I am very disturbed about what has happened to the CEO of Mozilla this week. It has chilled me to the bone as I didn’t think that something like this was possible in the United States of America. Because I am so distraught, I have dug up quite a few articles on the topic. I hope that you will read them, and realize how detrimental this occurrence is to our freedom. Spread the word. The Left will not rest until they shut out all dissenting voices. We must not lie down. We must fight this with all that we have. We must not be silent.
Stories of the Day
“Rumors are floating around Twitter that proof of Brendan Eich’s donation was illegally leaked by people in government sympathetic to the cause of gay marriage. Not so. I’d forgotten about it, but friends reminded me that the LA Times obtained a list of people who gave, for and against, to the fight over the Prop 8 referendum in 2008. They put the whole database online and made it searchable. Search it today and, sure enough, there’s Eich with a $1,000 donation in favor. Under California law, that disclosure is perfectly legal: The state is authorized to provide certain personal information about anyone who donates more than $100 to a ballot measure. Why the state is allowed to do that, I’m not sure. The reason you want transparency when donating to a candidate is to prevent an elected official, who’s supposed to serve the public interest, from being secretly coopted by huge sums of money provided by a special interest. In a ballot measure, though, the money being spent is designed to influence the public itself. They’re the final arbiter of the public interest, no?” How did people find out that Mozilla’s CEO donated to support Prop 8?
“The difference between Eich and Obama is that. as far as we know, Eich didn’t lie to people’s faces about his views to further his own ambition. He could have publicly renounced his donation this week in the name of keeping his job, but apart from a statement about making sure that Mozilla supports everyone regardless of orientation, he didn’t. I imagine there must be some satisfaction to him in that. The ultimate goal in boycotts like these isn’t getting people fired, it’s enforcing uniformity of thought on the subject. When forced to choose, Eich evidently preferred to sacrifice his job rather than his beliefs.” Mozilla CEO “resigns” after uproar over his opposition to gay marriage
“One of gay marriage proponents’ most effective and persuasive arguments appealed to many Americans’ “live and let live” sense of fair play. Hey, it’s a free country. The core idea was compelling: “Our love and our marriage doesn’t affect you.” They asked for tolerance, if not acceptance. And they won. Now we’re beginning to see what the disquieting “next step” looks like, at least as imagined by some of the loudest and most radical voices. Tolerance is no longer sufficient. Enforced celebration is the new standard. Those who resist will be labeled bigots, and may be subject to having their lives or livelihoods destroyed. We’re way past “live and let live.” We’ve moved on to coercion in the name of ‘tolerance.’” Tolerance: Tech CEO Forced to Resign Over 2008 Anti-Gay Marriage Donation
Oh, the hypocrisy. “On Thursday, Mozilla announced that Eich, who co-founded the firm, decided to step down from his role as CEO. Mitchell Baker, executive chairman of Mozilla’s parent company, the Mozilla Foundation, said in the announcement, “Mozilla believes both in equality and freedom of speech. Equality is necessary for meaningful speech. And you need free speech to fight for equality. Figuring out how to stand for both at the same time can be hard.” “Our organizational culture reflects diversity and inclusiveness,” Baker wrote. ”We welcome contributions from everyone regardless of age, culture, ethnicity, gender, gender-identity, language, race, sexual orientation, geographical location and religious views. Mozilla supports equality for all.” Mozilla CEO Steps Down over Support for Traditional Marriage
“Baker’s statement is must reading, though it requires some translation. It is not exactly straightforward. Using the mandatory shibboleths, the statement refers to a corporate culture of “diversity and inclusiveness.” If you’ve read 1984, you can probably handle the translation without help from me.” Mozilla speaks, sort of.
“As someone who was publicly supporting gay marriage even before Dick Cheney, I find this degree of bullying and blacklisting repellent. I’m beginning to think that the only thing the left found wrong with the 1950s blacklists was that they were aimed at . . . the left. And so I find myself in agreement with Andrew Sullivan:
Will he now be forced to walk through the streets in shame? Why not the stocks? The whole episode disgusts me – as it should disgust anyone interested in a tolerant and diverse society. If this is the gay rights movement today – hounding our opponents with a fanaticism more like the religious right than anyone else – then count me out. If we are about intimidating the free speech of others, we are no better than the anti-gay bullies who came before us.” GLEICHSCHALTUNG!
