Human Rights Slams Target And Best Buy For Supporting Anti-Gay Tom Emmer

There you have it, the Supreme court decision on private business donation already making a mark on influencing politics and supporting candidates for private agendas.

The political fallout from the post-Citizens United spending by Target and other Minnesota companies on the state's gubernatorial race continues, with gay-rights activists attacking business interests for supporting the anti-gay Republican Tom Emmer.

While Target and Best Buy already came forward to point out that they are very open when it comes to the diversity of their customers, they already feeling the pressure of angry human right groups boycotting.

Target's donation of $150,000 to MN Forward, a business group supporting Emmer, has been causing a backlash among gay rights activists in the state, due to Emmer's support for a proposed state constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage, and his close associations with the religious right

Target responded the they support candidates that are on the best interest of the business and nothing more.

Well I can not wait what other big corporate private interest will be supporting other candidates and what those candidates stand for

I guess the tax payer in the nation can not longer influence politics in this nation when it has to compete with big conglomerates and foreign wealthy interest anymore.

We truly has lost our nation.

tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com...

reply to post by marg6043


Ah the federal government, the best government money can buy!

I really wish our government was forced to wear jackets with their corporate sponsors logos on them. Least we will know who is buying them off.

If you wonder why some people vote the way they do, find out who is buying them, (this includes the vaunted Ron Paul too) you will know why they vote the way they do.

reply to post by whatukno


Yes, my friend, the true face of Americas politics, corruption and more corruption.

I cannot wait what else the watch groups will be digging out from the next mid term elections.



Good Ole target and Best buy, perhaps they were only after the promises in closed door deals with Tom Emmer but they overlooked his "other" agendas.

We truly has lost our nation.

Perhaps I read your thread wrong, marg6043, but it appears to me that you are saying we have lost our nation because people can still openly support anti-gay philosophies?

Im confused.

Not that im anti-gay, but if this is the premise of what you were saying, then please tell me why it's okay to be against one's opinion if that opinion is anti-gay but it's not okay to have an opinion that anti-gay is okay?

And how does private business giving to a cause it seems worthy mean we have lost our nation?




[edit on 31-8-2010 by Snarf]

I totally support this gay movement,
It will turn a lot of men gay,
and then there will be even more women for me

Support Gay Rights!!!!

I don't think Target is supporting anyone due to their stance on homosexuality, but I could be wrong. I'm pretty sure they'd be looking more at his stance on tax breaks and special treatment for big companies. That's where their interests lie.

I think the interesting aspect of this is that now that the Supreme Court has ruled that corporate entities can support candidates, the corporations wil have to deal with people affecting their bottom line over who they're supporting. If all the gay people decided to boycott Target over this, that would probably have some sort of impact on Target's sales. Companies will have to consider public reaction when they decide which candidates to support. They don't want to be offending their target market with their political stance.

If a corporation supported an unpopular enough candidate, the public reaction could potentially put them out of business.

reply to post by Snarf


No, we are losing our nation to big corrupted corporate money without even looking twice to see what the true agendas are.

While our politicians whore themselves for corporate money and probably promising laws and regulations that will only end up crapping on Americans tax payer pockets.

But this time for Target and best buys it back fired.

See retails giants and conglomerates can not be to choosy about who comes to their stores to spend money this days.

BAD KARMA.

reply to post by subject x


Bingo!!!!! this shows target and many other big retails giants and others that they can not just go by just promises from political whores whiteout checking the overall agenda of the politicians and their background.

reply to post by marg6043


I heard a detailed story about this on NPR.

They had a couple of political analysts that summed up the lesson learned by the Target example...

I am paraphrasing..

"Buy government ...and do it in ways you won't get caught, the Supreme Court has created many avenues where a corporation can do this without identifying themselves...Target was just stupid in how they did it. Other companies will learn to not go public with there contributions, but they will certainly be taking advantage of the supreme court ruling.""

[edit on 31-8-2010 by maybereal11]

[edit on 31-8-2010 by maybereal11]

Originally posted by Snarf

We truly has lost our nation.

Perhaps I read your thread wrong, marg6043, but it appears to me that you are saying we have lost our nation because people can still openly support anti-gay philosophies?
[edit on 31-8-2010 by Snarf]

"openly support" = Corporate contributions to politicians to serve thier interests.

Target never "Openly Contributed" to gay causes. They just had an employment policy that strongly favored diversity and tolerance.

Now that Corporations can write checks for political purposes it is a whole different ballgame.

FYI - Target Execs don't have it in for the gay community, they just supported a candidate that was pro-big-box-stores ...they couldn't and didn't care less about his views on homosexuality.

and that is the issue in a nut shell.

With the supreme court ruling saying corporations are citizens and due an equal voice while having a grossly unequal loudspeaker ($$$$$$) we can expect government to pass legislation with corporate profits as an end goal and corporate profits are not synonomous, and often contradictory to the welfare of citizenry.

Less Pharmaceutical regulation, laxer EPA regulations, Zoning...target building their stores wherever they like...the sky is the limit for USA, Inc.

[edit on 31-8-2010 by maybereal11]

reply to post by maybereal11


believe me, im not for unlimited corporate donations either, it creates an unfair playing field.

But what I am for is any corporation sponsoring any candidate they want.

For example - i LOVE shopping at gamestop. But if Gamestop were to suddenly and openly endorse Sarah Palin, i'd never spend another dime there.

I believe they have that right, but i also have the right to never give them my business again.

