Shout Out Patriots with Martin Mawyer
0:44 Jaguar’s New Marketing Plan: Drive Off a Cliff and Call It Progress
6:04: Target’s Big Pivot: Dumping Satanists, Apologizing to Christians
9:44 Parental Rights, Hollywood Style: Jeff Younger’s Real-Life Horror Story
Hello, Patriots, and welcome to Shout Out Patriots! I’m your host, Martin Mawyer, president of Christian Action Network. Thank you for joining me today for another episode where we take a bold stand for faith, family, and freedom.
We’ve got a powerful lineup for you today.
First, we’ll dive into Jaguar’s bizarre marketing stunt—one that has them trading horsepower for woke rainbows. Then, we’ll celebrate the bravery of a Target employee who stood strong for her Christian beliefs—and actually got an apology from the retail giant.
Finally, we’ll take a hard look at the heartbreaking story of Jeff Younger, a father stripped of his parental rights in California’s ongoing war against families.
Jaguar’s New Marketing Plan: Drive Off a Cliff and Call It Progress
Let’s kick things off with what might be one of the boldest marketing ideas ever—or perhaps the most ridiculous, tone-deaf, and downright disastrous ad campaigns since Anheuser-Busch put trans-activist Dylan Mulvaney on a Bud Light can and turned America’s best-selling beer into Coca-Cola Blak.
What’s that? You’ve never heard of Coca-Cola Blak before? It lasted less than two years.
Well, have you heard about this? Instead of focusing on performance, Jaguar’s rebranding campaign looks like they’ve parked their priorities at the intersection of Woke Street and Rainbow Boulevard.
Forget sleek cars growling down the highway; now it’s all about DEI summits, spangled jackets, and transgenders wielding sledgehammers.
Seriously, what are they smoking over at Jaguar?
I wish this was just a bad acid trip from the ‘60s, but nope—it’s the brainchild of Santino Pietrosanti, the marketing guru who decided to swap Jaguar’s roaring feline for what feels like a mewing house cat.
So here’s the burning question: Is this all just a publicity stunt?
Or has Jaguar somehow missed the memo about the Bud Light-Dylan Mulvaney debacle—a disaster that turned “go woke, go broke” into the battle cry of beer drinkers across America?
Anheuser-Busch InBev didn’t just alienate its base; it nuked its credibility with the precision of a wrecking ball.
And yet here comes Jaguar, seemingly revving up for the same cliff dive while admitting they may lose 85% of its current customers.
Let’s set the scene for this marketing masterpiece—or meltdown, depending on your perspective.
Santino Pietrosanti, the head of brand at Jaguar, strutted onto the stage at the Attitude Awards decked out in a spangled jacket and see-through shirt, declaring that Jaguar is on a “transformative journey.”
And no, that journey apparently doesn’t include, you know, cars. Instead, it’s about embracing the “full spectrum of human potential and creativity.” Translation? DEI summits, policy revisions for “transitioning at work,” and—wait for it—15 diversity groups, including one for neurodiversity.
Hey, I’m all for creativity, but when did a car company start sounding like the HR department of a Silicon Valley startup?
And don’t worry, the rebrand isn’t just bold—it’s fearless, exuberant, and everything else that looks great on a PowerPoint slide.
Jaguar even ditched its iconic “growler” badge, replacing it with… well, it doesn’t really matter, because their promotional video didn’t even bother showing a car. Instead, we got models wandering through alien pink landscapes while techno music blared in the background.
If you’re wondering what any of this has to do with driving, you’re not alone.
Even Elon Musk chimed in, tweeting, “Do you sell cars?” Jaguar’s response? An invite to their Miami Art Week event next month. Because clearly, nothing says “luxury automotive excellence” like sipping cocktails in a room full of abstract art that nobody understands.
But let’s get back to the real issue here: Is Jaguar alienating its core customers to chase an audience that probably isn’t in the market for a six-figure electric car?
Their managing director admitted they expect only 15% of their buyers to come from the existing customer base. That’s a polite way of saying, “We’re throwing our loyal fans under the bus—or maybe an eco-friendly electric bus.”
