Slashdot Mirror
Google Raises Campaign Funds For Climate Change Denier
HonorPoncaCityDotCom writes "Alex Altman reports at Time Magazine that Google recently hosted a fundraiser for Oklahoma Senator Jim Inhofe, one of the Senate's most conservative Republicans and a staunch opponent of EPA regulations. Inhofe authored a treatise called 'The Greatest Hoax: How the Global Warming Conspiracy Threatens Your Future,' thinks the Bible disproves global warming, and once denounced the 'arrogance' of scientists who suggest that 'we, human beings, would be able to change what He is doing in the climate.' What prompted Google to host a fund raiser where attendees shelled out up to $2,500 for lunch with Inhofe? A data center that Google operates in Pryor, Oklahoma. 'Google runs a significant operation that provides around 100 jobs,' says Rusty Appleton, Inhofe's campaign manager. 'The Senator had an opportunity to tour the facilities in May of last year, and is committed to ensuring that Oklahoma remains a great place to do business.' A Google spokesperson says the company regularly hosts fundraisers for candidates of all stripes, even when Google disagrees with some of their policies — as it does with Inhofe on climate change. This explanation didn't wash with the activists outside Google's D.C. headquarters near K Street. "
Corporation places self-interest over popular hot-button issue. Stay tuned for more.
Company acts in own self-interest, news at 11.
...is starting to either redefine "evil" or "don't"... Haven't figured out which yet...
I know that politics makes for strange bedfellows, but this seems to head a little out of the norm.
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
...up until that point in which it becomes advantageous to do evil.
and don't try to hide it by doing a doodle of flowers growing.
if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
Buying congress makes sense. If they're outspokenly against you, when you buy them, they stop doing that. It'll be fun to see if this congressman does a 180 once Google's money is up his sock hole, and starts spouting Google's corporate values as his new platform.
You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
manufacturers of iOS devices, Android devices, Windows Phone devices, even Blackberries that still exist in the wild all do at least some of their manufacturing in China, where labor and environmental abuses are not just a daily occurrence but an accepted part of "doing business."
calling one side hypocritical is naïve, flame baiting, and ultimately pointless.
And you think Apple and Microsoft are any less evil?? How many wind and solar farms are they bankrolling? What kind of phone are YOU using, hypocrite?
I have two words for you -- bribery and extortion. It's how politics work in the US.
Free Martian Whores!
A Google spokesperson says the company regularly hosts fundraisers for candidates of all stripes, even when Google disagrees with some of their policies â" as it does with Inhofe on climate change. This explanation didn't wash with the activists outside Google's D.C. headquarters near K Street.
Why would that explanation lack credibility? It sounds a lot more forthright than I would expect. Let's frame it a little differently and I think it will ring quite true:
"Google doesn't care about the policies of the politicians it supports, or whether those policies harm the nation, the planet, or the American people. Google will happily help channel money to any politician who can help us pay a little less taxes to maintain the system we benefit from, or who can influence laws so that we are not held responsible for our stalking or the government stalking we facilitate. Oligarchy rules!"
Stop-Prism.org: Opt Out of Surveillance
This pretty much solves that whole iOS v. Android question that many have. If someone ever tells me that Climate Change exists with their Android device in hand, now I can call them a hypocrite.
No you can't. It's a phone, not a carte blanche agreement with whatever google does.
For that matter, it sucks how most manufacturing companies don't hire much US labor. 100 employees here and there just doesn't instill confidence.
PS: I don't reply to ACs.
Q: How do you change the world?
A: With money.
Q: How do you get more money?
A: Make sure you have influence with those in power.
Q: What do you when you have enough money?
A: Anything you want, including discarding the trash you used to get to the top.
Q: Isn't that dishonest?
A: This is business, not kindergarten.
Wars are won one battle at a time. You must choose how to win each battle if you ever hope to prevail in the war.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
When Google lobbies one right winger, it's news to Slashdot? Is anyone here aware that his views are shared with a significant portion of the population? This isn't David Duke's final term, this guy is mainstream.
He's probably wrong about Global Warming, I'll grant that. But I daydream about one day when the coin is flipped and Google's lobbying of a left winger (who's antipathy toward free enterprise and economic globalism lead to more human suffering around the world than that of a global warming denier) is shocking news.
Dance like you're hurt, Love like you need money, and work when somebody's watching.
-Scott Adams
I can think of some
Between his campaign and the main super PAC supporting him, Restore Our Future, Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney has received $9.6 million in contributions from the oil and gas industry. In contrast, President Obama has received about five percent of that total, or just under $500,000 from oil and gas donors
... whatever
What about round earth?
Or the earth being very old?
Fun fact, reality does not care if you believe in it or not.
You do realize that when you go into the kitchen to get a beer, you change either the rotation rate of the Earth, or its polar motion, or (more likely) both?
The question is not whether or not it happens, the question is whether it is big enough to be detected observationally. Today, with GPS and VLBI, pretty small changes can be detected (although, I will grant, not you going into the kitchen). (Yet.)
