Google Ad system makes in-kind political contribution to aid MoveOn.Org in supporting and opposing candidacies MoveOn.Org favors and disfavors Google gives in-kind contribution in form of bogus trademark claim to protect the Left from criticism by non-leftists.
Google's Ad system makes political contributions to MoveOn.Org by banning anti-MoveOn.Org ads but not Anti-Blackwater ads-- Time for Justice Dept. investigation on anti-trust and campaign "finance" grounds?
Since the Left eagerly supported the assertion of Microsoft's dominance of the market as grounds for protracted anti-trust prosecution, doesn't the same analysis warrant comparable anti-trust prosecution of Google? Does Google's dominance of the internet "ad" market, the search-engine market, and the internet-video market give it significantly less dominance than did Microsoft's dominance of the OS and browser markets?
Since the Left so loved campaign finance "reform" known as "McCain/Feingold" creating a framework for governmental rationing of political speech, shouldn't the Justice Department begin an investigation of Google's transparently naked political contribution to MoveOn.Org? Manifestly, such actions by Google constitute in-kind contributions to promotion of candicacies MoveOn.Org favors and as well as in-kind contributions to MoveOn.Org's opposition to candidacies MoveOn.Org disfavors.
If Equal Protection were to mean anything, it means the answers to both the anti-trust and campaign "finance" questions "yes." Google's politically selective application of it's interpretation of "trademark" laws constite "in kind" political contributions by Google to MoveOn.Org and "in kind" political activity against MoveOn.Org's opponents.
Is it now time for all non-Leftists currently doing business with GoogleAds to immediately cease doing so? Unless Google were to promptly change its positon, the answer is certainly "yes." Is it now time for all non-Leftists currently displaying "Google" search-engine tools on their sites to cease doing so? Unless Google were to promptly change its position, the answer is certainly "yes." Is it time for all non-Leftists to stop using, or linking to, any Google service? Unless Google were to promptly change it's position, the answer is certanly "yes."
Has Google used its market positon to attempt to politicize the internet? Yes. Is it time for all non-Leftists to shift all their internet usage away from Google and in favor of some other service that will not use its position to make "in kind" political contributions to organizations such as "MoveOn.Org"? Unless Google were to promptly change its position, the answer is "yes."
Jim Wrenn, Editor at PoliSat.Com.
Additional permanent link to this installment is here
Jim is a proud descendant of 18th Century criminal exiles from England who swam to the Outer Banks when the British ship taking them to a Georgia penal colony sank in a storm near Cape Hatteras. Having the prescience to prevent their descendants from becoming "TarHeels," they immediately migrated to Virginia, where, within just a few generations they worked their way up into poverty. Jim's grandfather was the first in the family tree to see the distant horizons, but his career was cut short by severe injuries he sustained when a cousin cut down the tree.
After a brief stint in the Amry (ours) following graduation from law school, he began his legal career in the state bureaucracy but was never able to break into the federal bureaucracy. Several years later, he entered the private practice of law and co-founded a small law publishing company. Later, finding the publishing of small laws unstimulating and finding his private practice too private to be lucrative, he began writing political satire/commentary. His greatest vice is taking himself too seriously.
Although he regularly teaches Continuing Legal Education courses to lawyers, he's too-often available through he Rubber Chicken Speakers Bureau to speak on politics, satire, etc., at luncheons, dinners, root canals, funerals, etc. His speaking fees are so outrageously high they border on criminal price-gouging, but as a free-market advocate, he defends his fees on the higher moral ground of charging whatever the traffic will bear. For more information (surely more than one would want or need), go to www.PoliSat.Com.