EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
- Burning Tulsa: The Legacy of Black Dispossession
- Think Fracking Is Bad? Wait Until You Hear about the Gas Industry's "Acid Jobs"
- Get Apocalyptic: Why Radical is the New Normal
- We’re Being Watched: How Corporations and Law Enforcement Are Spying on Environmentalists
- German Official Warns of Immediate 'Revolution' if EU Adopts US Model
Popular content
Today's Top News
Target Faces More Heat Over Political Donation
Randi Reitan planned to spend Friday caring for her grandchildren. But something came up: She had to lead a protest against Target Corp.
Jacob Reitan, left, and his parents, Randi and Philip Reitan, spoke to Target's Alexis Kanton, far right, and Brad Wanger, Minneapolis, August 6, 2010, in the lobby entrance to Target. (Below his hands are a box of 240,000 signed petitions of people boycotting Target over it's $150,000 contribution. (Pioneer Press/Jean Pieri) Reitan, of Eden Prairie, has become the public face in a growing
controversy over a $150,000 Target political contribution. When she
heard Target's money helped Republican gubernatorial candidate Tom
Emmer, who has an anti-gay-rights record, 'I was just shocked,' she
said. 'The Target I knew was the Target that embraced its gay
employees.'
She began telephoning Target executives, only to be told to stop calling. So she made a protest video of her cutting up her Target credit card and vowing, "I'm going to boycott Target until they make this right." Posted on YouTube, the video has been viewed about 255,000 times.
On Friday, Reitan was outside Target headquarters in downtown Minneapolis, along with her husband, Philip, their gay son, Jacob, and a 3-foot-high stack of boxes.
"I am boycotting Target, and I have with me signatures of over 240,000 people gathered by MoveOn.org who are joining me in that boycott," Reitan told the assembled TV cameras and a small crowd.
Once inside, the protest turned more presentation than confrontation. Reitan was met in the lobby by two Target officials - but not by the man they hoped to see, Gregg Steinhafel, Target's chief executive.
Instead, Target sent a gay employee and a lesbian employee to meet the protesters: Brad Wagner, a Target diversity
consultant, and Alexis Kanter, one of the co-chairs of Target's gay and lesbian business council. The two Target officials chatted quietly with the Reitans, accepted the petitions, answered a few questions and returned upstairs.
"I had really hoped that Target would invite us up to visit with some of the executives," Reitan said afterward. "They have consumers who are very, very angry, and if I was a CEO, I would want to mend those feelings. Today they could have done that."
While Randi Reitan, 59, has strong feelings on this matter, it's clear many others do, too. Boycott critics are filling Internet message boards with hundreds of opposing views. A small sample from YouTube's message board:
For Target Corp., it leaves them precisely where they don't wish to be - directly between two angry groups and drawing scorn from both.
On Thursday, Steinhafel issued an apology, saying in a letter to employees he was "genuinely sorry" for the hard feelings the donation had caused.
He said the money was meant to strengthen pro-business policies, but some employees and customers felt it betrayed Target's longstanding commitment to gay and lesbian equality.
On Friday, Target officials again were hoping to quell the ill will. At the protest, Wagner was asked if Target would try to make amends for the donation. "We're working on that," Wagner said.
Is Target going to stop making corporate donations? "We're under a review right now," Wagner said.
A few dozen supporters, some wearing "Expect More, Shop Less" T-shirts, joined the Reitans, chanting "Stop buying elections."
One irate counterprotester came near the group and shouted, "So you take $4 million from progressives and you're not buying elections? Hypocrites!"
Reitan plans to keep up the fight on behalf of gay people such as her son.
She understands that Target may seem like an odd choice for a boycott, given its gay-friendly policies and diverse work force. But she believes the discount chain needs to set things right before moving on.
Plus, "It still bothers me that the Target executive offices did not want to hear from me," she said.
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...
14 Comments so far
Show AllTarget can donate to anyone they choose, but they must face the consequences. Protesters have the right to speak their mind. This is America, where everyone has a right to free speech, whether they are right or wrong. Its not the free speaking that is the problem in this society today, it is the intolerance. To attack those who don't agree with us is just plain wrong and we will continue to degrade as a people if we don't find ways to cooperate for the good of this country.
"Target may donate to anyone they choose. Everyone has a right to free speech." Each sounds good when standing alone. In a free society, an individual's liberty has but one limitation: the nullification of another's rights. When it is perceived that a corporate donation to an entity with legislative powers, then that donation becomes a bribe. Bribery in most countries (including the US) is illegal. The reason that it is illegal is that to bribe one in power is to deny a voice to those who have not, nor cannot, afford to bribe those in power. If you look at most criminal statutes (though not all, and I cite most drug laws), those statutes prevent rights of one group or individual from being taken away by another group or individual. Balance will not be restored to this planet until corporations are no longer permitted to take away individual rights through their wealth and influence.
No one has a 'right' to steal.
