Target gives $50K to group supporting anti-gay Va. candidate Ken Cuccinelli

  • metta

    Posts: 39165

    Jul 26, 2013 1:20 AM GMT
    Target gives $50K to group supporting anti-gay Va. candidate Ken Cuccinelli


    http://www.lgbtqnation.com/2013/07/target-gives-50k-to-group-supporting-anti-gay-va-candidate-ken-cuccinelli/
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 26, 2013 3:31 PM GMT
    This is an example as to why corporations should not donate into politics at all. By donating equally across the board the company still pisses off the far left and right fringe. By donating to only one side it pisses off the other side.
  • Destinharbor

    Posts: 4435

    Jul 26, 2013 5:00 PM GMT
    They also gave $50K to the Democratic Governors Assn which then gave to Terry McAuliffe, Cuccinelli's opponent.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 26, 2013 6:14 PM GMT
    Corporate donations should be illegal. Period.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 26, 2013 7:26 PM GMT
    goddammit! didn't we just have this issue a year or two ago? Now i've got to boycott them again! *smh*
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 26, 2013 9:34 PM GMT
    Scruffypup saidCorporate donations should be illegal. Period.


    Wouldn't that be a nightmare for the politicians...icon_surprised.gif

    politicians that aren't multi-millionaires, that is...
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 26, 2013 9:46 PM GMT
    If Target's going to support him it should be 5 cents for every douche sold.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 26, 2013 9:57 PM GMT
    I love articles that play Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon with campaign finance.

    Also, the idea of not giving to political candidates is naive. Companies that don't give end up being shook down by politicians. If you had a government that wasn't run by the equivalent of a self-important mafia, this wouldn't happen.
  • Whipmagic

    Posts: 1481

    Jul 26, 2013 10:26 PM GMT
    Scruffypup saidCorporate donations should be illegal. Period.


    But corporations are people, and very wealthy people at that. They have the right to political speech, and influence-buying, like all wealthy people. And donating money is, of course, such protected speech. Just ask the five gangsters on the Supreme Court.
  • TheBizMan

    Posts: 4091

    Jul 26, 2013 11:03 PM GMT
    Oh my god, puhlease dude.

    I've said it before and I'll say it again. Target is a gay wonderland. And if you are trying to make the company out as homophobic you are going to have to try a lot harder. They employ gays like there is no tomorrow. They have a very strict anti-harassment policy that includes protections for gays, lesbians and transgender people.

    Why do I know all of this? Because I work there.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 26, 2013 11:18 PM GMT
    Scruffypup saidCorporate donations should be illegal. Period.


    This.

    Target as a whole is very gay friendly, the people doling out the contributions to these organizations most likely have little or nothing to do with everyday running of the business there. They're just playing both sides of the fence so they aren't in disfavor, no matter who wins.
  • metta

    Posts: 39165

    Jul 26, 2013 11:54 PM GMT
    ^
    I don't think it will ever happen, but I would like to see all forms of donations to politicians made illegal. The politicians themselves should not be able to contribute to their campaigns either. That is the only way to put everyone running on a level playing field, minimize corruption, make it so that you don't have to be a millionaire to win, and not make politicians feel like they owe something back to anyone but the people that are in their district. Government MINIMALLY funded campaigns is a better way to go than through donations. Politicians wont support that because they know haw to play the game the way it is currently designed. This would totally change how things are done....for the better. It may even give candidates from third parties a fair shot at winning. Having more than 2 main parties would help to force the various parties to work together rather than pinning one against the other.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 27, 2013 2:14 AM GMT
    Target is not giving the money to Ken because he's "anti-gay."

    See "Ken Cuccinelli Economic Policies." Target has no obligation to the LGBT community one way or another. Target is a BUSINESS.

    Isn't it enough that Target has gay-friendly hiring and employment policies? But you morons constantly push a scorched-earth strategy.

    If Target folds like a cheap Walmart camera on this one, it will ONLY be due to being bullied.

