, church membership grew.
The ASARB defined adherents as people who “generally are members, children who are not members, and others who are not members but are considered participants in the congregation.”
Catholics were by far the greatest number of church congregants in 2020, with 633,259 adherents (29.9 percent), which is a slight bump of 1.5 percent from 2010’s number of 584,941 adherents (28.4 percent).
The next largest religious denomination in New Mexico is evangelical protestants, with 277,326 adherents, a slight 1.21 percent decline from 273,956 in 2010. Evangelical protestants make up 12.9 percent of all churchgoers, with non-denominational Christian Churches making up the largest amount of that figure or around 37.6 percent.
The Catholic Church had the highest concentration of adherents in 32 out of New Mexico’s 33 counties, with the only exception being Hidalgo County, which had a higher percentage of adherents belonging to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS).
Islam had a massive 192.6 percent increase in New Mexico, with 12,046 members of the church in 2020, while there were only 4,116 adherents in 2010.
Judaism had a significant 14.4 percent decline in New Mexico adherents, with 3,698 in 2020 versus 4,232 back in 2010.
According to an analysis of the data by Ryan Roys of Eastern Illinois University, “South Florida and many of the least-populous counties in Texas close to the border with Mexico saw notable growth, as did parts of New Mexico and Arizona. Additionally, counties in Idaho became more religious in 2020 over 2010.”
Nationwide, the Catholic Church remained the leader in religious denominations, with 61,858,137 adherents, and non-denominational Christian Churches came in second place with 21,095,641 adherents.
See the full results of the 2020 U.S. Religion Census here.
Pew Research Center’s 2015 Religious Landscape Study revealed that New Mexico is the 15th most religious state, with 63 percent of respondents saying they believe in God with absolute certainty and 57 percent of the population being “highly religious.” A similar statistic from the World Population Review revealed that New Mexico is the 18th most religious state, with 57 percent of adults being religious.
Amid Anheuser-Busch Inbev SA’s Bud Light partnership with leftist transgender advocate Dylan Mulvaney, the company’s stock value has taken a turn for the worst, with its market capitalization before news of the partnership being at $132.38 billion. Now, the stock’s market cap is valued at $127.13 billion, a nearly four percent loss.
Those losses following the Mulvaney branding sponsorship amount to more than $5 billion.
Conservatives are calling for a boycott of the product amid the “woke” pairing, with many formerly loyal Bud Light drinkers quitting the brand.
On Tuesday, while appearing on Rosie O’Donnell’s podcast, “Onward With Rosie O’Donnell,” Mulvaney claimed, “These people, they don’t understand me and anything that I do or say then somehow gets taken out of context and is used against me and it’s so sad because everything I try to put out is positive. It’s trying to connect with others that maybe don’t understand me. It’s to make people laugh or to make a kid feel seen.”
Alissa Heinerscheid, Anheuser-Busch’s vice president of marketing, recently addressed the conflict on the Make Yourself At Home podcast, saying, “This brand is in decline, it’s been in decline for a really long time, and if we do not attract young drinkers to come and drink this brand, there will be no future… it’s like we need to evolve and elevate this incredibly iconic brand. What does evolve and elevate mean? It means inclusivity… it means having a campaign that’s truly inclusive and feels lighter and brighter and different. And appeals to women and to men.”
This post originally appeared on the Piñon Post’s sister publication, Patriot Vibe.
Following the revelation that transgender activist and influencer Dylan Mulvaney is being paid big bucks to be a Bud Light brand sponsor, many are calling to quit the brand, including celebrities like singers Kid Rock and Travis Tritt.
Kid Rock made a video on Twitter showing his thoughts on the Bud Light brand:
Now, as boycott calls increase, here are all of Bud Light parent company, Anheuser-Busch’s other brands beer drinkers may think of quitting:
Although Thanksgiving is a holiday most think of in regard to the pilgrims and the Indians joining together in Plymouth, Massachusetts to feast in the fall of 1621, a year after the new settlers landed in America, Thanksgiving happened a lot earlier and in the Southwest.
Aaccording to historians, the first Thanksgiving actually took place near New Mexico in the city of San Elizario, Texas, just south of El Paso.
Ana Pacheco, the City Historian of Santa Fe writes:
According to American history, the founding at Plymouth Rock in 1620 is the oldest colony in the country. The reality is that the first European settlement in the United States occurred 22 years earlier. In 1598 the Spanish explorer, Don Juan de Oñate, and his army established the first colony in north America. The settlement was located at San Gabriel near Ohkay Owingeh Pueblo, 30 miles north of Santa Fe.
