Summary: Another closer look at the issue of Microsoft intersection with US politics
Microsoft is already close to the Democratic Party [1, 2, 3]. It smoothly realigned itself after the parties had swapped positions*. Some days ago we saw Obama putting a FOSS-hostile person from Microsoft inside the Technology Advisory Panel and now we are seeing this:
Does experience at Microsoft make for a good politician?
State Rep. Ross Hunter, a former Microsoft general manager, announced today that he’s running for King County Executive, competing against four other candidates for the position. He’s one of many former Microsofties now in the political arena — and he’s pointing to his experience at the Redmond company as a major selling point
We’ve already covered what some people call the "Microsoft religion" and others call the Microsoft "political movement". It’s a huge subject that we’ve explored in many dozens of posts already and to give just example, Bill Gates’ father, who has connections with the BSA, is doing quite a lot politically. Last month we saw the BSA lobbying the government to put corporations in charge of security. Coincidentally, around the very same time, a Microsoft employee was put in change somewhere at the DHS (Department of Homeland Security).
There are other examples of Microsoft people in the US government. And this is why — as the title already stated — the United States is likely to be last to migrate to Free software. █
* Not as a matter of rule, to the best of my understanding, the United States virtually relies on one big party (the business party) which comprises two separate factions (blue and red, just like the flag). The party rallies the two sides at the same time and funds them handsomely to take turns and run PR campaigns with prospective leaders serving as icons, brands/slogans, or even mere symbols, whose role more of less resembles that of the Queen of England. A lot of the impact comes from behind the leadership, so while the two sides do take turn (illusion of choice), votes never receive a real opportunity to elect decision-makers. Information as seen on TV (also owned by big business) assures that a barrier is installed before those who challenge the status quo of this unbalanced system.