The Daily Mail is reporting that Google has been aligned closely to Obama and Hillary and their ties are deepening.
Google executives and employees donated more than $1.6 million to Obama’s two White House campaigns, and the online search giant parachuted top talent into both.
One result has been a coziness with the U.S. government’s executive branch that few other companies can match – marked by access for lobbyists, mentions in nearly half of Obama’s State of the Union addresses, and a personnel feeder trough serving the White House with new senior hires.
But why should the average American worry? Why does this impact them? Think about search results.
Google itself was accused publicly of favoring Obama’s 2012 re-election campaign in a more visible way.
Customized search results would appear when users typed ‘Obama’ into a search window, but entering ‘Romney’ yielded no such help.
Americans turn to the internet for news and information. Having the monopolistic search engine of the day favor one candidate over the other, whether intentional or not, requires more scrutiny. If you google Hillary and get all favorable results while searching Rand Paul, Marco Rubio, etc renders unflattering political ad videos, a less-informed voter could be unfairly swayed.
Google is entrenched in the daily lives of millions of Americans. Thinking that it is an unbiased, fair arbiter of political information is necessary to trusting the results and information provided. Unfortunately, Google seems focused on gaining the favor or prominent Democrat politicians.
Employees of the Silicon Valley behemoth have been in the White House more than 230 times since Obama took office – approximately once per week. At least 190 of those meetings were with senior officials.
More than 60 featured Google lobbyist Johanna Shelton.
Overall, according to The Wall Street Journal, Google spent $16.8 million on lobbying last year. That’s four times the amount spent by Apple, whose market capitalization is twice as big.
Now, a Google executive is taking the role of technology chief for Hillary Clinton’s 2016 run for President. How could that indicate any favoritism at all? If no favor is curried, why would Hillary be seeking such additions to her team?
Google has escaped litigation and managed placement of executives in key Democrat operative positions. While the legalities and ethics are to be questioned, Americans may make decisions on which search engine or cell phone operating system they use on their own.
Liberals scream about crony capitalism when it does not benefit them – their voices are eerily silent on Google’s White House access and the benefits the tech giant seems to be receiving.
The large contributions of the company to progressive politicians means that American’s purchases and use of Google assets appears to lead to indirect support of far left Democrats.