    What is it with Leftish gays? The economy is the most important issue at present. You and other white Liberal navel gazers seem to want to drive the USA to economic ruin.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 27, 2013 2:25 AM GMT
    metta8 said^
    I don't think it will ever happen, but I would like to see all forms of donations to politicians made illegal. The politicians themselves should not be able to contribute to their campaigns either. That is the only way to put everyone running on a level playing field, minimize corruption, make it so that you don't have to be a millionaire to win, and not make politicians feel like they owe something back to anyone but the people that are in their district. Government MINIMALLY funded campaigns is a better way to go than through donations. Politicians wont support that because they know haw to play the game the way it is currently designed. This would totally change how things are done....for the better. It may even give candidates from third parties a fair shot at winning. Having more than 2 main parties would help to force the various parties to work together rather than pinning one against the other.


    Wrong. Your idea would lead to legislatures solely made up of billionaires who don't need donations, and who don't need to make a living from public service. For them, legislating would be like weekend quail hunting on their vast estates. And guess who's the quail?

    Can you imagine a Congress made up of hundreds of Mike Bloombergs, Bill Gateses, and Warren Buffets? Public service would truly become the Sport of Kings then.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 27, 2013 2:37 AM GMT
    You still haven't offered your alternative thesis as to the cause of Detroit's woes (other than you used to live there).
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 27, 2013 3:02 AM GMT
    Aristoshark said
    WJohnP saidYou still haven't offered your alternative thesis as to the cause of Detroit's woes (other than you used to live there).

    I know that you're Southbeach - you tipped your hand just now---and I'm not going to get into a pissing contest with you.


    And that's what Detroit's problem is. Greedy unions bargained for unsustainable benefits then moved out when they retired early, destoying the cities tax base. Union members, when you want to know what Detroits woes are from, look in a mirror.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 27, 2013 3:39 AM GMT
    WJohnP saidTarget is not giving the money to Ken because he's "anti-gay."

    See "Ken Cuccinelli Economic Policies." Target has no obligation to the LGBT community one way or another. Target is a BUSINESS.

    Isn't it enough that Target has gay-friendly hiring and employment policies? But you morons constantly push a scorched-earth strategy.

    If Target folds like a cheap Walmart camera on this one, it will ONLY be due to being bullied.

    What is it with Leftish gays? The economy is the most important issue at present. You and other white Liberal navel gazers seem to want to drive the USA to economic ruin.



    And as long as they hire Blacks, it would be okay with you if they gave 50k to a cause to bring back slavery, right? Oh wait, you're Southbitch, of course you would.
  • metta

    Posts: 39165

    Jul 27, 2013 5:11 AM GMT
    WJohnP said
    metta8 said^
    I don't think it will ever happen, but I would like to see all forms of donations to politicians made illegal. The politicians themselves should not be able to contribute to their campaigns either. That is the only way to put everyone running on a level playing field, minimize corruption, make it so that you don't have to be a millionaire to win, and not make politicians feel like they owe something back to anyone but the people that are in their district. Government MINIMALLY funded campaigns is a better way to go than through donations. Politicians wont support that because they know haw to play the game the way it is currently designed. This would totally change how things are done....for the better. It may even give candidates from third parties a fair shot at winning. Having more than 2 main parties would help to force the various parties to work together rather than pinning one against the other.


    Wrong. Your idea would lead to legislatures solely made up of billionaires who don't need donations, and who don't need to make a living from public service. For them, legislating would be like weekend quail hunting on their vast estates. And guess who's the quail?

    Can you imagine a Congress made up of hundreds of Mike Bloombergs, Bill Gateses, and Warren Buffets? Public service would truly become the Sport of Kings then.


    I think you missed my point where I said that they would not be allowed to financially contribute to their own campaign. Only MINIMAL government financing would be allowed. Each person running for the same position would receive the same budget. They would have to stick to small campaign budgets and that's it. It would actually cut the need for politicians to be wealthy. I think the people winning would end up being more representative of the people in our country. It would also show how well they can do on a tight budget.

