This video has surfaced on YouTube in the last 24 hours in the continuing controversy over Target Corporation's donation to MN Forward, the conservative political action committee which donated to the campaign of gubernatorial candidate Tom Emmer:
Curiously, the video wasn't filmed at a Target in Minnesota. It was shot in Seattle, according to a MoveOn spokesperson.
Meanwhile, the Associated Press is reporting that Target has decided not to donate money to "gay-friendly causes to quiet the uproar" over the donation to Emmer, who opposes same-sex marriage.
What I find interesting is the Target Apology was not sorry they did it, but more sorry they got caught.
Seriously the way they tried to apologize just said sorry with nothing behind it. Which ends up meaningless....
But it worked to get the media off their tail.
The attitude is still there.
I think this is funny/jaw dropping. How do you get upset at a local favorite based on the decisions by a select few? So if people want to boycott target, are they going to boycott the twins, timberwolves and everything else target has their named stamped on?
I dont know the first thing about Tom Emmer, but it certainly is about time that MoveOn took a look at their letterhead and took the hint.
Even though I have season tix, I suspect I'll end up boycotting the TWolves, though it won't be over this particularly issue.
I feel sorry for these people for a lot of reasons. Mostly because they are willingly depriving themselves of Market Pantry brand toaster pastries.
It's called a "nonpology"
Great comment Aaron . . . and so true! I have struggled with the very same thought about my choices as a consumer these days … and it’s not just limited to Target … What comes to my mind after this story hit the mainstream is just how far reaching the consequences of one person/corporations (confused?) action/choice can become! Maybe that’s the upside to the court ruling (hmmm). I know people that work at Target and other places that have the Target support or endorsement. And by not supporting them there will be great affect on their jobs and livelihoods. They have families and bills and medical and things that we all have . . . EVERYONE may suffer because of the choices of their employers. But then again, we do live in a country where choice is an important value. Maybe it’s time for business to listen to the consumer and do what they do the best, sell goods and services not politics so we consumers can do what we do best . . . ugh, it's so frustrating . . .
MoveOn.org is wrong!! They are a liberal attack machine funded by George Soros!!
Target contributed money to a pro business group. The pro business group donated money to the Tom Emmer campaign which had nothing to do with Target. The pro business group has every right to contribute to whom ever they want.
MoveOn. org is lieing and has misleading and false facts. MoveOn. org should be ashamed!
This whole thing is one big LIE from
MOVEON. Like CALIGUY said "Target contributed money to a pro business group. The pro business group donated money to the Tom Emmer campaign which had nothing to do with Target. The pro business group has every right to contribute to whom ever they want."
Not only that but then they went off on the "gay" thing, completely disregarding Target's history of supporting gay events.
Thirdly, does this mean MOVEON will boycott all those businesses that gave money to Obama? Here is a little list:
University of California $1,591,395
Goldman Sachs $994,795
Harvard University $854,747
Microsoft Corp $833,617
Google Inc $803,436
Citigroup Inc $701,290
JPMorgan Chase & Co $695,132
Time Warner $590,084
Sidley Austin LLP $588,598
Stanford University $586,557
National Amusements Inc $551,683
UBS AG $543,219
Wilmerhale Llp $542,618
Skadden, Arps et al $530,839
IBM Corp $528,822
Columbia University $528,302
Morgan Stanley $514,881
General Electric $499,130
US Government $494,820
Latham & Watkins $493,835
University of Chicago $414,555
Ok, this is just stupid. A company is just as affected if not more affected by who is in political office. And, their more responsible for the financial security of average voters because they are responsible for the livelihood of both employees and shareholders. If one politician more than another stands for better business practices they would be remiss for not endourcing them.