Matt Cutts and other tech donors launch CounterPAC

Yep, the difference now is that it's less predictable. In the past if you were a part of the existing power structure you could expect to be safe, even if the political landscape changed under your feet. For example, plenty of powerful white men held pro-segregationist views in the 60's and recanted in the 80's without getting blacklisted.

In constrast, those outside the power structure were not safe. Any views or actions from the past could be resurrected to get them fired or worse when the landscape changed. The beginning of the Hollywood blacklist, for example, was as much about getting rid of Russian Jews as it was about finding communists.

Now it seems that nobody is safe and our political landscape is changing more quickly than ever. That makes it more frightening to step out, especially for those of us like myself (white guys) who had previously been protected implicitly.

I can point to rap genius as a public example (and that wasn't even an honest mistake), but I've seen this happen myself and I've talked to a number of people who have admitted that Matt Cutts or someone on the search team personally intervened in their issue.

To clarify: I'm not saying anyone is taking action against people they don't like, I'm saying that it's very easy to not take action to help people you don't like.

And if Russia or China was participating to a significant degree in our internal politics, that would come out as a national security issue and should be dealt with in other ways.

I know that my position isn't popular, but the Federalist papers talked about this issue, and took the position that for every David Koch there is a Tom Steyer. Why not let them waste all of their money fighting each other? There are several recent examples illustrating that money doesn't buy elections. Maybe it's not a fact yet, but there's enough evidence behind it that I think it's a defensible position.

If this takes off, I think the end result will be less participation in the political process by average Americans, who fear retaliation down the road. Maybe it looks like a difficult balance to you, but I think I would always come down on the side of more speech rather than less.

I have to say that while I know it's difficult to find people qualified for such a job who don't have huge political ties, it's disappointing to see such heavily biased people be on a committee to make decisions like that.