Remember, the Supremes said that there could be no limit to the amount of money corporations can spend to bribe or buy politicians. It is their constitutional right. Just recently they also said it is unconstitutional to interfere with Corporations bribing or buying candidates. That is an undue interference with corporate profits.
They have bought all three branches, so it is now government of the people, by the lackeys, for the corporations. Mussolini would be proud!
A corporation is not a person. At least corporations better hope they are not treated as persons, because persons are jailed for crimes.
Why do corporate executives donate big money to elect repugs? Because the executive class needs to own at least one party in America to maintain corporate control of the US.
With their control of America, corporate executives have even made themselves a special privileged class. The average fortune 500 executive takes 50 times more pay and perks than the fair value of their work; thats 5000% more than their work is worth. In other countries, such as Japan and Germany, executive pay is close to fair value for their work, not fifty times more than fair value.
But a corporation IS a person. Just ask any lawyer. As far as having to rule one party, corporate executives rule both parties. I bet you would find that Target gave about as much money to Democrats. Our rulers aren't about to take any chances that the American people are given a choice. That would be democracy.
You should boycott Target anyway, along with all the other parasitic boxes lined up along the corporate alleys.
Hey glick ,
How come it seems hardly anyone gets that?
I know organic farmer's wives who shop their asses off at
big box hell. WTF ?
Do many USAns have much of a choice? Even here in mom-and-pop-shop dominated Pittsburgh, your choice is the three big-boxes, the department-store chains or perhaps Burlington Coat Factory. I at least try to patronize the transit-and walking accesable downtown locations rather than the suburban mall locations, but there is no excaping the chains, when it comes to new clothes anyway.
Certainly for farmer's wives in the midwest, there are no other choices.
The only non corporate alternative I can think of are thrift shops, which are a great bargain on lots of clothes. As rarely as I wear one, I'd never buy a sport coat from anyone but a thrift shop.
It's funny how most Americans utterly believe they live in a free society, yet have so few choices where to shop, whether for food, clothes, medicine, media, or health care. A handful of corporations own the vast majority of the stores, media and businesses in this country. There is no true competitive "free" market - that is but an illusion.
Americans are slaves to a system set up by the rich to further enrich themselves. That's why we have a revolving door policy, whereby administrative posts meant to protect the public health and interest are being filled by corporate insiders whose sole loyalty lies with protecting the corporate fiefdom they have built. That's why Wall Street was "bailed out' to the tune of billions of dollars and not a damn thing was done for the American worker. That's how they can brazenly use doublespeak to say we are in a "jobless recovery," because the wealthy continue to make money at the Wall Street Casino, while countless Americans lose their livelihoods and their homes. That's why they want to privatize Social Security, so the wealthy can further engorge themselves at the public trough and transfer even more wealth upwards away from the "peasants". That's why BP gets to call the shots and stay in business in the worst oil disaster in history. Do the rich ever go to jail for their white collar crimes? Except for a very few carefully chosen "fall guys" the vast majority walk away scott free.
More than half of our senators are millionaires....pray, tell, just how well do you think they can really relate to the average worker here in the USA? Plain and simple, they don't care at all as long as the kickbacks from major corporations keep coming. Nothing will change until we throw ALL of Congress out, implement run-off paper based voting, and vote in reps who will truly work for the benefit of the people and our environment over greedy, polluting corporations.
"It is truly enough said that a corporation has no conscience; but a corporation of conscientious men is a corporation with a conscience." Henry David Thoreau -Civil Disobedience-1849
Sadly the execs in the corporation no longer have consciences.
I always get a kick out of newspapers like the St. Paul Pioneer Press and others who try to "show both points of view" as if corporatism is a legitimate, non-insane point of view.
"Boycott critics are filling Internet message boards with hundreds of opposing views..."
you are right ghandi. this is the perfect example of what will happen more and more thanks to the supreme court ruling in citizens united vs fec.
why even both having elections then? a corporation can just buy their candidate and they are immediately installed. our elections will become an even bigger joke than they are already. corporations have much more money than most americans and will use it in our elections. its insane to continue voting dim or repug.
support the green party or other truly progressive candidates.
its time to amend the constitution to stop this shit of buying of elections.
movetoamend.org
I find the idea of ordinary private citizens actually defending corporate campaign contributions as a aspect of "freedom" to be pretty breathtaking.
Also something I never figured out is how people complain about their taxes going to things they feel are inappropriate, but never complain about a huge corporation spending their hard-earned money forked over to them for food, clothing and other necessities on buying politicians, paying exhorbitant salaries, bonuses, country-club memberships, busting unions, and other sleazy causes.
What is the difference?
No, the consumer cannot choose to spend their money elsewhere, In the US, retail groceries and clothing come from near-monopolies.
you are very right, SaboCat. Until I moved to the Canadian sub-arctic I did not realize how pervasive corporate influence was. Now I am forced to either buy from tiny local merchants or order online. And it's nice to have little local merchants.
Giving up big box stores is like giving up smoking. Difficult at first sometimes, but you've earned the right to breathe easier.