TCF Bank is one of the largest corporate contributors to independent expenditure committees in Minnesota this election cycle. The financial institution gave $250,000 to the State Fund for Economic Growth, LLC, which in turn gave money to MN Forward and the Taxpayer’s League of Minnesota, a group engaged in a lawsuit to strike down portions of Minnesota’s campaign finance disclosure laws. The arrangement has largely shielded TCF from scrutiny of the kind Target and Best Buy have received for their political contributions, and while it appears to be legal, watchdog groups wonder if its an effort to avoid transparency.

TCF gave the State Fund for Economic Growth (SFEG) $100,050 on Aug. 2 and another $150,000 on Sept. 19. Combined, the two donations make for one of the largest corporate expenditures this cycle. SFEG then directed $100,000 to MN Forward, a group that backs Republican Tom Emmer for governor, and $50,000 to the Taxpayer’s League.

SFEG registered with the state as an independent expenditure group on Aug. 16, two weeks after receiving TCF’s first contribution. The group, which also uses TCF Bank as its financial institution, is entirely funded by contributions from TCF.

The process of using an LLC as a mechanism to funnel money from a corporation to an independent expenditure committee has been used several times this year by both right- and left-leaning groups. Minnesota’s Future, its LLC and the Republican Governor’s Association came under criticism for using a similar setup, which is currently being investigated by the Minnesota Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board after a complaint from Common Cause Minnesota.

That group’s director, Mike Dean, said that while they are similar, TCF and SFEG followed the rules.

“This group is set up in very different ways,” said Dean. Minnesota’s Future LLC didn’t register with the finance board, while SFEG LLC did.

But he said the arrangement raises questions about why SFEG exists. TCF could have simply made its donations directly to MN Forward and the Taxpayer’s League. Dean suspects the added layer of an LLC is to help shield TCF from scrutiny.

“They created this scenario to disguise those contributions, and in that they were largely successful,” he said. He said the fallout from Target’s donations to MN Forward seems to have prompted the need to add the extra layer. In July, news of Target’s donations to the pro-Emmer committee launched protests and boycotts of the retail giant, forcing Target to respond and take a hit to its reputation.

That might be why TCF funneled money to the Taxpayer’s League of Minnesota. That group is pushing a lawsuit to overturn Minnesota’s requirements that corporations disclose their contributions. They lost their first case, but are appealing that decision. If they are successful, no company will face the kind of controversy Target has because the public will never know which corporations gave to independent committees or how much.

“It’s a clear example of how some corporations are reacting to the Target backlash,” said Dean of TCF’s maneuvering.

He noted that when MN Forward’s finance reports were released earlier this month, TCF was not listed among those contributors and the media missed it because it was funneled through the LLC. While 3M and Best Buy took some flak from liberal groups, TCF got a pass.

But because TCF and SFEG followed the rules, following the paper trail eventually reveals the donations. “That’s how we know the donations came from TCF,” said Dean.

Yet the setup between TCF and MN Forward and the Republican Governor’s Association and Minnesota’s Future are very similar, and for good reason: Both have LLCs that were set up by the same attorney, Dean said.

State Fund for Economic Growth

In the new 2011 Corporate Equality Index (CEI) released by the Human Rights Campaign (HRC), three Minnesota corporations’ ratings were decreased due to political activity. Target, Best Buy and 3M all were given an 85-point rating after each received a 15-point reduction for their donations to independent expenditure group MN Forward.

Those donations were protested by LGBT-rights groups as Emmer opposes civil rights measures and has ties to a controversial Christian rock band. In last year’s index, each of those company received a perfect score. The HRC had already announced that Target and Best Buy would be dropped from the organization’s buying guide.

In judging U.S. businesses, the CEI measures a number of factors such as non-discrimination policies, providing partner benefits to same-sex couples and diversity training. They also include a category titled “responsible citizenship,” worth 15 points, that examines whether corporations have “a large-scale official or public anti-LGBT blemish on their recent records.” Best Buy, Target and 3M were granted perfect scores in all categories except the responsible citizenship measure, where all three lost the full 15 points.

In July, Target and Best Buy contributed $150,000 and $100,000 respectively to MN Forward, an independent group that has spent almost all of their funds running advertisements supporting Republican gubernatorial candidate Tom Emmer or attacking Mark Dayton, the Democrat in the race. 3M joined the list of MN Forward donors in September, contributing $100,000 to the organization. Progressive organizations had been largely mute on that latest donation until the new edition of the CEI.