“As one who has been a longtime supporter of gay marriage and remain one, allow me to say that I am appalled by Mozilla’s decision to fire (or “force to resign”) its newly installed CEO (and inventor of Java Script) Brendan Eich because Eich gave $1000 a few years back for Proposition 8, the California ballot initiative to ban same-sex marriage. Although not held by me, Eich evidently has beliefs shared by literally billions of people of faith throughout the world. Those demanding his head like junior Robespierres should be ashamed of themselves. Not only are they violating the spirit of the Bill of Rights and freedom of religion, they dishonor their own cause and embarrass themselves no end. They move things backwards when the think they are moving things forwards. All the blablabla in the world from the crew at Mozilla cannot cover this up. Ditto the gang at the OKCupid dating site that initiated the witch hunt. Whatever their intentions, they have become “thought police.” They are unable to contain, as the shrinks say, the deeply held religious beliefs of others, let alone respect them in any way, even when, as is clearly the case with Eich, he is able to respect theirs in his daily work quite well.” Gay Marriage Supporter Abhors Mozilla’s Decision to Fire Eich
“In 2008, Barack Obama and Brendan Eich both were against gay marriage. Senator Obama averred his support for the one-man/one-woman view of marriage, while Mr. Eich, a cofounder of the Mozilla web-browser company, donated $1,000 to support Proposition 8 — a California ballot initiative that had the effect of making Senator Obama’s avowed marriage policy the law in California, at least until a federal court overturned it on the theory that California’s constitution is unconstitutional. Barack Obama inexplicably remains, as of this writing, president of the United States of America, but Mr. Eich has just been forced out as CEO of Mozilla because of his political views.” Corrosive Conformity
“So now, no longer is it just the government that can single you out, punish and persecute you for being a patriot or a tea partier. Now, your employer can as well. And then, maybe your landlord. And, why not the local hospital? And what about your kids in school? For those of you from the old USSR, you know, this was how it was done. Stick to the party line, keep quiet, support the state…and you keep your job and get assigned a small apartment. If you don’t, your kids suffer in school, your boss makes life difficult at work and don’t be surprised if your electricity doesn’t work. Take on the entire system, become a dissident or refusnik, and it’s off to Siberia. You’ll be lucky if you live. Knowledge is indeed power, and when those in power can use their knowledge of what you do outside of work to determine your professional fate, we have indeed stepped behind the Iron Curtain. This is simply chilling.” Brendan Eich and the New American Totalitarian State
“The intimidation factor will be huge with corporations, who don’t want to suffer through boycotts or corporate character assassinations; the path of least resistance will involve quietly checking the politics of high-profile hires, to make sure they haven’t voted or spoken in a way that might touch off the mob. Those who seek such high-profile positions will understand that their political credentials must be kept in good order; the exercise of free speech, or providing financial support to certain issues, will be judged far more trouble than it’s worth. That’s how fascism works, and while you might be chilled to the bone by reading the previous paragraph, rest assured that Eich’s tormentors are delighted – it describes precisely the environment they wished to create.” More on donor lists and the Mozilla oppression
“The very same people who have declared, “I yam what I yam”, and “we’re here, we’re queer; get used to it,” and who fought against discrimination on the basis of physical or emotional natures are proving themselves empty of magnanimity in victory. They are now saying “don’t be who you are,” and “you’re wrong, you’re gone; get used to it.” They’re applauding employment discrimination on the basis of an intellectual or spiritual philosophy. What are they, anyway, philosophobes? Are they so terrified of any outlook which does not conform to theirs? I always thought a well-founded argument could withstand a little principled opposition. Apparently not. Let’s think about this, for a second. Barack Obama only “evolved” on the issue of gay marriage when his re-election team deemed it necessary. Hillary Clinton came along even later, once the issue was clearly showing up in the “win” column. They blow with the wind, stand for nothing, but they’re given a pass.” A Gay CEO with Balls Needs to Hire Eich and Halt this Crap
“When you consider how Mozilla co-founder Brendan Eich was drummed out as the company’s CEO, the consequences of holding politically incorrect views about gay marriage are becoming clearer. The message is simple: We won’t just drum you out of polite society — we’ll take your job, too! Such messages aren’t intended solely for one person, of course. The larger purpose is to create a chilling effect — to disincentive your future opponents from participating in politics, altogether. (If you wonder why conservatives are suddenly fighting to ensure some political donations — the so-called “dark money” — remain undisclosed, fear of retribution is at the top of the list.)” Mozilla’s CEO sacking will have a chilling effect on political discourse