This is where the Bud Light comparison gets interesting. Anheuser-Busch thought they could redefine their brand with a single can and a viral campaign. What they didn’t count on was their core audience—everyday beer drinkers—saying, “No thanks, we’ll take a Molson or Coors.”
Jaguar seems to be steering into the same skid, betting that future buyers will love their newfound wokeness while completely dismissing the people who made their brand iconic in the first place.
The truth is, brands like Jaguar need to understand one thing: Customers don’t buy cars—or beer—to feel enlightened or socially validated. They buy them because they work, they’re cool, or they just taste good.
When you replace craftsmanship and quality with virtue signaling, you’re not creating loyal customers; you’re creating memes.
And let’s be honest, Jaguar’s “transformative journey” is a gamble. Sure, they’ve racked up 20 million views of their announcement, but ask Bud Light how well viral outrage translates to sales. Spoiler alert: It doesn’t.
So here’s the takeaway: If you want to build a brand that lasts, maybe—just maybe—focus on the product. And if you’re going to stir controversy, at least make sure it’s for something people care about, like performance, reliability, or even a new electric model that doesn’t look like it came out of a sci-fi fever dream.
Otherwise, you’ll end up like Jaguar—or Bud Light—a case study in how to alienate 85% of your customers in record time.
Target’s Big Pivot: Dumping Satanists, Apologizing to Christians
Our next segment features a Target employee who wouldn’t back down when told she couldn’t share her faith at work. And this time, it’s Target that’s apologizing.
Let’s give a big Shout Out to Denise Kendrick, the brave Target employee who refused to back down when her manager fired her for wearing a name tag reading, “Trust in Jesus.”
That’s right—fired. For three little words. But thanks to Denise’s courage, Target not only apologized but also demanded her rehiring.
This, folks, is a huge turnaround for a company that, not so long ago, was caught up in a firestorm for prominently featuring LGBT apparel designed by a self-proclaimed Satanist.
Remember that debacle?
Target proudly displayed bags and sweatshirts by Erik Carnell—whose slogans included “Satan Respects Pronouns” and “Trans Witches for Abortion.” Because apparently, nothing screams family-friendly shopping like demon-inspired accessories.
But let’s get back to Denise.
She didn’t show up in flashy rainbow gear or Satanist-inspired slogans—just a simple red sweatshirt, jeans, and a name tag reminding people to “Trust in Jesus.”
Yet, her manager allegedly told her she couldn’t wear it.
When Denise pointed out that other employees had rainbows on their name tags, her manager doubled down, firing her on the spot without so much as a written explanation. Instead, she was handed a list of phone numbers for Target’s dress code policy hotline. Helpful, right?
Now, here’s where it gets interesting.
After public outrage erupted, Target quickly backpedaled, issuing a formal apology and offering Denise her job back.
In their statement, Target admitted that her termination was a mistake and promised to “address the actions” of the manager responsible. But the question remains: Is Target finally learning its lesson about alienating its traditional customer base, or is this just damage control?
Denise’s victory feels like a win for traditional values—a moment where faith triumphed over corporate wokeness.
But is Target’s apology a sign of genuine change, or just another attempt to clean up a PR mess? After all, it’s clear the company has been burned before. Maybe, just maybe, they’re starting to realize that their traditional customer base—the moms, dads, and families who keep their stores running—aren’t interested in being lectured or shocked by controversial displays.
And let’s not forget: Denise’s case highlights a much larger issue. If you’re going to allow employees to display rainbows and promote causes, then how can you justify silencing someone for sharing their faith? For all their talk about diversity and inclusion, this was an obvious contradiction.
So here’s the big takeaway: When companies like Target put activism above their core mission—providing quality products to their customers—they end up alienating the very people who keep them in business.
It’s a lesson we’ve seen repeated with brands like Bud Light and, almost certainly soon, Jaguar.
