You might end up voting for the other guy . . .

I had to laugh, then cry at the hypocrisy of Mr. Ten Haken, Social Media expert(?) and Click Rain president (Web and media services for countless GOP candidates and PACs);

Ten Haken said he is no stranger to a good political debate on his Facebook and Twitter, but airing out your political feelings online can be a social media ‘don’t’ because it can come back to haunt you.  Rants and fights online can not only wreck personal relationships, but even put your job in jeopardy.

Why? I have never understood this line of crap. Last I checked I live in a Democracy and am protected by the 1st Amendment. My boss may have the right to ‘suggest‘ how I should register to vote, and who to vote for, but it is none of his/hers business my political affiliation. In fact, I would be a bit insulted that my boss would even make it an issue, and it actually borders on discrimination. I have never been fired for my political views, and have actually been defended by past and current managers for my stances. One even said to me, “I appreciate it that you stick up for what you believe in, even though I may not agree with you.”

Sorry Paul, but being involved and vocal about the process is EXACTLY what the public needs to start doing, especially new registered voters.

“It’s just safe to kind of walk the middle of the road and if you’re going to post about politics.  There’s nothing wrong with engaging in politics, but just not in such a polarizing way,” Ten Haken said.

Mr. Ten Haken, Mr. Middle-of-the-Road himself. LOL! This is the same guy who helps out people like Gant and the Rushmore PAC. He even assisted Pat Powers to play ‘musical servers‘ with his website(s) domains. Mr. Ten Haken is no stranger to being ‘POLARIZING’ he just hopes you are not, because you might find out about him . . . birds of a feather.


18 Thoughts on “Prominent Republicans in SD don’t want you to get involved and informed

  1. Moral of the story, don’t post your political beliefs on Facebook unless you are republican.

  2. The 1st Amendment is protection from the government not protection from your employer. Until political views are added to the “discrimination” list by statute your employer will be able to fire you for them, if that is you live in a right to work State like SD anyway. Moral of the story: be careful what you put on facebook if you want to keep your job.

  3. Testor15 on September 22, 2012 at 1:32 pm said:

    I worked at a large cc operation in this town many years ago and was constantly bombarded by the New York bosses to vote for the dirtbag Texas republikans who eventually stole the election. We were discouraged from discussing politics unless it enhanced the dirtbag party candidates of their choice.

  4. Years ago at Austad’s, the old man put out a memo telling people not to vote for Janklow.

  5. Doesn’t this guy now host the SDWC? Not to mention Noem, Thune, SD GOP and several GOP websites?

    I wonder who controls the blog that only puts out GOP press releases these days? Must be the SD GOP or this brain surgeon.

  6. Barry – You are correct, this is a right to work state, and your boss can fire you for any reason, in fact he/she doesn’t need a reason. But guess what, that is a two way street. In fact, the last two jobs I quit I didn’t give a notice. Why? Because I didn’t have to. When it comes to FB, I totally understand if you are participating in illegal activity or threatening people. But if you are simply stating your political views, and someone fires you over that, I would guess you would have a pretty good lawsuit on your hands, granted, your boss would have to say to you, “I am firing you because of your liberal views I read on FB.” But Like I said above, poppycock. My current employers and past employers have never given me ANY grief about DaCola. Why? Because they valued me as an employee and actually liked that I knew something about politics. Paul likes to spread his hypocrisy to implement fear in the worker bees. Don’t state your opinion, or you will be fired.

  7. I agree with you on the point that a persons skills as an employee are what is the important thing to any employer concerned with their bottom line. It would be interesting however to know if there ever has been a successful anti- discrimination lawsuit in SD for anything other than employment discrimination on the basis of age, race, color, creed, religion, sex, ancestry, disability, or national origin. I’d say it would be a pretty tough go for a lawyer.
    The point about right to work being a two way street is a good one that many employers do not understand in that they require a 2 week notice upon quitting, which is something that no one is obligated to do in SD; By law you can just walk off your job for any reason you want.( as long as no ones life is endangered)
    Bottom line I suppose is it all depends on a persons circumstances at work as to how much care they should take when going public with their views. An employer who believes that an employee’s views shine a bad light on their business has the right to fire that person. At least this is my understanding of the law maybe someone can enlighten me differently.

