Target Faces Backlash For Supporting Tom Emmer In Post-Citizens United World

So.........

Target would have financially supported Adolph Hitler in 1932 - as long as his economic policies were beneficial to Target?

And never mind the social policies?

Sorry Target - that argument won't wash.....

The DISCLOSE act is looking better all the time...

Local media in the Twin Cities deserves a huge amount of credit for reporting this story thoroughly including linking it to the recent Supreme Court case.

Anyone else notice that the best reporting these day is happening in of all places local and small town media? Small market TV and small town newspapers are covering the impact of war on families in their communities too.

If you want the truth these days look for it among the young reporters who haven't yet sold out.

So now big corporations can buy a Congressperson that will support their particular business/industry.
Thank you activist judges on the Supreme Court.

If money is speech, as the Supreme Court has said, then Target uttered hate speech with this donation to Emmer.

Emmer donation=Hate speech.

I'm with that brave Minnesota mother. No more Target shopping for me.

It's true Randian politics (in the BEST possible way).

Your business starts doing stupid stuff, supporting ridiculous ideas, you're subject to people with morals who won't support you.

No more Target for me. Period. I still haven't been back to Whole Foods since their CEO tried to torpedo health care reform.

It's really easy to stop doing business with organizations that are hostile to my beliefs.

Now Target is most definitely on that list. Give money to Republicans and no Democrat should ever shop there again.

It's one way we can stop this Citizens United fiasco on our own. Simply boycott ANY corporation that gets involved with electoral politics that are hostile to us.

It's really easy to stop doing business with organizations that are hostile to my beliefs.

The thing that drives me nuts about Emmer's response is his dismay at things becoming 'personal'. The clueless f*ck is pushing an adgenda that wants to cut off EVERY opportunity for same-sex couples to have the same rights that married couples have, including hospital visitation rights, adoption, keeping our freaking jobs and apartments, and then he has the nerve to tell us not to get 'personal' about it with him. We hurt his feelings. Could he possibly be any less aware of the irony and hypocricy of that statement?

Did some more checking and discovered that several other MN corporations have recently donated large amounts to MN Forward, including Best Buy, Polaris, and Securian. The last is especially interesting because it is the REQUIRED provider for faculty retirement plans at the U of M, which has (you guessed it) an explicit non-discrimination policy with reference to sexual orientation: "The University of Minnesota shall provide equal access to and opportunity in its programs, facilities, and employment without regard to race, color, creed, religion, national origin, gender, age, marital status, disability, public assistance status, veteran status, sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender expression."

"Celebrate our different perspectives," Mr. Emmer? Now I am a heterosexual, middle-aged married woman (and I say that only because there are a load of straight people joining the boycott), and I am curious as to why I should "celebrate" the fact that if you are elected, you would a) ban marriage equality, and b) ban adoptions by gay couples (because you know, kids are so much better off in foster care or orphanages than a loving home). And why would I want to celebrate your "free speech" in giving money to a punk group that advocates killing gays and lesbians?

I think that Minnesotans shouldn't vote for Emmer, because in addition to being a total bigot, he is incredibly stupid.

And Mr. Steinhafel is a bit of a liar. He says his support of LGBT groups is "unwavering." But if Emmer does become governor and introduces legislation that says any company doing business in Minnesota cannot offer domestic partner benefits, how "unwavering" will he be then?

Keep the boycott going!!!

On other message boards, anti GLBTers have said this will make them more likely to go to Target. The thing is, Target, you can bet that when those same people see that you haven't withdrawn your support for GLBT people or said the anti gay pledge of, "Gays must die!" they'll turn on you. Ask Ford. They found that out the hard way.

The only thing that really distinguishes Target from Wal-Mart is their hip advertising. Target's just another big-box store that pays low wages and bullies suppliers. Now they become Exhibit A for why Citizens United was a bad decision.

The gay blogs and community is already sending out memos, freedom of speech? maybe, but if you support the opponent with my money, you ain't getting another cent, I'm also returning the flat screen I bought last week at best buy. BOYCOTT!!!!!

The gay blogs and community are already sending out memos, freedom of speech? maybe, but if you support the opponent with my money, you ain't getting another cent, I'm also returning the flat screen I bought last week at best buy. BOYCOTT!!!!!

Changing my pharmacy to Walgreens until Target donates a like amount to the DFL and Independent primary winners. If Target does not donate to the primary winners of the DFL and the Independent Party, I will permanently join the BOYCOTT! Seems reasonable to NOT contribute to the cash pile being used exclusively against my beliefs.
Mr. Emmer authored a bill in the MN legislature to reduce the penalties for driving under the influence of alcohol. Is Target going to begin selling liquor?
I have deleted Best Buy and Polaris from my future, too.

This is exactly how this is supposed to work.

The right is right in that it can be reasonably be argued that political donations are an expression of free speech. (Though you can argue, reasonably, the ludicrous idea that a corporation is a person and should have that right to begin with.)

However, as was said upthread, companies that DO choose to donate should be forced to deal with the circumstances of their donations. The proverbial "free market" can solve this problem by having the offended party cease to do business until the corporation(s) that opted to launder their money through a PAC for a bigoted candidate recants and either withdraws their donation or makes an equivalent donation to another candidate.

If this offends you, and it offends me, nothing changes unless and until you choose to take your business elsewhere. And if enough of you do, Target and Best Buy will capitulate. If this offends you and you do nothing, then you have no one and nothing to blame but yourself.

Minnesota please leave this hole in the dust on election day. Target's defense of their involvement is ludicrous. Another big box store to join WalMart on my 'no shop' list.