Her story is a reminder that standing up for your values—whether it’s faith, family, or simply common sense—can make a difference. And maybe, just maybe, companies like Target will finally learn to respect their customers instead of trying to lecture them.
A big Shout Out to Denise Kendrick, for showing courage in the face of corporate nonsense. And to Target—take notes. Stick to selling products, not pushing agendas.
Parental Rights, Hollywood Style: Jeff Younger’s Real-Life Horror Story
Now, let’s turn to a far more troubling story. This one takes us to California, where the state’s radical policies have left one father fighting for his family and his rights. Here’s the gut-wrenching tale of Jeff Younger.
It’s hard to fathom the anguish of Jeff Younger, a father who spent years fighting to protect his pre-teen son, James, from what he calls a forced gender transition. But thanks to California’s so-called “sanctuary laws,” Younger has not only lost custody of his son—he’s also been stripped of his parental rights altogether.
And if that weren’t enough, his ex-wife now has full authority to pursue chemical castration for their child.
Let that sink in: A father loses everything because he refused to bow to the demands of an ex-wife who began socially transitioning their son, now called “Luna,” at just two years old.
California’s Judge Mark Juhas handed down the final blow, granting Younger’s ex-wife sole custody and authority to transition their child.
This ruling leaves Younger with nothing but “supervised visitation,” which he’s understandably refusing to accept. He said it best himself in a recent post: “Goodbye, boys. Perhaps we will meet when you are adults.”
If this story doesn’t make your blood boil, consider the bigger picture.
California’s sanctuary law, SB 107, protects parents who flee other states to seek “gender-affirming care” for their children—even against the court orders of other states. Essentially, it tells parents that if you want to override your ex-spouse’s rights or bypass the laws of your home state, just come to California, and we’ll make it happen.
This law is part of the same anti-family, anti-parent trend that drove Elon Musk to move X and SpaceX out of California.
Musk didn’t mince words when he called the state’s policies the “final straw” for his businesses.
And who can blame him?
California has become ground zero for policies that actively undermine parents’ authority over their children’s lives—whether it’s hiding kids’ gender transitions from their families or, as in Jeff Younger’s case, allowing one parent to unilaterally make life-altering decisions.
Jeff Younger’s fight began years ago when he discovered his ex-wife was socially transitioning James, dressing him in girl’s clothes and even registering him in school as a girl.
Younger claims he would send his son to school in boys’ clothes, only for the school to put him in a dress and force him to use the girls’ restroom.
This isn’t just a custody battle. It’s a fight for the soul of parenting in America.
When one parent can uproot a child’s identity—and the state actively supports it—it’s not just the family that suffers. It’s society as a whole.
What’s more chilling is that Younger’s ex-wife moved to California specifically to take advantage of SB 107. Despite a Texas court ruling that she couldn’t pursue gender-transition treatments for their son without Younger’s consent, California offered her a loophole.
The result? A father is cut out of his sons’ lives entirely, forced to watch from the sidelines as his child is set on a path he fiercely opposes.
Jeff Younger’s final words to his sons should resonate with every father in America: “Let my story be a cautionary one for young men. Fathers have no rights to their children. Do not enter the family law system.”
This isn’t just his fight—it’s all of ours. If we allow states like California to strip parents of their rights, what’s next? How long before other states follow suit?
A big Shout Out to Jeff Younger for fighting this battle, even when the odds were stacked against him. And to Elon Musk for taking a stand against policies that destroy families.
California may think it’s a ‘sanctuary,’ but for parents like Jeff Younger, it’s more like the Hollywood horror flick, Body Snatchers.
That wraps up today’s episode of Shout Out Patriots. We’ve covered a lot—Jaguar’s woke misstep, Target’s surprising apology, and Jeff Younger’s tragic battle for his family. These stories remind us that the fight for faith, family, and freedom is far from over.
Thank you so much for listening, and don’t forget—your voice matters. Share this podcast with your friends, your family, and your community. Together, we can make our faith and patriotism seen and heard across this great nation.
Until next time, stay strong, stay faithful, and as always, shout out, Patriots!