backtop


Print 60 comment(s) - last by Reclaimer77.. on Feb 1 at 6:29 PM


  (Source: Getty Images)
Google is a close ally of the President and he's not above plugging it's social network

President Obama is perhaps the most technology-savvy president to date.  While the POTUS (President of the United States) has made plenty of controversial stands [1][2][3] over his presidency, he has made some changes that should be unilaterally welcomed and commended, such as the We the People White House webpage [press release], which allows citizens to create petitions directed at the White House and Congress.

The President has a special love for Google Inc. (GOOG), whom he appointed his official "video secretary".  Aside from broadcasting State of the Union addresses on YouTube, something that would surely give the Founding Fathers cause to chuckle, and pushing legislation via YouTube, he's also gotten into Google+ of late.

Google+ is Google's social network rival to the ubiquitous Facebook.  Unlike the Facebook's privacy-be-you-know-what policies, Google+ focuses on discretely sharing content with select circles of friends.

Today at 5:30 President Obama will host a "hangout" answering questions he's received in the past couple weeks on his YouTube channel.  

Google+ Hangout
A Google+ Hangout [Image Source: webbROI]

The President promises to answer the top rated questions, but the chat will likely provoke controversy, if previous chats on Facebook, Twitter and YouTube are any indication.  In those prior sessions some accused the President of dodging the highest rated questions -- many of which were admittedly "tough" -- instead cherry-picking "layup" questions that were easy to answer and/or made him look good.

The President's support of Google also raises some eyebrows given Google's clever use of the "Double Irish" and "Dutch Sandwich" (legal) tax evasion strategies, funneling money through Ireland, the Netherlands and Bermuda, courtesy of federal loopholes, to avoid paying federal income taxes on its profits.  These strategies reportedly saved Google $1B USD in 2011 and cut the company's effective tax rate to 18.8 percent, far less than the standard 35-40 most small businesses pay on earnings.

Google officially raised almost a million dollars for the President's election bid.

This follows in the line of other key corporate friends of the President, such as General Electric Comp. (GE) -- a more extreme tax evader who made $14B USD in profit in 2010, yet received a tax refund of $3.2B USD back from the federal government.  Obama appointed GE CEO Jeff Immelt to lead his jobs board -- which helps decide federal tax policy -- also in 2010.

Obama also appointed John Doerr and (Intel Corp. (INTC) CEO) Paul Otellini to his jobs council -- both of whom are board members at Google.

Google is known for its informal corporate motto "Don't be evil."

Sources: Google+, Bloomberg, CNN



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: blah blah blah
By Nfarce on 1/30/2012 7:46:02 PM , Rating: 2
The biggest character flaw of Dr. Paul, if you want to call it that, is being a pacifist/isolationist who thinks the US can drastically reduce the scope of its military and mind its own business and all the world's problems and hostilities will magically go away.

We sent ships into the Arabian Sea to send Iran a clear and present message that their Straits of Hormuz aggression/closure WOULD be countered. It's amazing how they stop running their mouths when started doing our own sabre rattling.

While domestic issue management is important, so is international issue management. A balanced budget won't do America a whole lot of good if WWIII breaks out in the Middle East and then expands globally. Not any more than an Iranian nuke lobbed at New York or Washington based in their pal Hugo's Venezuela.

In any event, even with that said, I'll be voting for any Republican who gets the nomination to at least help send the narcissistic empty suit Divider In Chief (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/post/o... we have currently residing at 1600 Pennsylvania packing and back to his cronies in Chicago. Even if it means Paul who has a myopic view of international affairs and problems.


RE: blah blah blah
By VERBW on 1/30/2012 8:30:49 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
The biggest character flaw of Dr. Paul, if you want to call it that, is being a pacifist/isolationist


Seriously? That's the biggest flaw with Ron Paul?

I can think of some others.

http://i.imgur.com/qPCCI.jpg

Then again, I guess I've been brainwashed by the Liberal MSM.

Anyway, Santorum believes in the re-criminalisation of homosexuality. I don't understand how anyone could even consider voting for him, even if that was his only flaw.


RE: blah blah blah
By Nfarce on 1/30/2012 8:36:32 PM , Rating: 2
Santorum is not really in the running. In any event if you think Congress, let alone SCOTUS, would allow Santorum to sign that nonsense into law, you don't have a clear grasp on how our federal government and Washington works.


RE: blah blah blah
By Nfarce on 1/30/2012 8:40:50 PM , Rating: 1
Oh, and yes, I'm aware of the allegations against Paul. But let's look at it this way in all fairness: if Democrats can elect an open former KKK Grand Kleagle to Congress for decades as the longest running Congress member in US history (Robert Byrd from West Virginia), then Dr. Paul who never was a member of the KKK should not be excluded from the presidency ballot and nomination.


RE: blah blah blah
By VERBW on 1/30/2012 8:48:33 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Oh, and yes, I'm aware of the allegations against Paul. But let's look at it this way in all fairness: if Democrats can elect an open former KKK Grand Kleagle to Congress for decades as the longest running Congress member in US history (Robert Byrd from West Virginia), then Dr. Paul who never was a member of the KKK should not be excluded from the presidency ballot and nomination.


No one is suggesting that he be excluded from the ballot, just that people who vote for him have to know about his past.

Electing an open former KKK member is just as bad, of course, and equally inexcusable. But like I said, no one is suggesting that they be refused the nomination (if he wins, he wins, that's how democracy works), just that no sane person ought to vote for them.


RE: blah blah blah
By Kurz on 1/31/2012 11:16:58 AM , Rating: 2
Know what about his past?


RE: blah blah blah
By VERBW on 1/30/2012 8:45:46 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Santorum is not really in the running. In any event if you think Congress, let alone SCOTUS, would allow Santorum to sign that nonsense into law, you don't have a clear grasp on how our federal government and Washington works.


No no, I understand absolutely. And I understand that he doesn't have a hope in getting the nomination, let alone the presidency.

My point is not that he would be able to pass any of that legislation, but I still find it disgusting that people would vote for him, regardless.

Luckily, as you pointed out, they won't.


RE: blah blah blah
By Reclaimer77 on 1/30/2012 9:41:30 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Anyway, Santorum believes in the re-criminalisation of homosexuality.


That's way out of bounds. I believe that was taken out of context from a philosophical discussion he was having on states rights. Just like Ron Paul was discussing states rights and the Civil Right's act and people flipped out and said he was for segregation.

As President, he would have no influence on such matters. He supports states rights. Any law signed by a state regarding such things would be heard by the Supreme Court anyway. He believes these are Judicial issues, not executive ones.

We elect President's, not dictators or kings.



RE: blah blah blah
By BAFrayd on 1/31/2012 3:40:26 PM , Rating: 2
Care to point out what, exactly, in the link you posted, shows Ron Paul to be a white supremacist? Oh, and by the way, try putting it into context and back it up with documented facts.

That link you posted is simply foolish...


RE: blah blah blah
By Reclaimer77 on 1/31/2012 3:53:46 PM , Rating: 2
Ron Paul might not be a white supremacists himself, but that link shows that a newsletter he knowingly published and supported was openly racist. He admitted he personally read them and signed off on them. He even defended them.

I don't know what to make of that. I really don't. But as far as his electability, can you imagine someone with this in his past debating Obama - an African American? How credible is he going to be once the media frames up that little soap opera and runs with it?


“And I don't know why [Apple is] acting like it’s superior. I don't even get it. What are they trying to say?” -- Bill Gates on the Mac ads














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki