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. "

23 of 365 comments (clear)

  1. In today's news... by crashcy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Corporation places self-interest over popular hot-button issue. Stay tuned for more.

    1. Re:In today's news... by al0ha · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Damn it everyone, stop referring to Corporations as if they are people. Corporations do nothing, the people that run them do.

      --
      Did you ever wake up in the morning, with a Zombie Woof behind your eyes? -- FZ
  2. Imagine that by Lithdren · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Company acts in own self-interest, news at 11.

    1. Re:Imagine that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      Since I have now proven you wrong, Slashtiquette allows me to make fun of your spelling, grammar, lack of paragraphs

      You're way out of touch with Slashtiquette. Making fun of his spelling and grammar allows you to claim he's wrong, not the other way around. Try again, and this time focus.

    2. Re:Imagine that by Alef · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Seriously, how is this news? A large company is schmoozing politicians. It's fine to think it's evil and corrupt and whatever. But news is generally something that you didn't already know.

      That's a bit like saying, we know air planes crash, therefore the recent crash landing in San Francisco is not news.

      I want to hear about events like these, and I think others should to, so that it gives Google the bad publicity it deserves. Because if it results in bad PR, it is less likely that companies will schmooze buffoons like Inhofe in the future.

      We shouldn't set our expectations on the behaviour of corporations so low that we are completely indifferent when they behave badly. Otherwise, those who are not will have nothing for it.

    3. Re:Imagine that by Dixie_Flatline · · Score: 4, Insightful

      There's very little nuance to be had with 'The Greatest Hoax: How the Global Warming Conspiracy Threatens Your Future.' I appreciate that in all of science there are spectra and good bits and bad bits, but Inhofe leaves no room for disagreement on subtle details. If you believe what Inhofe says, you're a Denier with a capital 'D'.

      He goes far beyond 'sceptic', which is something that all science enthusiasts should be--he's actively denying any and all science with his position. He's not your friend if you're the kind of person that reads and posts here.

    4. Re:Imagine that by Alef · · Score: 4, Insightful

      But to call them out on it is "doing something". It taints their brand (like I explained in the part you didn't quote). Yes, it may only make a small difference, but it makes a difference nonetheless. A small contribution to a better world, if you will.

  3. Don't be evil... by TWX · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...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.
    1. Re:Don't be evil... by PraiseBob · · Score: 4, Informative

      The person who wants to ignore reality and scientific evidence so they can personally profit, at the cost of our children (and possibly all future generations) having an environment suitable for life, is less evil than who exactly?

  4. Buying congress makes sense by Junior+J.+Junior+III · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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!
    1. Re:Buying congress makes sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      up his sock hole

      Where the hell are you wearing your socks???

  5. Re:So happy by fightinfilipino · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

  6. Sounds Credible to Me by Bob9113 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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!"

    1. Re:Sounds Credible to Me by phantomfive · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Basically if you're going to wait for a candidate that matches all your beliefs, you're never going to get it, even if you become a senator yourself. So you have to decide what priorities you think are most important. Google chose theirs, which are different than the activists, which annoys the activists.

      And honestly I'm not sure they made the wrong priority decision. Whether they support climate change politicians or not, little is going to change in that area.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  7. It's just business by Overzeetop · · Score: 4, Informative

    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?
  8. Re:So happy by Cenan · · Score: 4, Informative

    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 ...
  9. Re:So happy by h4rr4r · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What about round earth?
    Or the earth being very old?

    Fun fact, reality does not care if you believe in it or not.

  10. It's not the science by bryanandaimee · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.)

  11. Re:So happy by dkleinsc · · Score: 4, Funny

    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 /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
  12. Stay out of politics! by jellomizer · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.
  13. Re:So happy by TsuruchiBrian · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

  14. Re:So happy by Dixie_Flatline · · Score: 4, Informative

    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.

  15. Re:So happy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.