Google's FEC filing for political donations made in June (#pride month!) is up. We start off strong with $5,000 to ferocious abortion opponent and self-described "David Duke without the baggage" Steve Scalise, who once spoke at a white supremacist rally, he claims, by accident
Here's a $2,500 donation to Ben Sasse's leadership PAC, which in 2018 gave exclusively to Republican senators. If you love Senate obstruction on DACA, the Equality Act, election security... well, so does Google!
Google gave $5,000 to 'One Georgia PAC', which in 2018 gave $324,600 to Senate Republicans exclusively, and the Lone Star Liberty Fund, which gave only to House Republicans.
Google gave $5,000 to Oorah! PAC, which donated $156,583 to Republican Senate candidates, and $19,500 to Republican House candidates in 2018. Google's shrewdly using some indirection here. But Pinboard dereferences pointers!
In a similar vein, this $5,000 donation from Google to the Lone Star Liberty Fund, John Ratcliffe's leadership PAC, which is a third of its 2018 budget. It all goes to Republican House candidates.
Google gave $1,500 on June 26 to Rep. Darin LaHood, who was one of 19 state senators in the Illinois state legislature to vote against a ban on gay conversion therapy in 2015. Happy #pride!
Roger Marshall in 2017: "Just like Jesus said, ‘The poor will always be with us,’… There is a group of people that just don’t want health care and aren’t going to take care of themselves. Just, like, homeless people. …morally, spiritually, socially…don’t want health care.”
Did Google give to Marshall? No, of course not, that would be unseemly! They gave $5,000 on June 26 to Point PAC, whose only funding recipient in 2018 was Roger Marshall.
Here's Google's $5,000 donation to Texas Republicans United PAC, which in 2018 gave a broad slate of House republicans and one Senate candidate, Martha McSally, another strong opponent of LGBT rights
Tim Walberg, speaking before Family Research Council (designated as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center) has called Americans “slaves” to “sexual perversion.” Google gave this anti-LGBT activist $500 on June 26
Google gave $2,000 to Heartland Values PAC, John Thune's leadership PAC, on June 26. This entity gave $215,000 entirely to Republican candidates for Federal office in 2018.
Also on June 26, Google gave $2,500 to Mike Lee, who you may remember is one of the two senators who put a hold on aid to dying 9/11 first responders this week. Lee is also a ferocious opponent of same-sex marriage, in keeping with the #pride theme.
Google gave $5,000 to Eye of the Tiger PAC, Steve Scalise's leadership PAC, which made $1.1M in donations to Republican candidates last year. Eye of the Tiger PAC is notably one of the only remaining PACs that gives to Steve King, the overtly white supremacist Congressman.
Google gave $2,500 to Ken Buck (disclosure: I fundraised in 2018 for Buck's opponent, as well as Steve King's), who has said "I think birth has an influence over [being gay], like alcoholism and some other things, but I think that basically you have a choice." So did Google.
And finally, Google made a $2,500 donation to Alamo PAC, John Cornyn's leadership PAC, which gave $345,000 in 2018 exclusively to Republican candidates. Cornyn is also the Senator who (with Ted Cruz) nominated a Federal justice who said trans kids are "part of Satan's plan"
Some remarks about these donations. First, they are wholly unnecessary. Google runs an enormous D.C. lobbying organization and throwing a few thousand dollars at candidates changes nothing. Apple and IBM prove you don't need a PAC to thrive as a giant U.S. tech company.
Second, they are funded entirely by voluntary employee contributions. That means you can talk to your co-workers about where their money is going. The July filing contains a full list of contributors who are given no say in how their money is spent. docquery.fec.gov/pdf/569/201907…
Third, notice what a slap in the face this is to Google's LGBT employees. In the middle of ostentatious Pride celebrations, despite all the controversy over homophobia on YouTube, and @NoPrideForGoog, they decided to give publicly to some of the most homophobic people in Congress
Even if it were essential to Google's survival to give a bigot like Steve Scalise money, the election is over a year away! They could have easily waited as a gesture of respect to not give during #pride. But not only are the donations unnecessary, their timing is another insult
I learned in talking to Microsoft that their CEO and President do not review political donations by the PAC. The decision is made by D.C. flunkies without further review. I would be very curious if that is the case at Google. Does @sundarpichai know where Google's money goes?
