Google Exec Floats Extreme Anti-Kavanaugh Strategy: 'Abolish the Senate'
Google has a political bias problem … or at the very least, a serious public relations issue.
Over the past few months, several glaring examples have come out of the tech giant that suggest it isn’t nearly as “diverse” and “tolerant” as its leaders like to pretend.
First, there was a video that showed Google’s top executives wringing their hands over the election of Donald Trump, and indicating that they would use the corporation’s significant power to influence future elections.
Then, another top Google project leader used his Twitter page to spew hate against conservatives in a curse-filled rant that would get almost anybody else fired.
Now it’s happening again. Late last week, a Google executive used his official, verified Twitter account to respond to Brett Kavanaugh’s Supreme Court confirmation in a way that can only be described as extreme.
“Abolish the Senate,” Ken Norton posted.
Abolish the Senate.
— Ken Norton (@kennethn) October 6, 2018
According to his own website, Norton is a “Google Ventures Partner and Product Manager,” and has held high-level positions at the tech giant for over a decade.
Yes, one of Google’s top people just publicly declared that a core part of the U.S. government, half of the legislative branch that has been in the Constitution since it was drafted, should be “abolished” because he doesn’t like conservatives.
It’s worth pointing out the deep irony here. Liberals like Norton claim to stand for equality and the voices of minorities. What is the entire reason the Senate exists? Er, equality and the voices of minorities.
The House of Representatives, as you probably know, is filled based on population. High population states like California and New York receive far more votes in the House because of this — which essentially means that the majority rules and big states can overwhelm minority voices and bully them into silence.
Not so in the Senate. It was specifically set up so that no matter their size, each state has the same number of senators — two — which means that minority voices still have an important say in national decisions.
“The Senate has remained a smaller body where states have an equal voice,” an informative page from the U.S. government helpfully explains. “Senators have tended to be somewhat older and more experienced than representatives, and the Senate has remained a deliberative institution that has brought caution and stability to the legislative process.”
Equal voice? Caution? Stability? Such horrors!
By throwing a temper tantrum over Kavanaugh and announcing that the Senate should be abolished, the Google bigwig basically revealed that he believes in majorities dominating minorities when it comes to laws. How tolerant.
Not that it would make much difference. It apparently escaped the tech expert that Republicans also control the House of Representatives right now, actually by a wider margin than in the Senate.
Kavanaugh would have been confirmed there, too. That’s because, in lawful elections, more citizens chose conservatives as their representatives than liberals. We used to call this “Civics 101,” something that Norton no doubt also can’t stand.
In another tweet, Norton endorsed a post calling President Trump “that piece of s–t” who should be hated. The bias is clear.
Other tweets from the Google lead show that he supported an attempt to influence the vote of Sen. Susan Collins, who proved instrumental in confirming Kavanaugh. As PJ Media’s Tyler O’Neil pointed out, the “money for votes” plan that the Google leader endorsed could be seen as bribery.
“Norton tweeted a call to action, announcing that he had donated money to a bribery scheme attempting to force Collins to vote ‘no’ on Kavanaugh,” O’Neil explained.
“Match my pledge to Either Sen. Collins VOTES NO on Kavanaugh OR we fund her future opponent on @Crowdpac!” Google’s Norton tweeted.
In other words, it was a pledge of money contingent on one specific vote from the senator. It was obviously an attempt to financially influence the lawmaker’s vote on Kavanaugh — and that’s obviously pretty shady.
“The scheme arguably violated federal laws against bribery, and Collins declared that she would not be swayed by it,” O’Neil wrote.
Throughout all of the recent scandals, Google has insisted that they are inclusive and unbiased. Simple question: Do Google’s top brass look unbiased to you?
The corporate giant has already admitted that they want to sway politics as an active participant, not remain neutral.
The leaders of any company influence its culture. If the rest of Google’s leaders are as one-sided as Norton and Hogue, it may be time to ask some hard questions.
Here’s an important one: Why do Google’s top people keep being exposed as angry, extremist partisans?
Truth and Accuracy
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.