Explaining the downgrade in the three companies’ ratings, the HRC’s report says:

This summer, it came to light that Target Corp., Best Buy Co. Inc. and 3m Co. – all of which had outstanding workplace policies and 100 percent scores on the CEI – had donated substantial sums to an independent expenditure committee supporting an anti-LGBT gubernatorial candidate. HRC confronted the companies about their donations, which could help block marriage equality in Minnesota if this candidate is elected. In doing so, HRC highlighted the dangers of a post-Citizens United world and channeled the LGBT community’s anger toward what HRC hoped would be a reasonable solution. As of this writing, the companies have chosen to take no corrective action and are being penalized under the existing CEI criteria not for the donation itself, but for failing to respond to significant community concerns.

The downgrade for Target, Best Buy and 3M was outside the general trend for U.S. companies in the CEI. The report granted a perfect rating to 337 businesses, an increase from the 2010 CEI, which gave a 100 percent rating to 305 companies.

Patrick Caldwell is the American Independent’s Minnesota correspondent.

On Sept. 10, Minnesota-based corporation 3M contributed $100,000 to MN Forward, an independent expenditure organization that has taken in large sums of money from numerous Minnesota corporations, including Target, Best Buy, Holiday gas stations and Red Wing Shoes. A number of other corporations also donated to MN Forward in the last finance reporting period, but 3M contributed the largest sum in becoming the highest profile company to add their name to MN Forward’s roster.

MN Forward has run an expensive advertising campaign supporting Republican Tom Emmer and opposing Democrat Mark Dayton in Minnesota’s gubernatorial campaign. When Target’s contribution to the group became public knowledge, liberal organizations quickly organized a boycott of the big-box store. Progressives criticized Target for providing support for Emmer — a candidate who opposes LGBT equality and has been tied to You Can Run But You Cannot Hide, a Christian rock band with vehemently homophobic views. Liberal groups’ efforts against Target proved largely successful, discouraging many new corporations from making political contributions after the August primary. But these same groups have been slow to organize a response to 3M’s donation, sending a message to Minnesota’s businesses that they are once again free to engage in such political expenditures with little fear of public backlash as the campaign season heads into the final stretch.

3M describes itself as “fundamentally a science-based company. We produce thousands of imaginative products, and we’re a leader in scores of markets — from health care and highway safety to office products and abrasives and adhesives.” Most consumers would recognize the brand for Post-it Notes and Scotch Tape, though the company earns significant funds from industrial products such as abrasives and adhesives.

In their business practices, 3M has a strong record of supporting LGBT rights. The company receives 100-percent ratings on the Human Rights Campaign’s (HRC) Corporate Equality Index and a perfect rating on the HRC’s Buying for Equality guide. Target and Best Buy both received similarly high marks prior to their donation to MN Forward, which was part of the reason LGBT-rights groups were so shocked by the political contribution. As part of the fallout from those donations, the HRC plans to drop both Best Buy and Target from their buying guide.

“[Target's donation] was significant because they have been such a leader, both in their workplace and how they treat their employees and also supporting so many different events,” said Monica Meyer, executive director of OutFront Minnesota, a LGBT-rights group that played an early role in the protests against Target’s contributions. “3M also has been out there as well, being supportive of their employees, offering domestic partner benefits. They also have a presence at the HRC dinner, and they have a presence at [Twin Cities] Pride. Obviously we really support good corporate values that really stand up for fairness and equality for all people, and by contributing to the campaigns in this way… it’s basically letting consumers know that their dollars are going for something that they may or may not agree with.”

3M’s donation only became public through campaign finance disclosures last Wednesday, but so far, response from progressive organizations has been muted compared to the reaction against Target’s donation. Some have called for boycotts, and a petition was started on Change.org, though it has only garnered around 200 signatures at the time this article was posted. The two organizations at the forefront of the Target boycott — MoveOn.org and the HRC — have remained largely mute on the further corporate donations to MN Forward. A spokesperson for the HRC said the organization reached out to 3M to inquire about the donation; HRC declined to comment until 3M responds. MoveOn did not respond to the Minnesota Independent’s request for comment.

Like Target before it, 3M claims that the decision to become engaged in politics was about supporting sound business policy in general, rather than a specific candidate’s platform, let alone social issues.