I did calculate once the rotational effect of everyone going back and forth to work in LA; maybe it's time to redo those calculations.
Google is a big corporation. As such they are going to hold varying views and will play both sides (if you actually consider there to be only two) of the political fence. This is business as usual.
"Growing old is inevitable; growing up is optional."
Buying the good graces of a member of congress is a good investment. Rates have never been lower, and congress has never bee more corruptible. Even if you're not evil, the purchase of congressional support means that they tend to watch your back when they're screwing the little guy. It's just good business.
One thing I don't get about Inhofe and the other climate change deniers is this: why say the hoax is costing you millions when the hoax could just as easily be a business opportunity. I mean, real or not, it just means an opportunity for companies to cash in on environmental friendliness, sell people cures (whether they need them or not), etc. Even if you suppose Inhofe is receiving carnal pleasures from the petrochemical industry in exchange for his obedience, those same companies could turn around and make megabucks on carbon sequestration schemes, higher-priced fuel formulations that reduce emissions 1-2%, etc. People already swimming in cash are in a unique position to jump on opportunities of this sort. Hell, Exxon and GM ought to be able to get huge grants for "research" in making more carbon-neutral petro-fueled vehicles -- we're talking free money!
That's the problem with corrupt politicians these days... They miss the bigger money-grubbing picture.
That's okay. Global Warming believes in you.
Inhofe sounds like a bit of a nut, but for me it's not about the science. I think the science of global warming is pretty well understood. But when it comes to political policy, the science of global warming is only ever used to promote thinly veiled marxism and anti-business, and even anti-human policies. If the global warming crowd ever got behind nuclear power, or ever admitted that technology is quickly erasing polution in our day, or ever even showed a small amount of restraint in the demand for all countries to cede large swaths sovereignty for the sake of cutting carbon emissions, I'd be a little less inclined to dismiss the rest of the agenda.
I guess you could say I'm a climate change believer and a marxism denier. The two don't have to go together, they just alway seem to in the current political climate. So even though Inhofe may be a cook, that doesn't mean that his policy prefferences won't be better than the alternative. And even though some other politician may be very bright, that doesn't mean that the marxist policies he/she promotes in the name of science/global warming wouldn't be very damaging. (And yes, I do mean more damaging than the pro-growth alternative.)
I don't believe in gravity, so I do not care how hard I'll hit the pavement when I jump off this building.
I am officially gone from
I tried not believing in gravity, but it only made me lightheaded.
Ok here is the lowdown!
Everyone has their good and bad parts about them. It is not productive to ignore and not work with people just because of their bad points. It is productive to work with these people because of their good points.
If you fully agree with everything the Republican or Democratic party says, then you are most likely a mindless shill who really should get out of politics because you are too stupid. You will tend to use most of your mental skills, trying to justify any inconsistencies in ideologies. Most likely you are not running for office, and you do not have anything at stake for not being Conservative or Liberal enough.
If you are going to protest google, protest the policy/ideology/action that google does that you do not like. Not the fact they worked with a politician that you wouldn't vote for, because they liked something unrelated to the policy you're fighting against.
Unless you are actually opposed to a Datacenter in Oklahoma.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
the company has a huge impact on our daily lives. This isn't some manufacturer no one ever heard off outside of small town USA. This company is intertwined into our daily lives and its in our interest to know about their ethics and political support/interference.
by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
Ha, corporations get to settle their criminal cases.
To be a successful corporation in today's Amehrica, you cannot just spend all your time and money on a single party. You have to buy members of both parties in order to maintain your cozy relationship with the federal bureaucrats.
"Somebody has to do something. It's just incredibly pathetic it has to be us."
--- Jerry Garcia
I don't believe in global warming, so I do not care what kind of phone I use.
Shut up, already. It's SCIENCE!
"Somebody has to do something. It's just incredibly pathetic it has to be us."
--- Jerry Garcia
The kind of asshole who still owns something.
I don't see how it is evil to raise money for the campaign of a politician that helps you. I see how it *can* be evil, if the thing he/she is helping you to do is evil, or if the politician is evil.
I don't think being a climate change denier makes a person evil. It probably makes them stupid. But in all honesty, how many politicians are *not* stupid? What percentage of politicians believe in God? This makes 99+% of politicians in America stupid, or at liars pretending to be stupid, or both.
In a perfect world I would say that we should consider any kind of campaign contributions from anyone to be evil, but what's the alternative?
Force people to donate to all campaigns (i.e. public funding)?
Only allow donations from certain people (e.g. non evil people without agendas)?
If we are going to step outside the world we live in when we start labeling people evil, I am going to say that anyone who doesn't donate 100% of their profits to charity is evil, and therefore 99.9999% of Americans are evil, including google. Every dinner out, or new phone is a wasted opportunity to save a child or children in Africa. Every item of luxury that you enjoy is at the expense of someone else's necessities going unfulfilled.