On April 30, 1598 this nation’s first Thanksgiving took place. The event occurred near San Elizario, Texas. Oñate, and his contingent of soldiers, Franciscan missionaries and colonists celebrated their safe arrival. They had spent almost two months on a lengthy trek through the treacherous-desert terrain. The heroic expedition suffered from the elements marching from Santa Barbara, Mexico. Finally, they were able to take refuge at the northern boundary of the Rio Grande near El Paso.
The historical account of the first settlement was recorded as La Historia de Nuevo Mexico. It was written by the soldier/scribe Gaspar Perez de Villagra. It’s the only epic and historical book narrating the first European settlement of any state in the U.S. That is the true history of America’s first Thanksgiving.
A second Texas town claims to have been the real site of the first Thanksgiving in America. In 1598, a wealthy Spanish dignitary named Juan de Oñate was granted lands among the Pueblo Indians in the American Southwest. He decided to blaze a new path directly across the Chihuahua Desert to reach the Rio Grande. Oñate’s party of 500 soldiers, women and children barely survived the harrowing journey, nearly dying of thirst and exhaustion when they reached the river. (Two horses reportedly drank so much water that their stomachs burst.)
After 10 days of rest and recuperation near modern-day San Elizario, Texas, Oñate ordered a feast of thanksgiving, which one of his men described in his journal:“We built a great bonfire and roasted the meat and fish, and then all sat down to a repast the like of which we had never enjoyed before…We were happy that our trials were over; as happy as were the passengers in the Ark when they saw the dove returning with the olive branch in his beak, bringing tidings that the deluge had subsided.”
Thanksgiving’s rich traditions across our nation may now hit harder here in the Land of Enchantment, with the men and women who founded our beautiful state helped make the first Thanksgiving following a long and treacherous journey through the Chihuahuan Desert to discover what we are blessed to call New Mexico today.
Although others may claim the “first Thanksgiving” took place in another part of Texas, and some even claim since settlers arrived earlier in St. Augustine, Florida that those were the first Thanksgiving, it is not true. There are documented accounts that Oñate’s Thanksgiving feast was the first.
Last month, the Piñon Postreported how far-left groups have begun to focus on Georgia O’Keefe as their next target to “cancel.” The fringe group, “Three Sisters Collective,” blasted a New Mexico Tourism Department advertisement featuring O’Keeffe as “romantic settler voyeurism” and “erasure” of Native American culture. Here is the advertisement:
Even the Georgia O’Keeffe Museum itself, a supposed institution meant to honor the late artist who came to New Mexico, blasted her, writing the following in a statement:
The Georgia O’Keeffe Museum does not support the use of Georgia O’Keeffe quotes describing the New Mexico landscape as ‘her country’ or claiming ‘that was mine.’ While these quotes are from the artist, it is now clear that this is the language of possession, colonization, and erasure. Such language is offensive, insulting and insensitive. We strongly discourage the use of these problematic phrases, as well as ‘O’Keeffe Country’ to promote tourism or represent Northern New Mexico.
But the attacks on O’Keeffe’s legacy are nothing new. An August 2020 Georgia O’Keeffe Museum-sponsored virtual event called “Discussion: This is Not O’Keeffe Country” brought together radicals to assail O’Keeffe’s legacy and demean New Mexico culture in general.
In opening up the discussion, Cody Hartley, the director of the museum, claimed the Abiquiú area where the artist lived was “mistakenly” called “O’Keeffe Country” and instead said that he was “recognizing that the region we are discussing tonight is Tewa Country.” He then claimed the use of land in Santa Fe was “settler colonialism.”
Alicia Inez Guzman led the discussion, which invoked the term “colonialism” repeatedly in the description of O’Keeffe’s journey to New Mexico. Guzman described the artist’s worldview as “cosmopolitan.” She then asked the panelists about what she dubbed “unintended consequences.”
Christina M. Castro responded saying, “But with regard to unintended consequences, I would argue that the consequence, you know, they might not be as unintended, as we may think they are. The more I learned about the legacy of O’Keeffe and the era of her time, and the folks that were coming out from the East coast to, you know, ‘find themselves in a vast undiscovered landscape,’ the more I learned, you know, these elites were very calculated in their movements. And so, I’m trying to look at the legacy.”
Castro added, “These were elites who came out here as a part of an artistic settler colonial project. So, I’m interested in that because I don’t think that the consequences are necessarily unintentional.”