I have officially started my boycott of Target and have emailed the corporation to advise them of my decision.

http://www.target.com/gp/help/display-contact-us-form.html?displayLink=tci

"Celebrate the fact we have different perspectives," eh, Mr. Emmer? So bigotry and equality are just two different "perspectives?"

Target is now off my shopping list.

My god, I'm so sick of right-wingers complaining that protests are an infringement of their rights to free speech. You have a right to say the stupid hateful thing that you did, and I have a right to tell you so and not spend my money in your store. Suck it up and stop whining.

"The sad part to me is, I thought we were supposed to be able to exercise our rights of free speech. We're supposed to celebrate the fact that we have different perspectives. And it doesn't seem like that's what this is about. This seems to be more personal and we've got to get over that."

Wait, boycotting target is "more personal" than "free speech"? How can ANYTHING be "more personal" than free speech? And yet, according to the Citizens United decision, what we do with our money IS "free speech." I only wish my intellect was as flexible as Emmers'.

Cut up the Target charge card! There's plenty of other good retailers out there.

Do the Rethuglicans get their candidates out of some central casting service? Emmer has that typical look of newish GOPer candidates: conspicuously overfed, carefully coiffed big hair, who thinks that a hard day of physical labor is nine holes of golf at the country club.

Of course Target supports the human-rights-denying republican solely for economic reasons.
Maximizing input is what both of them do. On our backs.

Target is now the target.

I also just wrote Target and informed them that I will no longer be shopping in their stores. I consider it part of my First Amendment rights to free speech and association. I choose to exercise my right to speak out against the support Target provides to a homophobe, and I choose not to associate with Target and their policies, which go against the grain of my own personal beliefs and philosophies. They can support bigot and homophobes if they choose; I just don't have to spend money there helping them to do it.

Welcome to the free market, Mr. Emmet. You are indeed able to use your money as free speech. What you don't seem to understand is that so are we.

We've decided we don't need your store any more. Maybe you can have a special bigot sale.

"The sad part to me is, I thought we were supposed to be able to exercise our rights of free speech," said Emmer.

Seems like Emmer subscribes to the Sarah Palin theory of the 1st Amendment: if I speak up, that's free speech. If someone else doesn't like what I said and speaks up, that's oppression.

Mr. Emmer is totally correct, we are able to exercise our rights of free speech, but Citizens United decision did not grant corporations that right and take it away from citizens. So individuals as well as corporations can still voice their concerns as the boycotters are free to do (I plan on joining them and no longer shopping at Target). As for the "this seems to be more personal" comment, I believe it was Tip O'Neil who said that all politics was local and the equal rights of LGBT citizens is something that cannot get more personal.

I'm off Target.

How is it that a candidate for Governor doesn't understand what the Free Speech amendment actually means? Mr Emmer, you were not imprisoned for your views on LGBT community. You are still free to voice your opinion. Just as those people who disagree with you have the right to voice theirs... in the voting booth.

"Target has a history of supporting organizations and candidates, on both sides of the aisle, who seek to advance policies aligned with our business objectives, such as job creation and economic growth,"

Does Emmer actually have any positions that relate to either job creation or economic growth (real policies, not just "Cut Taxes"). And can anyone point to a similar sized donation to a Democratic candidate? (Particularly since in the fact-based world, democratic policies are proven to be more advantageous to broad economic development.)

Emmer doesn't seem to understand that Boycotting is free speech. Just like the Teabaggering movement in the GOP, Free Speech, and Freedom of Religion, only means "as far as their ideologies go, others be damned".

For his part, Emmer has criticized such boycotters. "The sad part to me is, I thought we were supposed to be able to exercise our rights of free speech," said Emmer. "We're supposed to celebrate the fact that we have different perspectives. And it doesn't seem like that's what this is about. This seems to be more personal and we've got to get over that.

So its ok for corporate scum to have free speech rights, just not the peons.

I seem to recall a boycott of Target (Dayton Hudson stores?) in the early 90's when personality tests given to applicants had questions about "ever being attracted to a person of the same sex" and similar questions to weed out the gays.

Someone else may remember more and fill in the details.

I just called the Target customer support number. They have people available just for this issue. lol. I talked to a supervisor making it clear it wasn't his or his employees fault. I wouldn't verbally abuse him or anyone over it. I was nice but firm.

Bottom line? If it cost Target a buck or two for the employees to talk to me and handle the issue that would be fine with me.

I did tell him why I was angry. I supported Target when the same GOPers were boycotting their store over the inclusive 'happy holidays' greeting instead of 'merry Christmas'. I also made it clear I wouldn't be spending any money at Target in the future because of the $150,000 donation to the GOP.

Right wingers always cry foul when they find consequences for exercising their free speech rights. We hear incessant whining from O'Reilly, Palin, Coulter, Hannity and Limbaugh when their hate speech results in a loss of sponsors or protests at their speeches. And we hear complaints from corporations like Target when people vote with their feet and their dollars.

All of these crybabies could learn a lesson from Thoreau, Gahndi or MLK who were more than willing to go to jail for their actions when they thought they were right. Perhaps it has something to do with taking a moral stand, rather than a cold calculation based on how rich it will make them or their corporation?

Tom Emmer is against civil unions, not just gay marriage.

http://minnesotaindependent.com/60007/gubernatorial-candidates-support-gay-marriage-with-one-exception

In what business/economics textbook is supporting bigots considered good for business or the economy?

If corporations want the rights of citizens, they should be held accountable for hate speech... such as supporting the election of bigots who deny that GLBT ARE full citizens of the US.

Target may say they support gay rights, and cite this donation as a decision to favor a candidate who's "pro-business" - but it's simply not good business to discriminate against US citizens.

Boycott. Picket. Write letters. Make phone calls. ACT UP.