Google is full of people who love the company. You believe in it, and you see it as a force for good. I respect that. But the company's political giving to fund bigotry has to stop. It goes against everything Google claims to be, and it could end tomorrow with no harm to Google
Look, Google management is not personally evil, but they are paralyzed by their fear of attacks from the right wing, who have very successfully played the refs here. The alt-right gets invited over for coffee and donuts.
But this is an area where regular employees can win. Your colleagues at Microsoft are having success at de-funding the PAC. Twitter's PAC is down to just *two* donors. I look through the donor list and I see some of the giants of the Internet. These are not their values, or yours
(Er, sorry, I Twitter in Polish. That screenshot of Rubin above is from July 18—yesterday)
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Lurking the r/generator subreddit recently I learned something interesting about the situation in Texas. Quite reasonably a lot of people in the Houston area have decided to get generators installed, since there have been recent major power outages both in summer and winter...
This being Texas, what most people want to run off their generator is a five-ton whole-house air conditioner. This as you can imagine is pretty power hungry, particularly when it first powers on. To avoid storing gas/diesel, a lot of people have opted for a natural gas hookup
Natural gas distribution in Texas is not set up to support hundreds of multi-kilowatt generators running at the same time, let alone firing up at the same time. So what people have collaboratively built in Texas is a system for converting power outages into massive gas outages.
The first time I voted in a US election I was amazed that no proof of citizenship—not even photo ID—was required. From the point of view of an immigrant, you're constantly made to prove your legal residency for stuff—jobs, school, driving—but for some reason not voting.
I don't really get why positive proof of ID isn't a voting requirement, other than the fact that voting law in the US is very old and predates the modern surveillance state. I don't have strong feelings about it, but it's definitely a US oddity, like the lack of national ID
From the point of view of public faith in elections, there does seem to be something rickety about the combination of trust-me voter registration requirements, absentee ballots, and mail-in votes getting counted for weeks after election day.
Cryptocurrency and generative AI make roughly the same size claims to being transformative innovations, so it's interesting to see how many interesting things people have already found to do with the latter, while the first has mostly been an expensive tour through human folly
I like thinking of cryptocurrency as "financial string theory", but for the parallel to really work a lot more physicists would need to be in jail
With both crypto and string theory, you have domain experts in thrall to a mathematical apparatus so intellectually satisfying that they get emotionally invested into bringing it into contact with reality. But instead each failed attempt pushes them further out into la-la-land
Rising from the crypt to talk a little about how pre-wikipedia generations lived. There was a big encyclopedia in the library, but only really rich families would own one. The best that poor kids could hope for was grocery store encyclopedias, bought one volume at a time
Grocery chains really would sell the world's saddest encyclopedia, one slim volume a week, and you felt lucky to have it. Unrestricted access to a full set of the Encyclopedia Britannica is the thing that felt most like having access to the world wide web in the pre-www days.
Naturally when the web came along, we all wondered how encyclopedias would work online, and for a brief while it looked like Microsoft would sell expensive access to a kind of crappy one. And then wikipedia appeared and blew everyone's mind by the fact that it worked
Early this year I went online after taking too many drugs and ordered a Mongolian yurt. Here is my yurt, and here is my story:
The great thing about yurts is you can get high, make a deposit, and forget you bought one for seven months. Then in late July I got email giving me an imminent delivery date and demanding to see a photo of the finished substructure. I tried to bluff them with a quick Lowe's run
The yurt company was totally on to me, though. Everyone lies about the substructure. Demands for photo evidence grew insistent, and I found myself having to level heavy things in the desert while getting heatstroke
This whole thread on large-scale circulation in the Atlantic Ocean is great, but the real showstopper is that global-warming induced breakdown in this flow will result in significant *cooling* for a large chunk of Eurasia, greatly complicating the politics of climate response.
The existing strategy for mitigating climate change is incoherent because:
1. It demands a total restructuring of societies worldwide 2. Most of this burden would fall on developing nations 3. It ignores imminent tipping points that (by definition) there is no coming back from
But with no politically achievable plan for capping (let alone reducing) global emissions, what will happen is we'll run into one of these tipping points, and if that happens to be AMOC collapse, then suddenly a bunch of G7 economies have much less incentive to decarbonize