Chicago Boyz

What Are Chicago Boyz Readers Reading?

Recommended Photo Store
Buy Through Our Amazon Link or Banner to Support This Blog
  •   Enter your email to be notified of new posts:
  •   Problem? Question?
  •   Contact Authors:

  • CB Twitter Feed
  • Lex's Tweets
  • Jonathan's Tweets
  • Blog Posts (RSS 2.0)
  • Blog Posts (Atom 0.3)
  • Incoming Links
  • Recent Comments

    • Loading...
  • Authors

  • Notable Discussions

  • Recent Posts

  • Blogroll

  • Categories

  • Archives

  • Liberals See Corporate Donors To Obama As Saintliness, Donations To Republicans As Evil

    Posted by James R. Rummel on August 13th, 2010 (All posts by )

    Read all about it here.

    The US retail chain of Target made a donation to a business friendly group that endorses Tom Emmer, the Republican candidate for Governor of Minnesota. This has gotten Liberal groups in a tizzy, particularly groups that supposedly support equal rights for people who lead alternative lifestyles.

    Why would LGBT advocates get upset about this? Mainly because they claim that Mr. Emmer has made some disparaging remarks about gays in the past. (Since I have not heard of Mr. Emmer before today, I cannot say if their claims are accurate or not.)

    So a group which supports pro-business candidates receives a donation from Target, and then Target is pilloried by the Left because one of the people endorsed by that group doesn’t support their agenda?

    The group receiving the cash is only interested in a narrow field of topics, and gay rights isn’t one of them. Target only wanted to support those candidates which support commerce, and did not request that their cash be dispersed to specific people. Yet the original purpose of the donation is ignored in favor of some sort of organized campaign to punish a company which only wants to see their tax burden reduced?

    How far removed from the source does someone have to be before they are not held responsible for the remarks of third parties, anyway? If Liberals think they can shame someone into supporting their own narrow agenda, then they are always responsible!

    I find this whole thing to be ironic, considering that this list of the largest contributors to Obama’s campaign is infested with corporations. But the Left always has a very specific myopia when it comes to matters if this sort. As long as business opens their coffers to candidates that are openly hostile to their existence, then they are on the side of the angels. But just as soon as they look to find relief from the death-by-a-thousand-cuts that the Liberals force on them, they are evil incarnate!

    Ace has long maintained that the Left is intellectually bankrupt. The facts support a Right-leaning outlook on practically every issue, yet Liberals will viciously attack anyone who points out that some of their most dearly held shibboleths have been massive failures. Not only that, but the pet solutions that Liberals advocate almost always turn out to inflate the very problems those solutions were supposed to address.

    And yet, there are still Liberals wandering about. Ace states that this is because they think they are in a morally superior position just because they support Leftist causes. This would certainly explain why the spokespeople quoted in the article keep saying that Target did harm, and that they need to make things right again.

    It looks to me that this is nothing more than an attempt by some groups to extort money from a business they see as having deep pockets. And those groups are really only interested in massive social engineering goals that are of little interest to the general public. Yet I don’t think this move on their part will hurt them in any way.

    Why is that? It certainly would hurt a Conservative group if they tried something similar!


    3 Responses to “Liberals See Corporate Donors To Obama As Saintliness, Donations To Republicans As Evil”

    1. Irish Cicero Says:

      Thanks for the link, Gentlemen.

    2. Sgt. Mom Says:

      I shall so have to go over to the local Target Superstore and spend some money there… just on general principles.

    3. Ralph Says:

      I’m with Sgt Mom. I didn’t especially like it that Target quit letting Salvation Army solicit at Christmastime, but then again, perhaps in the privacy of the executive suites or their homes, they made up for it, and I know who and where the Salvation Army is if I feel strong enough.

      The idea of corporate social responsibility outside that of making profits, providing jobs and increasing living standards of the community is turning me right off. I, for one am tired of being approached to do business with a company because they tell me how much they care about some current popular cause.

      Whatever happened to live and let live, even for business? I find the promoted social causes of most companies as either opportunistic or fake anyway.

    Leave a Reply

    Comments Policy:  By commenting here you acknowledge that you have read the Chicago Boyz blog Comments Policy, which is posted under the comment entry box below, and agree to its terms.

    A real-time preview of your comment will appear under the comment entry box below.

    Comments Policy

    Chicago Boyz values reader contributions and invites you to comment as long as you accept a few stipulations:

    1) Chicago Boyz authors tend to share a broad outlook on issues but there is no party or company line. Each of us decides what to write and how to respond to comments on his own posts. Occasionally one or another of us will delete a comment as off-topic, excessively rude or otherwise unproductive. You may think that we deleted your comment unjustly, and you may be right, but it is usually best if you can accept it and move on.

    2) If you post a comment and it doesn't show up it was probably blocked by our spam filter. We batch-delete spam comments, typically in the morning. If you email us promptly at we may be able to retrieve and publish your comment.

    3) You may use common HTML tags (italic, bold, etc.). Please use the "href" tag to post long URLs. The spam filter tends to block comments that contain multiple URLs. If you want to post multiple URLs you should either spread them across multiple comments or email us so that we can make sure that your comment gets posted.

    4) This blog is private property. The First Amendment does not apply. We have no obligation to publish your comments, follow your instructions or indulge your arguments. If you are unwilling to operate within these loose constraints you should probably start your own blog and leave us alone.

    5) Comments made on the Chicago Boyz blog are solely the responsibility of the commenter. No comment on any post on Chicago Boyz is to be taken as a statement from or by any contributor to Chicago Boyz, the Chicago Boyz blog, its administrators or owners. Chicago Boyz and its contributors, administrators and owners, by permitting comments, do not thereby endorse any claim or opinion or statement made by any commenter, nor do they represent that any claim or statement made in any comment is true. Further, Chicago Boyz and its contributors, administrators and owners expressly reject and disclaim any association with any comment which suggests any threat of bodily harm to any person, including without limitation any elected official.

    6) Commenters may not post content that infringes intellectual property rights. Comments that violate this rule are subject to deletion or editing to remove the infringing content. Commenters who repeatedly violate this rule may be banned from further commenting on Chicago Boyz. See our DMCA policy for more information.