“That donation is about advancing public policy that will foster a more competitive business environment,” a 3M spokesperson told the Minnesota Independent. The company declined to elaborate further on the motivation for the contribution, and would not say if they were directly supporting Republican gubernatorial candidate Emmer. But a quick glance at MN Forward’s expenditure records reveals that any contribution to MN Forward essentially serves as a donation to Emmer rather than support for general “business policy.” Over 95 percent of MN Forward’s campaign spending has been devoted to Minnesota’s gubernatorial campaign, with only minimal amounts directed at lower ballot races.

“They say they’re supporting candidates that have a strong business interest, but really what is that? I think that many would argue that all three candidates can be considered strong on business issues. What it appears to be is that they are concerned about one particular issue, and that is lower taxes for themselves,” said Mike Dean of Common Cause Minnesota. “My larger concern is that that is not what they’re trying to do, to create a strong business climate. They’re trying to buy influence. When corporations give this type of money, they’re trying to get something in return, and many of them called it an ‘investment.’ When you make an investment, you expect to make a return on that investment.”

Dean noted that 3M, like many local businesses, has interests that will likely come before the next governor and legislature.

“Some of their [3M's] practices have been scrutinized in terms of how they handle, basically how they manufacture products and chemicals that they’re putting into the environment, and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency has a role in overseeing that process,” Dean said. “My concern is that by giving this, are they hoping that the next governor will look the other way when it comes to these type of political contributions?”

Though 3M’s donation represents a significant sum in the gubernatorial campaign, the protests against Target appear to have made corporations at least hesitate before donating.

“We did not see that many new corporations get into the fold,” Dean said. “At least big corporations [did not give] at all. And a lot of the new money was a lot smaller. One of the key things is that after the controversy regarding Target’s donation, I really think that corporations are thinking twice about whether they want to get involved in this arena because of the backlash they can experience from both customers and shareholders. They’re realizing it is not in their best interest as good corporate citizens to get involved in this arena at all and get into the business of trying to buy or influence elections.”

With less corporate money affecting the election, national organizations will play an increasingly important role in campaign funding. The Republican Governors Association (RGA) has funneled money through a group called Minnesota’s Future in order to run ads attacking Mark Dayton. The national organization has poured almost half a million dollars into the independent expenditure group, allowing the RGA to essentially spend money freely without the ads identifying the true source of the funding.

That type of spending is not solely contained on the Republican side. The Democratic Governors Association (DGA) contributed $250,000 to WIN Minnesota, an organization which has in turn sent significant sums to the independent expenditure committee Alliance for a Better Minnesota (ABM). That group that has then poured money into ads attacking Emmer. But both WIN Minnesota and ABM have drawn their funds from a wide number of sources beyond just the DGA, while Minnesota’s Future has the appearance of a front organization, with almost every dollar of their expenditures funded by the RGA.

Socially conservative institutions are also heavily investing in Emmer’s election. The National Organization for Marriage (NOM) — a conservative group that runs numerous state campaigns opposing same-sex marriage — has already produced two television ads and one radio spot for the gubernatorial campaign. The group has skirted through loopholes in Minnesota’s campaign finance laws, so unlike the groups discussed previously, NOM’s campaign spending and fundraising remains largely a mystery. However, a recent investigation by sister publication The Washington Independent revealed that the Catholic organization The Knights of Columbus contributed $1.4 million to NOM in 2009, and many have long speculated that Mormon groups provided a substantial portion of NOM’s funding for their campaign against California’s Proposition 8, a referendum on same-sex marriage.

In spite of the fact that corporations appeared more hesitant to make political donations during the last reporting period, Dean predicts that there may be an influx of corporate spending as Election Day approaches. “As we get closer to the election, I think there is going to be even more pressure placed on corporations to get involved, because they’ve already sort of put their chips in on one candidate,” Dean said. “If we see this race continue to stay tight, or get tighter, than I think you’re going to see them [corporations] say, ‘Hey, we’ve already invested this much, in order to get the true return on our investment we need to put even more money down on the table here.’”

Whether Dean’s vision comes true will largely depend on the level of public pressure placed on the new corporate contributors. If LGBT and other progressive organizations rally against 3M, it will likely discourage further donations from companies who must directly sell their products to consumers. But unlike Target, 3M is a difficult institution to organize a boycott against. Whereas Target’s retail locations provided easy photo opportunities for groups to protest around or make viral videos inside stores, it is significantly more difficult to host a rally just inside the Post-it aisle of a Wal-Mart. Even then, 3M is far less reliant on their consumer divisions, so progressive organizations would have to get businesses that use 3M products to buy into a boycott.