We can either go through life constantly plagued with guilt even if we do our best, because it's never good enough, or we can just do something better than nothing and something less than everything, and try to enjoy ourselves before we die, and simply refuse to accept 100% complete responsibility for every bad thing that happens to someone else.
I kinda sucks, but I would rather enjoy my life.
Plea bargins are convictions. Settlements specifically exclude acceptance of guilt.
Apple's bankrolling Solar Farms, too. In fact, they say their data centres run on 100% renewable energy at this point.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-03-21/apple-says-data-centers-now-use-100-renewable-energy.html
So I don't know about Apple being less evil, per se, but I don't think you've got any room to look down your nose at them here.
The 13th century would like their news back.
"Heretic, burn them!"
So much for freedom of thought.
We're pretty much back to: Follow our religion or we will crucify you the best we can.
Nice to know some things never change.
-Styopa
I am so disappointed that people are now talking about religion-blind bribes as though they're evil.
Let's say you're in a third world country, and a "your papers please" official hassles you over something that doesn't make sense, but then explains that your problem can be taken care of for a small fee.
Do you ask him what crazy religious beliefs he has, as a condition for paying the bribe? "Sure, this $20 might find itself into your pocket ... if you can tell me a little about, oh, I don't know, say .. THETANS!" (As you blurt out the last word, transfix him with your gaze and watch to see if he winces.)
Of course not. And what if Google did that? You'd accuse them of religious discrimination.
Google: "Do you believe that evidence reveals properties of nature to us?"
Politician: "Of course. Are you telling me there are people who thi--"
Google: "Evidencist!! No money for you, Mister Science!"
And before you say we shouldn't have bribes at all, I should remind you than nearly 100% of voters always vote for one of the top two best-funded candidates in any race. I take that as meaning we've agreed that it's very important to us, that we only allow people in government if they have proven themselves adept at shakedowns. So, c'mon dudes, you're not telling me that 100% of The People are evil are you? Google's just doing what all Americans want them to have to do.
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
I also realize that the fucking Sun has much more effect on the climate than we ever will.
True, if there were no Sun, the temperature would be roughly 2.7 Kelvin. Right now it's 86 degrees Fahrenheit where I live, or 303.15 Kelvins, so about a 11,228% increase for where I live, at the moment. So yeah, humans have come up with no feasible method of heating up our own entire planet by that amount without using nearby star undergoing nuclear fusion. If that's how you want to look at it.
Most people are fucking retarded when it comes to climate.
Again, totally true. For example, if someone were to think a valid point to make in a climate debate was that the Sun is affecting our climate more than humans. Problem is, the Sun has reached a relatively static heat output for the functional purpose of generating and sustaining life. That is, temperature hasn't changed rapidly enough within the lifespan of any species to fundamentally alter their environment in a way that the species could not adapt through the natural course of evolution. The last Ice Age was over a period of 100,000 years, plenty of time for most species to adapt. But now we're talking about global warming, on a scale that can be felt within someone's lifetime. Earth's ecosystems have been fine tuned to a temperature equilibrium that is changing faster than they can adapt. And the Sun, of all things, is cooling, so we know (for a plethora of other reasons, too) it's man-made.
Doesn't matter if he's evil or not. The results of his beliefs and actions are what matters.
I consider all climate change data, even the unpopular data showing the earth has been cooling the past decade even though carbon emissions are at the highest ever!
LOLZ
The top 10 warmest years on record are all within the last 15 years, with all but 1 of those happening in the last 10 years. It's true we've had an extended La Niña for a few years (except 2010, the hottest year ever recorded) that caused some leveling off (not cooling), but it's leveling off at a very high temperature historically and shows signs of shooting back up to correct when the La Niña ends. So please be careful about what "data" you "consider" and that you're not suffering from confirmation bias.
E pluribus unum
On the topic of Climate Change, this guy is Stupid and Misguided, but I don't see an evil intent, they may be one.
The real evil here is that blatant bribery is legal in the US. Corrupting a representative system of government is evil.
If you're going to consider all climate change data then you need to include ocean temperatures too (and geosphere temperature changes although they're small enough to be ignored at the first order) because it's all part of a continuum and rather than temperatures in any one part of the whole it makes more sense to consider the total energy captured in the system. If you look at it that way the warming continues apace with no noticeable slow down. Over 90% of the energy being captured by the increase in greenhouse gases goes in to heating the oceans.
The "changing" effects of the sun are not included in any of the climate models currently mature enough to claim proof or predictive evidence of global warming. The amount of changes are less understood then you seem to think and the changing sun actually creates multiple effects on other systems like cloud formation that feed into the loop.
You make a bold claim there.
Evidence, please.
I'm sure ten or twenty-thousand scientists working in this area would be delighted to be enlightened by you.
Or, if your argument is basically "this whole climate thing is darn complicated" then... uh... yes, it is. That is why we have scientists working on it. Lots of them.
As for calling people idiots and retards, I'm reminded of pigs wallering in the mud.
omg, you really fell for that? Look, dumbo, you were the first one in this discussion using the word retard, so up yours. :-)
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org