“As for Intel, there are four ways the Eich-purgers can play it. One: Boycott the company. Won’t happen, though — Intel’s too important and it might be judged unfair to punish the entire institution for the views of a few dozen employees. Two: Ignore it on “mission accomplished” grounds. The point in banishing Eich was to warn other social conservatives in the industry to stay in line. You can do that by diligently hounding dozens of middle managers at Intel or you can do it by scalping one big-name guy with lots of press coverage. The latter’s more efficient and the message will be received just as loudly and clearly by interested parties. No need to scalp anyone else, for now. Three: Identify the highest-ranking Prop 8 supporter at each company named by Silver and purge him/her. What kind of witch hunt only ends up burning one witch, after all? There may be no Prop 8 fan at Intel quite as prominent as Eich but someone necessarily qualifies as the biggest fish in that particular pond. Throw out a line! Four: Suspend the purges in favor of a “no major promotion” policy instead. Like I said earlier, that’s really what the Eich case is about. His donation’s been a matter of public record for five years but only after he became the face of Mozilla by being named CEO was it deemed an unforgivable trespass. Prop 8 fans can continue to work in tech as long as they aren’t given positions of significant influence. That’s when the hammer comes down.” Uh oh: 60% of Intel employees who donated in Prop 8 debate supported banning gay marriage
Throw them all out. “And while the Supreme Court just struck down limits on campaign contributions to federal candidates, the new Reason-Rupe poll finds Americans are actually more concerned about how elected officials misuse their power and taxpayer money once they’re in office than they are worried about campaign contributions.” Americans Say 75 Percent of Politicians Are Corrupted, 70 Percent Use Political Power to Hurt Enemies
“David Stockman tells it like it is. In his interview and from his articles posted on his website, “Contra Corner”, Mr. Stockman gives the cold hard and politically incorrect version of what the Federal Reserve is up to in all its misdirected glory and auto-assumed powers. ‘The Fed runs everything; it has pegged, manipulated, medicated and manhandled the entire financial system. There is not an honest interest rate left…..A Regime of crony capitalism, for both sides… using the tools of the State the budget and the central bank…to accomplish ends that would not be remotely feasible, reasonable or likely in a free market.” So says Mr. Stockman. “The Federal Reserve has taken over and runs the GDP.’” The Mendacity of the Fed and the Ruination of Capitalism
Freedom of Speech
“For liberals, democracy has somehow become dependent on the enforcement of a complex labyrinth of laws first enacted in the wake of the Watergate scandal that have created a bewildering legal landscape for all those who wish to take part in our electoral system. Each new piece of legislation intended to further the principle of good government has created new inequities and anomalies that have further distorted this system to the point where no one but a lawyer who specializes in the field can truly know whether a candidate or campaign has violated them–and even then there is no guarantee that an arbitrary federal prosecution may not ensue. The campaign-finance movement is aimed not so much at the threat from corruption as it is to grant government enormous power over the electoral process. But if the framers of the First Amendment meant anything when they forbade “abridging the freedom of speech,” surely it was to prevent the government from trying to limit political expression.” Anger at SCOTUS? Liberals v. Constitution
“At the root of the Left’s opposition to McCutcheon, and Citizens United before it, is that it reduces governmental control over the political process. That control is taken, ipso facto, to be a good thing. If the First Amendment gets in the way, so much the worse for the First Amendment. Remember: The position of the Obama administration in oral arguments over Citizens United was that the government could ban books printed by corporations. Nancy Pelosi, the House minority leader, has proposed amending the First Amendment to give the government more latitude to limit political expression. In his decision, Roberts writes “that the First Amendment ‘is designed and intended to remove governmental restraints from the arena of public discussion, putting the decision as to what views should be voiced largely into the hands of each of us.’” For those lamenting the decision, that is precisely the problem.” The Nuisance First Amendment: For the Left, free speech does not apply to campaign finance.