With any large protest against 3M looking unlikely, other corporations may very well notice a landscape where they are free to contribute funds to political campaigns without experiencing the backlash faced by Target.

Patrick Caldwell is the American Independent’s Minnesota correspondent.

The Human Rights Campaign, the nation’s largest LGBT lobby, said on Friday that it will be dropping Target and Best Buy from its LGBT buying guide because of political contributions to MN Forward. Both corporations donated to the independent expenditure committee which has endorsed Republican Tom Emmer for governor and bought ads in support of the candidate. LGBT activists have targeted Target and less so Best Buy over contributions to MN Forward and by extension Emmer, who has been a staunch opponent of gay rights.

In a statement on Friday, HRC said, “Because we understand the impact of leaving Target and Best Buy on the various products associated with the Buyer’s Guide, both companies will soon be removed from it. HRC will not encourage people to shop at either store and believes that consumers should make their own decisions after careful consideration of all of the information available to them.”

HRC said that it would be reviewing its scoring criteria for its Corporate Equality Index and may include political contributions in the future.

Here’s the full statement from HRC:

The recent political contributions by Target and Best Buy are cause for reflection on the criteria used for future editions of the Corporate Equality Index (CEI). While considering all of this, it’s important to keep in mind that the CEI has made a tremendous impact in the real lives of LGBT people in large part because it has been a predictable and transparent roadmap for companies to institute fair workplace policies. Instead of making capricious decisions about scoring criteria, we believe that a responsible consideration of all of the facts is the smartest way to move forward.

Already complicated, the Citizens United decision has made campaign finance issues even more complex. HRC is thoughtfully studying the many ramifications of political giving by companies in this new reality.

The CEI, upon which the Buyer’s Guide is based, was completed in June 2009. Under that set of criteria, both Target and Best Buy scored 100 percent. The Buyer’s Guide available on our website was released in November 2009 and is representative of the information known to us at the time. Because we understand the impact of leaving Target and Best Buy on the various products associated with the Buyer’s Guide, both companies will soon be removed from it.

HRC will not encourage people to shop at either store and believes that consumers should make their own decisions after careful consideration of all of the information available to them.

Image from a Facebook group urging a Target boycott

Target announced Wednesday that its second-quarter profits of $679 million represent a 14 percent increase compared to the same period last year. The report suggests to some that the chain hasn’t yet been dinged too badly by the nationwide calls for boycotts over its financial support for a conservative PAC backing antigay gubernatorial candidate Tom Emmer.  (News of Target’s gift to MN Forward didn’t break until late July, in the third quarter, although Target expects slight growth over that period too.) Another good sign for Target: The Los Angeles Times editorialized this morning that MoveOn.org’s boycott effort is “distasteful” and “counterproductive.”

The paper’s editorial board writes:

For MoveOn, the fight is at least as much about corporate money as it is about gay rights. The Target contribution is a high-profile result of an overreaching January decision by the Supreme Court that opens the door for more corporate donations to political campaigns. But by pointing out Target’s involvement in Emmer’s campaign and obtaining an apology, MoveOn and Human Rights Campaign had already won; their calls for a boycott and attempt to strong-arm money from the company are deeply counterproductive.

The boycott is a tried-and-true tool of nonviolent resistance, used to powerful effect during the civil rights era. But it is cheapened and ultimately rendered ineffective when it becomes a hair-trigger response by activists irked by minor political transgressions. Target’s contribution to MN Forward was at worst a small error of judgment, and should matter far less than the company’s ongoing and long-term commitment to workplace equal rights and its sponsorship of pro-gay events. Moreover, the attempt to wrangle an in-kind contribution from Target is reminiscent of a tactic that appalled gay rights advocates when it was used against them during the campaign for Proposition 8, California’s 2008 initiative banning same-sex marriage. Proposition 8 supporters sent letters to big contributors for the opposite side, threatening to expose them unless they sent an equal donation to their campaign. It was a distasteful move then, and now.

It’s worth noting that many of the LGBT advocacy groups involved in the backlash against Target’s $150,000 donation to MN Forward acknowledge Target’s leading role in workplace fairness issues for LGBT people. In its open letter to Target (pdf), which ran as a full page ad in the Star Tribune, the national Human Rights Campaign called Target (and Twin Cities-based Best Buy, which also gave to MN Forward but has received less heat for it) are “shining examples of corporations that respected the equality and dignity of every American.” Both companies consistently got perfect scores on the HRC Foundation’s Corporate Equality Index.

