Start?  :-)  

 

 

 

From: [email protected] 
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of David R. Block
Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2013 7:48 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [RC] Google : Do no harm --to Google, to others, that's OK, wink, 
wink

 

Careful now, or I'm going to start sounding like Rush Limbaugh and Mark Levin. 

David

“No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for 
the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to 
protect themselves against tyranny in government”--Thomas Jefferson

 

 

On 2/24/2013 10:45 AM, [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>  wrote:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Blaze

 

Erik Telford


Google: The Halliburton of the Obama Administration



Feb. 21, 2013

 

Nestled among the lofty rhetoric of “hope and change,† Barack Obama made a 
core promise during the 2008 campaign that he would put an end to the corporate 
cronyism that has long pervaded the political system. “The days of sweetheart 
deals for Halliburton will be over when I’m in the White House,† he 
proclaimed 
<http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/may/13/obamas-mounting-hypocrisy/#ixzz2J0sGpCI3>
 . What President Obama left out however, was that the days of sweetheart deals 
for his cronies had only just begun–with his chief corporate advocate, 
Google, quickly emerging as the Halliburton of his administration.

Though the Internet giant recently faced serious federal antitrust charges that 
might have broken up other companies, it emerged virtually unscathed just two 
months after President Obama won re-election with significant financial and 
creative assistance from Google and its executives. Unquestionably the 
president’s most indispensable corporate ally, the terms of Google’s recent 
antitrust settlement are just the latest example of crony capitalism benefiting 
the company under the Obama Administration.

An investigation by the FTC found Google to be engaged in activities involving 
the illegal manipulation of search results to favor its own products, scraping 
content from other websites without any provision allowing those with 
objections to opt-out, and imposing restrictions that prevent portability of 
search advertising campaigns across AdWords and other platforms.

Google is still facing a litany of cases at the state level–Texas, 
California, Ohio, New York, and Oklahoma–as well as the European Union. Yet 
Google walked away from the federal case with a non-binding “handshake† 
agreement in which it says it will make minor changes to some of its search 
functions. Moreover, there is no way for the FTC or any other agency to enforce 
the terms of the agreement should Google decide not to comply.

 

Regardless of how people feel about antitrust laws, the hallmark of corruption 
is to selectively enforce laws in a way that harms your opponents and 
accommodates your allies. In this case, an administration that has been 
aggressive on antitrust enforcement when, for instance, spiking the AT&T and 
T-Mobile merger, took no enforceable action against Google even after finding 
wrongdoing.

It raises a major ethical conflict when the beneficiary of an agreement with 
terms so favorable that their propriety is questioned, has such incestuous ties 
to the very administration granting the dubious arrangement.

 

Google, and particularly its Executive Chairman Eric Schmidt, have a 
relationship with President Obama that is too close for comfort. Schmidt has 
been a top-dollar donor to Obama since 2007, has consulted on his campaigns, 
and currently serves as a member of the President’s Council of Advisers on 
Science and Technology. According to press reports, he was offered the post of 
Treasury Secretary in the second term–but ultimately declined. While holding 
court as one of Obama’s most trusted and generous confidants, Schmidt has 
continued to serve as one of Google’s most visible government relations 
operatives.

Since 2008, there has been a steady flow of cash, personnel, and technology 
from Google’s California headquarters to the White House. Google employees 
have given the President over $1.5 million in combined donations. In fact, they 
were his fourth-largest source of cash in 2008, and in third-largest in 2012. 
Google’s biggest contribution however was the specially-designed technology, 
not yet available to the public, that allowed Obama to connect with voters in 
ways his opponents could not.

The sad truth is that this settlement is just the latest, amid a long line of 
examples, in what has emerged as the cornerstone of Google’s Obama-era 
business model: break the law, or make the law, in a way that shackles 
opponents, while boosting their own bottom line – without suffering any real 
consequences.

While Google scratched Obama’s back, the favor has been returned in spades. 
It has happened with “net neutrality† regulations and rigged spectrum 
auctions being pushed through at the FCC, and in addition to this latest 
settlement, the DOJ’s voluntary 2011 settlement with Google over additional 
illegal advertising practices.

Some conservatives like Google, hate regulators, and therefore look favorably 
on the company’s string of free passes. But Google opposes big government 
only when it restricts Google, and the Obama administration has no commitment 
to regulatory restraint. Google, like Halliburton, should play by the same 
rules as everyone else.

Erik Telford is the Vice President of Strategic Initiatives & Outreach at the 
Franklin Center for Government and Public Integrity.

-- 
-- 
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community  
<mailto:[email protected]> <[email protected]>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org
 
--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected] 
<mailto:[email protected]> .
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 

 

-- 
-- 
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community 
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org
 
--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected] 
<mailto:[email protected]> .
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 

-- 
-- 
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community 
<[email protected]>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.


Reply via email to