    Other things would need to happen, such as stop allowing the politicians to use insider information for their investments. Other people are not allowed to do that. Why should they be allowed to do that? I also think that politicians should not be allowed to be lobbyist for several years (5-10) after they leave office. The system should be designed to minimize corruption. Right now, it is designed to encourage it.
  • hebrewman

    Posts: 1367

    Jul 27, 2013 7:51 AM GMT
    Scruffypup saidCorporate donations should be illegal. Period.


    wait. i thought corporatins WERE people. that's the whole point right? mitt thinks so......
  • hebrewman

    Posts: 1367

    Jul 27, 2013 7:54 AM GMT
    Coach_Mike saidIf Target's going to support him it should be 5 cents for every douche sold.


    and vagnal probe. and hidden cameras in every virginians bed room to make sure that no virginia citizen is engaging in oral, anal, animal, sex of any kind. i bet if you look deeper into the 'KOOKS' brain, you will find a fist fucking bottom that likes to be strapped to a sling.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 27, 2013 9:25 AM GMT
    metta8 saidTarget gives $50K to group supporting anti-gay Va. candidate Ken Cuccinelli


    http://www.lgbtqnation.com/2013/07/target-gives-50k-to-group-supporting-anti-gay-va-candidate-ken-cuccinelli/



    It's a free country Target has the right to give $ to whoever they want just as Fox News is allowed to spew hate.
  • mjammy1

    Posts: 4

    Jul 27, 2013 2:15 PM GMT
    good to know
  • roadbikeRob

    Posts: 14380

    Jul 27, 2013 3:21 PM GMT
    WJohnP saidYou still haven't offered your alternative thesis as to the cause of Detroit's woes (other than you used to live there).
    He can't because he is a blind sycophant to the democratic party, the organization that had monopoly control over Detroit city government for the past 60 years and literally destroyed that city along with most other older northern cities. In his fantasyland, the democrats can do no wrong regardless of how incompetant and corrupt they get while in office. Go figure.
  • roadbikeRob

    Posts: 14380

    Jul 27, 2013 3:36 PM GMT
    Aristoshark said
    roadbikeRob said
    WJohnP saidYou still haven't offered your alternative thesis as to the cause of Detroit's woes (other than you used to live there).
    He can't because he is a blind sycophant to the democratic party, the organization that had monopoly control over Detroit city government for the past 60 years and literally destroyed that city along with most other older northern cities. In his fantasyland, the democrats can do no wrong regardless of how incompetant and corrupt they get while in office. Go figure.

    Stop stalking me. I already told you I'll never have sex with you. I'd rather have hot needles poked into my eyes.
    Wait a minute, whaticon_question.gif have sex with you, man you need to get over your heroin addiction.
  • metta

    Posts: 39165

    Jul 29, 2013 6:53 PM GMT
    metta8 said
    WJohnP said
    metta8 said^
    I don't think it will ever happen, but I would like to see all forms of donations to politicians made illegal. The politicians themselves should not be able to contribute to their campaigns either. That is the only way to put everyone running on a level playing field, minimize corruption, make it so that you don't have to be a millionaire to win, and not make politicians feel like they owe something back to anyone but the people that are in their district. Government MINIMALLY funded campaigns is a better way to go than through donations. Politicians wont support that because they know haw to play the game the way it is currently designed. This would totally change how things are done....for the better. It may even give candidates from third parties a fair shot at winning. Having more than 2 main parties would help to force the various parties to work together rather than pinning one against the other.


    Wrong. Your idea would lead to legislatures solely made up of billionaires who don't need donations, and who don't need to make a living from public service. For them, legislating would be like weekend quail hunting on their vast estates. And guess who's the quail?

    Can you imagine a Congress made up of hundreds of Mike Bloombergs, Bill Gateses, and Warren Buffets? Public service would truly become the Sport of Kings then.


    I think you missed my point where I said that they would not be allowed to financially contribute to their own campaign. Only MINIMAL government financing would be allowed. Each person running for the same position would receive the same budget. They would have to stick to small campaign budgets and that's it. It would actually cut the need for politicians to be wealthy. I think the people winning would end up being more representative of the people in our country. It would also show how well they can do on a tight budget.

    Other things would need to happen, such as stop allowing the politicians to use insider information for their investments. Other people are not allowed to do that. Why should they be allowed to do that? I also think that politicians should not be allowed to be lobbyist for several years (5-10) after they leave office. The system should be designed to minimize corruption. Right now, it is designed to encourage it.



    Did you miss my response to you?