Likewise, OutFront Minnesota prefaced its disappointment with Target for its roundabout support of a candidate with a long record of opposition to rights for LGBT familes by stating, “Target Corporation has long been a strong ally of Minnesota’s GLBT community and OutFront Minnesota and many other GLBT organizations have looked to Target as a model of the corporate support for diversity.”

Best Buy, the Regis Corporation beauty salon business, and Securian insurance and financial planning each gave $100,000 in recent weeks, bringing the total contributions from business to $750,000. The fund, called MN Forward, has about $500,000 on hand to spend.

…

David Olson, president of the Minnesota Chamber of Commerce, said he hopes the fund will raise $2 million to $5 million from corporate revenues.

Target Corp. had previously contributed $150,000 to MN Forward, which was used to produce a pro-Tom Emmer ad; Emmer is the likely GOP gubernatorial nominee. Target has drawn fire from progressives for supporting Emmer, as Target had previously been viewed as a an ally to LGBT causes, while Emmer, running as a social conservative candidate, has been at odds with LGBT civil rights.

The increased flow of corporate money could bolster Emmer’s campaign as the general election season begins to ramp up. Emmer posted lackluster funding numbers Monday, trailing all of his potential Democratic opponents. His numbers were not far off from DFL-endorsed candidate Margaret Anderson Kelliher, but he would start the election in a large financial hole if either of the self-funded candidates Mark Dayton or Matt Entenza win the DFL primary on August 10.

“Congress is currently considering the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, a critical piece of workplace legislation that will include our community. Until all LGBT Americans get fair treatment in the workplace, we must support businesses that support us,” Joe Solmonese, president of the Human Rights Campaign said in a statement. “By purchasing products from businesses that support LGBT equality, shoppers send a clear message to businesses that their support, or lack thereof, will directly impact their bottom line.”

The guide ranks LGBT supportive employers next to those who don’t make the grade. For instance, Target bests Wal-Mart with a 100 percent rating compared to Wal-Mart’s 40 percent.

Here’s a full list of Minnesota-based companies — compiled by MinnPost’s Brad Allen — topping the rankings:

Ameriprise Financial, Minneapolis, 100
Best Buy, Richfield, 100
Cargill, Wayzata, 100
Carlson Cos., Minnetonka, 100
General Mills, Minneapolis, 100
RBC Wealth Management, Minneapolis, 100
Supervalu, Eden Prairie, 100
Target, Minneapolis, 100
U.S. Bancorp, Minneapolis, 100
UnitedHealth Group, Minnetonka, 100
PepsiAmericas, Minneapolis, 95
Imation, Oakdale, 88
Regis Corp., Edina, 68
Land O’Lakes, Arden Hills, 53
The Travelers Cos., St. Paul, 50

Further, deflating a criticism repeatedly leveled by conservative activists, she said shoppers will see the word “Christmas” in holiday marketing: “Christmas will be included in our insert and online. We have ‘Merry Christmas’ on our gift cards, too. In addition. we have developed the Christmas Morning simulator as an online interactive game.” (That message doesn’t seem to be getting through: Many news outlets, including a Denver Fox affiliate, cover the story with rhetoric like, “‘Merry Christmas’ is off-limits, but ‘Happy Eid al-Adha’ is apparently okay.“)

In another publication, Hawks said that, in addition to Eid wishes, “you will see greetings of Merry Christmas, Happy Hanukkah, Joyous Kwanzaa and Feliz Navidad in various Best Buy communications during the holiday season.”

That might rile conservatives, too. Already, the American Family Association has lashed out at the Gap for giving equal billing to Christmas, Hanukkah, Kwanzaa and Solstice in a new TV commercial — although that group’s main concern is the inclusion of Solstice.

Imad Hamad, the regional Midwest director of the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee, sees the greeting as a “welcome gesture from Best Buy,” adding that many of the complaints against it illustrate the kind of “anti-Islamic virus we’ve been hearing and dealing with.”

Likewise, Ahmed Rehab, from the Council on American-Islamic Relations, says it’s the first time he recalls an American retailer mentioning Eid in ads: “It makes perfect business sense to acknowledge and celebrate a holiday that one out of four people celebrate.”