“A writer for the website Gawker recently penned a self-described “rant” on the pressing need to arrest, charge, and imprison people who “deny” global warming. In fairness, Adam Weinstein doesn’t want mass arrests. (Besides, in a country where only 44 percent of Americans say there is “solid evidence” of global warming and it’s mostly due to human activity, you can’t round up every dissenter.) Fact-checking scientists are spared. So is “the man on the street who thinks Rush Limbaugh is right. . . . You all know that man. That man is an idiot. He is too stupid to do anything other than choke the earth’s atmosphere a little more with his Mr. Pibb burps and his F-150’s gassy exhaust.” But Weinstein’s magnanimity ends there. Someone must pay. Weinstein suggests the government simply try the troublemakers and spokespeople. You know, the usual suspects. People like Limbaugh himself as well as ringleaders of political organizations and businesses that refuse to toe the line. ‘Those malcontents must be punished and stopped.’” Climate Activists Uncaged: Gawker’s Adam Weinstein suggests arresting those on the “wrong side” of the climate-change debate.
“The Leland Yee story is one of the most remarkable in years. A California State Senator, Yee has long been a leading spokesman for gun control–it’s all for the children, you know. A popular politician who represents around one-half of San Francisco, Yee was about to run for Secretary of State when he was arrested for gun running. Specifically, he acted as an intermediary to buy shoulder-fired missiles and automatic weapons from a Muslim terrorist group in the Philippines and import them into the U.S. There were other charges, too; the usual bribery, money laundering, and so on. Now, one might think that this is a major scandal. A prominent politician, a principled advocate of gun control, turns out to be a gun runner who wants to import shoulder-fired missiles, in exchange for a large bribe. How could the networks resist a story like that?! Poor CNN has been limping along with a lousy lane closure for what, two or three years now? A dynamite story like Yee’s could put them back on the ratings map! Oh, one thing I forgot to mention–Leland Yee is a Democrat. So no national news organization has any interest in his story. Sorry. It’s on the back pages of the local papers. This is more proof, if it were needed, that the Democratic Party’s news media are not primarily interested in ratings or profits, but in advancing the party’s narrative.” The Leland Yee Story, As a Free Press Would Tell It
“Maybe Jimmy Fallon really does want to follow Jay Leno’s tradition of full-political-spectrum comedy. Earlier this week, Fallon ripped Barack Obama for his victory lap on ObamaCare, and last night he invited Sarah Palin to join him in this four-minute mockfest of Obama’s foreign-policy acumen. Palin is a good sport here, joking about the unusual names of her children at one point, but the subtext throughout this is that Palin was smart enough to see through Vladimir Putin — and Obama wasn’t. Watch for a cameo from “Obama” near the end (via Katie Pavlich).” Video: Fallon pokes fun at Obama with … Sarah Palin?