But I do see what the OP was talking about better now

reply to post by Snarf


You got it right, you as a citizen have the right to support stores or not depending on affiliation.

And that is what is happening with Target and Best buys, because the affiliations of the Tom Emmer (personal and politica agenda) they had poured millions in campaign funds the gay community and human rights groups are boycotting.

Now my problem is with, what Tom Emmer had promised Target and Best Buys for them to support him with such generosity.





[edit on 1-9-2010 by marg6043]

Originally posted by SupremeKnowledge
I totally support this gay movement,
It will turn a lot of men gay,
and then there will be even more women for me

Support Gay Rights!!!!

lolol. Good one.

Seriously, WTF? Target based their decision on what's best for business? Didn't they foresee that supporting someone that's anti-gay would hurt business? Someone or some people at Target need to be fired.

[edit on 1-9-2010 by RidleyFox]

Originally posted by Snarf
reply to post by maybereal11

 

For example - i LOVE shopping at gamestop. But if Gamestop were to suddenly and openly endorse Sarah Palin, i'd never spend another dime there.

I believe they have that right, but i also have the right to never give them my business again.

This scenario at least preserves a very small degree of free market choice.

As the law stands post SCOTUS ruling, corporations can both contribute to political candidates and do so in a manner that does not allow the public to see who or what cause they are contributing to.

So the consumer does not have a recourse if they disagree. The consumer cannot vote with their wallet....but the corporation can vote with Millions/Billions.

Target efed-up in the manner in which they made this contribution....and that is what other corporations are taking note of, not that they shouldn't be funneling money to politicians...just do it in a way where the consumer can't see it...and the SCOTUS this year said that was perfectly LEGAL.

Please read...

The Real Lesson In Target's Campaign Cash Trouble


Using 'Other Tools'

Target gave to a group that is legally bound to identify its contributors. That's why Target's contribution became known.

Many other groups don't have to disclose a thing. So a company can channel its money — and its message — through a business association or an advocacy group, and outsiders will never know.

"Given all these different ways that you can spend your money without generating a national news story, certainly I think a lot of corporate executives are saying this is just a reminder to use all those other tools that we have in our tool kit," says Robert Kelner, a campaign finance lawyer in Washington.


These tools work because Congress has never passed a wide-ranging disclosure bill. It tried to in response to the Citizens United ruling. But the bill was filibustered in the Senate.

www.npr.org...


[edit on 1-9-2010 by maybereal11]

They can donate money to whomever they wish, and so can you.

Originally posted by Gainsayer
They can donate money to whomever they wish, and so can you.

Yes....and when Costco wants to build a massive store in downtown "Podunk Iowa"...and the townspeople would like to keep thier family drug store, grocery store etc...

Who do you think is going to win the auction for the deciding politician? The towns people? Or Costco? Not hypothetical...happening everywhere right now.

In Guilford, Many Oppose Costco Proposal
articles.courant.com...

Wal-mart wants to build a store on the site of The Wilderness Battlefield.
www.sodahead.com...

Wal-Mart Hoping To Sneak Stores Into Chicago Under The Cover Of Recession
walmartwatch.com...

I could list page after page of links concerning just this singular thread of the cancer that has been unleashed on our politics.

Big-Box stores will be able to buy-off local governments and politicians so they can drop a massive store in any small town...eliminating entire swaths of local business.....just an itty bitty finger of the Campaign Finance terror that is on it's way.

Originally posted by SupremeKnowledge
I totally support this gay movement,
It will turn a lot of men gay,
and then there will be even more women for me

Support Gay Rights!!!!

A movement can induce Homosexuality? I never knew that. And ta think that all this time I was wrong in thinking that being Gay was a natural thing like eye color. Come to think of it, my dad used to tell me that watching Cristopher Lowell would make me gay. Now I know what he was talking about! Thanks

reply to post by maybereal11


That is the big issue, no only this big monopolies are taking over the markets but when they kill the competition and small town businesses they are also killing the local economy that most small town business buys from, all you get is supporting the foreign nations from where they buy their goods, while leaving our own nations producers unemployed.

A good example is our local harvey store, that most of their goods are from local farmers and producers, Walmart already have a super store in one side of our small town that happens to be mostly on wealth fare status even with Walmart providing employment, now they are building another superstore behind that Harvey that support local growers, that means Harvey will go out of business and so the local producers and growers, while Walmart will become the biggest employer locally, people will still be Dependant on food stamps.

How does that help the local economy



[edit on 1-9-2010 by marg6043]

Originally posted by marg6043

How does that help the local economy

It doesn't. It simply makes money for Big Box Stores...who take thier cut and pay vendors in China who use child labor to make thier fortunes.

Up till now our options were...

Speak-up, let our local politicians know they will not get our votes.

But with the new Scotus ruling thos politicians can now get Big money from Big Box Stores...

And the voters have no way to know about it.

For view of the battlefield google "say no to big box stores"

It's happening everywhere...

Here is Walmarts PAC "For Responsible Government"
www.opensecrets.org...

Here is a list of Other PACs they pay...who also contribute to politicians..
www.opensecrets.org...

My advice? Who is your local Congressman? Senator?

Through the sites I provided track Walmarts money to them.

I have no doubt that your Congressman has taken money directly or indirectly from WalMart...

From there he/she leans on your local zoning board, mayor etc. putting them to work to clear the way for the stores.

Find the money....document it...send a letter to your local paper with your information. Shine a light...it's all we can do until the laws change.

Tell me who your local congressman is and I will se what I can find.