  8. “An employer who believes that an employee’s views shine a bad light on their business has the right to fire that person.”

    I would agree with you on that, but simply having an ‘opinion’ about politics that is not inline with your employer is no grounds to fire you. If I ever owned a business, I would want my employees differing opinions as much as possible, it would make me a better business owner.

  9. “but simply having an ‘opinion’ about politics that is not inline with your employer is no grounds to fire you”

    I believe the same as you on this issue, I just don’t believe there is anything in the law that supports the above statement.

  10. Quick plug for getting involved and finding out about where people stand. The District 6 debates will be held Monday, September 24, 2012 at Lennox High School starting at 7:00 PM. It will involve both the House and the Senate candidates. Coffee and cookies will follow provided by the LEA.

  11. Mike – Are you going to live stream it, or at least record it for YouTube?

  12. Barry – You point out why the Republicans running this state for the past 34 years has accomplished this polarizing and paranoid society.

  13. The takeaway from the story is that employers (self included) don’t necessarily appreciate overly controversial bantor and talk that can create a rift in a company’s culture. Politics, religion, sports, etc. are certainly not taboo, but extreme left and right views can make an employer question the “fit” someone will be in a work environment that the employer has painstakingly built.

  14. Paul – thank you for your comment. But I disagree with you even more. True professionals know how to separate their personal lives (political, religious, and hobbies) from their jobs. I think employers already suck enough blood out of their employees without telling them ‘how they can think’ outside of work. As long as an employee isn’t engaging in illegal or dangerous activities outside of work, it is none of my employer’s business what I think politically, extreme or not. I had the co-founder of a SF arts non-profit try to get me fired from my job because I was critical of the organization in a letter to the editor, and my employer defended me, and said he didn’t give a rat’s ass what this person thought of me. Paul, all you are doing is spreading fear amongst people telling them they better play ‘reindeer games’ or else. It must really suck working for you.

  15. Testor15 on September 25, 2012 at 7:46 am said:

    Paul, as with all problems in a business, it is always the employer’s fault if people do not fit. Not the other way. The owner or management’s responsibility is setting the example in the workplace. You do not have the responsibility to control the after hours time.

    I have had several thousand employees over the years. I would never try to control their minds or habits outside of working hours. You win employees to your point of view by living and working the example. You do a good job honestly leading the group, your employees will carry the honesty to their homes and to the internet. You set an example of underhanded behavior, you set the example of being able to get away with it so your leadership style send the signal for them to do the same.

    If you control their lives outside of work, you set the tone of fear, suspicion and deceit, always looking over the shoulder mentality as they find ways to get even with you.

    I was taught many years ago, the eight hours spent at the job control the other sixteen hours. If you have to be concerned about their sixteen hours, you don’t have time to do a good job with their time ‘working’ the eight.

    I have learned through experience to totally disagree with the Right to Work laws. It has only allowed employers to abuse American citizens working for them.

  16. Testor – Thanks for chiming in. Paul sounds like a real ball and chain kind of employer.

  17. Testor15 on September 26, 2012 at 4:45 pm said:

    In South Dakota and other ‘Right to Work” states the employees are slave to whatever the management says. If you wish to express your rights, you as an employee will be reminded you have no rights in the workplace other than what is spelled out in Federal Law. These Federal Laws or Rules are usually the result of workers being abused, murdered or maimed on the job.

    The abuse when not controlled caused union to be formed as a reaction to bad management. The statements Paul has made are very similar to statements made 100 years ago to justify the abuse and controls put on laborers. I abhor the abuse, either mental or physical.

  18. Pingback: Maybe TenHaken needs to take his own advice when it comes to employees and social media — South DaCola

Post Navigation