Guzman responded, “I think that’s a good point, Christina, because if you’re really entitled, and you’re really privileged, you may not think they’re intended. But intention doesn’t necessarily have anything to do with outcome…. We’re entering into the cash economy, where we’re seeing some environmental racism and that the, you know, the first movements in that direction.”
Jason Garcia of Santa Clara Pueblo chimed in, invoking the term “erasure” multiple times, then saying, “I found it interesting that [O’Keeffe] said, in reference to [Cerro] Pedernal (mountain)… Tsi’pin, She said, ‘It’s my private mountain. It belongs to me. God told me if I painted it enough, I could have it.’ So, just the fact that she’s saying, ‘If I paint this picture a thousand times, two thousand times, it’s mine, I have ownership.’ So, it’s just interesting of how that intended erasure and it was–I mean, you fall in love with a place, but once you call it yours, it’s a whole different ball game and things like that.”
Guzman agreed, saying, “There’s this phrase that says that amnesia is the algorithm of colonization. And so, I think that that’s absolutely appropriate in this context.”
On the topic of feminism, Guzman added, “We think of the feminism that O’Keeffe came out of, that she really originated out of, it’s very different contexts and she was breaking glass ceilings in the art world but does that really square with how we see women in our place here in New Mexico.”
Castro said, “White women have benefited a lot from feminism on the backs of women and people of color.”
Then the converstiaon went down a turn where they spoke down toward the Spanish who came to New Mexico, claiming they used Native Americans as slaves. Guzman called it “white supremacy” when speaking about people of mixed race.
She said, “And then, there were a lot of terms for like mixed race people as well, because the Spanish were really like obsessed with making sense of like, mixtures. This is white supremacy, right? I mean, here’s the word we should be using. Speaking of not using words, we should be using white supremacy.”
Castro added, “ The hierarchy of white supremacy and Hispanic white supremacy.”
Once the conversation turned back into talking about O’Keefe, Guzman asked, “Is it fair to lump O’Keeffe in with those who did abuse the land and claimed it by manifest destiny?” Castro answered, “Yes.”
Guzman previously wrote an article in 2020 claiming the racist, anti-Hispanic narrative that the Hispanic identity was fiction. This racist theory has previously been spun by The Red Nation hate group’s Nick Estes. Here’s what Guzman wrote:
The Americanization of the Plaza ran parallel to other efforts that sought to whitewash the city’s mixed Indo-Hispanic population — racist campaigns that Swentzell refers to as a “rehabilitation of Mexicans into Spaniards.” New Mexic… was “too Mexican” to be admitted to the Union as a state. So white tourism boosters, anthropologists and legislators (many of them slave owners) began a massive rebranding to cast residents as Spanish-American, an identity that was “closer to white.” The founding of Spanish-American schools and Spanish Colonial societies and the celebration of Spanish Fiestas was just another means of performing whiteness, Swentzell said. To claim pure Spanish ancestry was a way to identify with your oppressor so that you could eat scraps at the table he took from you.
The panelists then claimed O’Keeffe was a product of displacing Native American people throughout her entire life since she was born in Sun Prarie, Wisconsin in 1887, which Garcia said was a Native American “ancestral village.”
“Of where you’re saying George O’Keeffe wasn’t, she didn’t choose this, but she was actually a product of displacement of native peoples,” he added.
The panel shifted once again to bashing the Georgia O’Keeffe Museum for how much it charged for admission and a criticism of museums in general.
Corrine Sanchez of “Tewa Women United” said, “So, I would also like, consider the deconstruction of museums. Like we build this fortune, or we build this maintenance around museums and these structures, and we created a culture around it where people go visit and learn. If we deconstructed all of that money and put that into our educational system in some way, for our young people and had, you know, maybe then traveling. You know, traveling displays or things that everyone could access. This is the same conversation we need to have around the structures and the monuments. We go to D.C. because they have these big old monuments.”
The panel agreed that it was a place of “radicalism” needed to change the museum’s framework. Guzman said, “And part of it is like reflecting on your own privilege…. And this is the thing that everybody in Santa Fe should really be thinking about is like, how do you instrumentalize your privilege so that it’s going towards or weaponized your privilege?”
As self-identified radicals claim is based on colonization and supposed white supremacy, the war on Georgia O’Keeffe is still trying to damage the late artist’s legacy and contribution to New Mexico’s identity. The war on O’Keeffe, however, is by no means a contained event in general, as New Mexicans are seeing monuments and other historically and culturally significant places and artifacts ripped down and erased by radical “Indigenous” individuals.