"Go Christmas, Go Hanukkah, Go Kwanzaa..." The Gap's 2009 holiday ad. Source: YouTube

The religious right’s annual “War on Christmas” is ramping up early this year, and at least one Minnesota-based company is on its hit list. For the past few years, the American Family Association has targeted retail corporations that use the word “holiday” instead of “Christmas” in their holiday marketing. On Thursday, the group said it’s a trend that began with the Nazis.

AFA lists Eden Prairie-based SUPERVALU, which runs Cub Foods, as a “retailer against Christmas” because the company “refers to Christmas decorations as ‘holiday’ on website and weekly ads.”

Bloomington-based Best Buy does a little better, making the list under “Companies marginalizing ‘Christmas.’” Best Buy was the AFA’s primary target in 2006, but ended up capitulating.

Minneapolis-based Target is the state’s only retail corporation listed among “Companies FOR ‘Christmas’” by the AFA. Target incurred the wrath of the AFA’s first War on Christmas campaign in 2005 with a massive Christian boycott. The company relented in mid-December of that year in response to AFA pressure.

The AFA’s main target in the War on Christmas this year is the Gap, Inc., and its subsidiaries Old Navy and Banana Republic. On Nov. 11, the AFA launched a two-month boycott of those brands.

“Last year, Gap issued this politically-correct statement to Christmas shoppers: ‘Gap recognizes that many traditions are celebrated throughout this season and we feel it is important to display holiday signage that is inclusive to everyone,’” wrote the AFA. “Christmas is special because of Jesus. It’s not just a ‘winter holiday.’ For millions of Americans the giving and receiving of gifts is in honor of the One who gave Himself. For the Gap to pretend that isn’t the foundation of the Christmas season is political correctness at best and religious bigotry at worst.”

The Gap responded with an ad campaign that does include the word “Christmas,” but remained true to their commitment to be inclusive. The ad features young adults in a holiday cheer:

Two, Four, Six, Eight, now’s the time to liberate
Go Christmas, Go Hanukkah, Go Kwanzaa, Go Solstice.
Go classic tree, go plastic tree, go plant a tree, go add a tree,
You 86 the rules, you do what feels just right.
Happy do whatever you wanukkah, and to all a cheery night.

The AFA was not amused.

“Did you notice it? Gap compares Christmas to the pagan holiday called ‘Solstice.’ Solstice is celebrated by Wiccans who practice witchcraft!” cried the AFA in a press release.

In a statement the Gap accused the AFA of dishonesty. “Our brands have periodically used Christmas in their holiday season advertising. With this year’s Gap and Old Navy ads, we hope that the AFA will update its Web site, which has claimed that Gap Inc. ‘refused to use the word Christmas in its advertising,’” the statement said. “This is untrue.”

While the AFA is targeting domestic retailers, their rationale goes back to Nazi Germany.

On Thursday, Bryan Fischer, AFA Director of Issues Analysis, penned an article called, “Nazis Started War Against Christmas,” which inexplicably conflates the Gap’s advertising with Nazi “holiday” ornaments.

He refers to a Daily Mail article about secular Christmas ornaments used in Germany during the rise of the Nazis to make the case that the Nazis were atheists.

“The Daily Mail story refers to ‘the atheist Nazis, who tried to turn (Christmas) into a pagan winter solstice celebration,’” he wrote. “Can you say ‘Hello, Gap?’ The Gap responded to pressure from the American Family Association about the absence of ‘Christmas’ in their advertising by producing a commercial that does mention Christmas, but then adds ‘Go Solstice’ in the next breath.”

He continued, “The Nazis hated Christmas for one simple reason: it celebrates the birth of a Jew. The left hates Christmas because it celebrates the birthday of the first Christian. But isn’t there something faintly anti-Semitic about that? After all, Christians can hardly be accused of systemic racism when we believe the Savior of the world lived his life on earth as a Jew.”

Participating companies — which include AIG, GM, Sears, Citi, Bank of America and Wal-Mart, among others — were nominated by readers and seeded based on the number of votes each got. (Companies seem to get the nod for overcharging, having poor customer service records or return policies, among other complaints.) Number-eight seed Best Buy, the Twin Cities-based electronics big-box chain, faces off with cellphone giant T-Mobile (#25), and so far, it’s a blowout, with Minnesota’s own garnering 84 percent of the “which company is worse” votes. It’s no surprise that AIG is the tournament’s top seed, but that the bailout recipient is paired with Target (#32) is. But no worries for Big Red: AIG is leading with 96 percent of the vote.