Money in Politics
“So who exactly is behind that “big money”? Bunch of rich Republicans and the Koch brothers, right? Nope. Of the 20 largest current overall political donors, the majority favor Democrats, and favor them strongly: 62 percent of the biggest donors’s money goes to Democrats. They are, in descending order: a couple of hedge-fund guys who give 100 percent of their donations (more than $11 million) to Democrats, people associated with the city government of New York (84 percent to Democrats), the Democratic Governors Association, the National Education Association (89 percent to Democrats) the Carpenters and Joiners Union (79 percent to Democrats), the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal employees (100 percent to Democrats), the AFL-CIO (81 percent to Democrats), and—our first GOP-leaning group comes in at No. 8—the National Association of Realtors (53 percent to Republicans), the electrical workers unions (97 percent to Democrats), AT&T (62 percent to Republicans), Lockheed Martin (61 percent to Republicans — you’ll notice a trend in the pro-GOP groups), Comcast (58 percent to Democrats), the engineers union (79 percent to Democrats), Northrop (57 percent to Republicans), the American Association for Justice (i.e., lawyers, 96 percent to Democrats), Honeywell (58 percent to Republicans), Boeing (57 percent to Republicans), Votesane PAC (70 percent to Republicans), Every Republican Is Crucial PAC (100 percent to Republicans), and the laborers’ union (90 percent to Democrats).” Big-Money Donors Do Not Favor Republicans
“Ironically, much of this makes Koch’s point for him. Why is it necessary for writers on the left to pretend Koch said something he didn’t? Because his actual argument is pretty unobjectionable. There seems to be this idea that the wealthy ought to be piñatas–silent as the staggering masses beat the stuffing out of them. Koch didn’t claim he’s deserving of anyone’s pity. But as a businessman whose reputation is being subject to repeated dishonest attacks by prominent politicians, it would be ridiculous for him–and irresponsible to his shareholders–not to defend himself in the public sphere.” Left Is Outraged Charles Koch Would Defend Himself
“As I say, put aside the argument, step back and view the thing at a distance. Support it or not, you cannot look at ObamaCare and call it anything but a huge, historic mess. It is also utterly unique in the annals of American lawmaking and government administration. Its biggest proponent in Congress, the Democratic speaker of the House, literally said—blithely, mindlessly, but in a way forthcomingly—that we have to pass the bill to find out what’s in it. It is a cliché to note this. But really, Nancy Pelosi‘s statement was a historic admission that she was fighting hard for something she herself didn’t understand, but she had every confidence regulators and bureaucratic interpreters would tell her in time what she’d done. This is how we make laws now.” Noonan: A Catastrophe Like No Other: The president tries to put a good face on ObamaCare.
“You see, Obamacare is unlike anything this country has ever experienced before; I think we’re all still struggling to comprehend it. It is a massive piece of legislation passed by the Democrats alone during the blessed progressive utopia when the Democrats controlled the presidency, House, and Senate for all of two years. And this wholly-owned-by-Democrats legislation was an arrogant, massive overreach of government power — with a seventh of the economy being taken over by people so incompetent with money that they probably couldn’t run a lemonade stand without posting millions in losses.” That’s No Moon: That’s Obamacare! Elect Democrats, or witness the firepower of this fully armed and operational health care legislation!
“Earlier this week President Obama announced 7.1 million Americans had “enrolled” (whatever the heck that means at this point) in Obamacare. He made the announcement in the Rose Garden at the White House complete with a roaring crowd. But apparently, a Rose Garden announcement wasn’t what Obama really wanted. Instead, he asked the networks to put aside a primetime spot on Tuesday so he could announce the White House hit their enrollment goal number, the same goal the White House denied ever having. His request was denied….by everyone. Oof. Buzzfeed has the scoop.” Embarrassing: Obama Asked Networks For Primetime Slot to Announce 7.1 Obamacare Enrollees, Was Rejected
“But liberals who consistently deny the existence of voter fraud — even absentee-ballot fraud — help contribute to a climate in which such offenses against democracy are too often excused or ignored. “Voter fraud harms people in the Democratic coalition more than most,” says former Democratic congressman Artur Davis of Alabama, “I have seen up close how Democratic primaries have been stolen in Alabama by corrupt machines that then deliver bad services and poor schools and rob people of their future.” Davis, who is now a Republican, says measures to prevent voter fraud shouldn’t be controversial. ‘There is a reason that polls consistently show over 60 percent of African-Americans and Hispanics support voter ID,” he told me. “They realize voter fraud isn’t a myth, and saying it is doesn’t make it so.’” Dems’ Voter-Fraud Denial: How do you address a problem they insist doesn’t exist?