enron, andersen and bush

[Wulfere]

bash bash bash bash bash bash bash bash bash.....ad nausium.

[John D Harris]

Lets see if I got this straight!
Enron gives LEGAL campaign donations to a legal campaign (both dems., & reps.) Enron calls the legaly elected government for help with a problem of their own causing. The government says sorry this is a captialist society It's not the business of government to bail you out of a mess that your incompetince got you in! The only thing we will do is try to get the money back that the TAXPAYERS of this country used to back one of your ventures (the power plant in India).

[fable]

quote:

---

Originally posted by MagiK:
From the news I read today, apparently ENRON had far more influance with Ex-President Clinton than they ever had with our Current Commander in Chief...

---

"Somewhat evenhanded," is the way the Washington Post, which was anti-Clinton during his heyday, puts it, regarding the company's lobbying efforts. They also say that Chairman Kenneth Lay disliked Clinton intensely. The Center for Responsive Politics reports that 73% of the company's donations went to Republicans over the last 12 years, but they did support such Democrats as Senate Energy Committee Chairman Jeff Bingaman, whose state, New Hampshire, is crossed by a major east-west Enron gas pipeline.

Elsewhere, on Radio Nederland, I just heard that Ley personally gave more than $6 million to the Bush 2000 campaign, making him its largest single donor. And while Enron itself split its donations, no Clinton team members worked for Enron: no less than 12 high-ranking Bush administration members either had high positions of authority working for Enron previously, or are currently heavy stockholders.

That's certainly no grounds for culpability on Bush's part, IMO. But it does open him to the charge of unfair influence by the energy industry, which has dogged him, with reason, since last summer, when he refused to act on California's behalf in securing assistance against corporate energy monopolies that were squeezing the state and its inhabitants.

And it leaves one to question the balance of the Bush administration, whose view of commerce appears tilted entirely on the side of large corporate business.

[ 01-24-2002: Message edited by: fable ]

[KHaN]

Did Bush know about the Enron collapse BEFORE the end of last year... but of course! Lay is...err..was one of his best friends. Lemme see, they never EVER talked shop when gabbin on the phone? Plz. Before you Gopers list all your silly reasons why I'm wrong...if you wanna know who got what check this site out;

http://www.opensecrets.org

It's a whose who of pols (D & R) with their hand in the cookie jar. The irony here folks is that the people that will judge Enrons fate are the very same people on its payroll (so to speak).

quote:

---

Originally posted by fable:


"Somewhat evenhanded," is the way the Washington Post, which was anti-Clinton during his heyday, puts it, regarding the company's lobbying efforts.
]

---

Yo dude I live in the Washington area..I don't know where you find any indication that the Washington Post was anti-clinton...The washington post is acknowledged as one of the more democratic liberall biased paper in the entire mid-atlantic region.. Washington Post = Democratic Liberal slated columns
Washington TIMES however = Rightwing conspiracy theory slanted columns.

The post was very much pro-clinton for all 8 years and continually ignored any attempt at an "even handed" reporting style. I know cause I was here....well from 94 on I was here.

Explain to me why Clinton PERSONALLY backed ENRON and its INDIA projects when commercial creditors wouldnt fund them, and why he always seemed to have ENRON Execs on his overseas junkets. Ive read the rhetoric from both sides, and I know that both sides are dirty in this whole thing, but I also know that any assertion about Bush knowing about or facilitating the ENRON Collapse is at this point BS, because there are so far no documents available to prove it..so it is all speculation He Knows Lay so he knows every thing about themmm You know I have a friend I knew for 25 years and never knew he was gay.....could it be that you can know someone and not know EVERYTHING? Could be.

[KHaN]

quote:

---

Originally posted by MagiK:


Yo dude I live in the Washington area..I don't know where you find any indication that the Washington Post was anti-clinton...The washington post is acknowledged as one of the more democratic liberall biased paper in the entire mid-atlantic region.. Washington Post = Democratic Liberal slated columns
Washington TIMES however = Rightwing conspiracy theory slanted columns.

The post was very much pro-clinton for all 8 years and continually ignored any attempt at an "even handed" reporting style. I know cause I was here....well from 94 on I was here.

Explain to me why Clinton PERSONALLY backed ENRON and its INDIA projects when commercial creditors wouldnt fund them, and why he always seemed to have ENRON Execs on his overseas junkets. Ive read the rhetoric from both sides, and I know that both sides are dirty in this whole thing, but I also know that any assertion about Bush knowing about or facilitating the ENRON Collapse is at this point BS, because there are so far no documents available to prove it..so it is all speculation He Knows Lay so he knows every thing about themmm You know I have a friend I knew for 25 years and never knew he was gay.....could it be that you can know someone and not know EVERYTHING? Could be.

---

Hmmm...I think there might be a difference in the analogy of your friend being gay and Bushy knowing about Lays dirty lawndry. Bush and Lay were in the same business together and working in the same town as well (Houston). You are exactly right this Enron stuff goes back to the Clinton years if not further (we might never know since they took it on themselves to shred documents) and for your answer, I'm sure it was considered a "political favor" i.e Clinton owed Enron a favor for large amounts of campain money.

quote:

---

Originally posted by norompanlasolas:


well, i dont think i have to be involved in anything to comment about it. if that was the case, discussions would indeed be very rare. and i critisice us conservative politicians because if i started trashing spanish conservative politicians here that would be a very lonely argument since nobody knows anything about them.

besides, i do that in rl (and not only talk)... the advantage of a forum is that you dont feel the canes of the riot police on your back... well, at least not so often, as it seems.

oh, and thank you, but i have absolutely no interest in running for office neither here nor in the us. [img]smile.gif[/img]

---

Im sorry I worded my second comment poorly, I really only wanted to point out that I have noticed you consistantly take some moral high ground when it comes to bashing the USA (on other threads) and pay little or no attention to things closer to spain..Im sure if you look you can find many shortcomings in the local area. It is irritating when you see someone claiming another country as his location, bashing your own country when there are quite enough issues of a local nature to be addressed....Personally, I think Americans (not all of us) have the image of the "snooty French" I think you are making a wonderful case to have spain replace France. I know that doesnt matter to you. Anyway...pick and gripe all you want, every day as more info comes out there is less and less pointing to Bush being the bad guy so it really doesnt matter.

quote:

---

Originally posted by norompanlasolas:


i do that in rl (and not only talk)... the advantage of a forum is that you dont feel the canes of the riot police on your back... well, at least not so often, as it seems.

---

You know there are ways to effect change without getting beaten by riot police ...even in Spain. We had a discussion threead a while ago wherein someone ranted at his poor treatment when he tried to get word out about his "cause" Upon further discussion we found that he irritated people by being pushy and inconsiderate of peoples own right not to talk to him. (thats a very breif description and not completely accurate but close) So if you are suffering beatings when trying to effect change in your local system..try a different tack...think before you act to make sure you will actually accomplish something other than getting beaten.

Rioting is not the answer nor is poor behavior, public insurection, vandalism or anyother action that causes mroe harm than good. Sometimes a little revolution is good but not all the time.

[ 01-25-2002: Message edited by: MagiK ]

[norompanlasolas]

quote:

---

Originally posted by MagiK:
Im sorry I worded my second comment poorly, I really only wanted to point out that I have noticed you consistantly take some moral high ground when it comes to bashing the USA (on other threads) and pay little or no attention to things closer to spain..Im sure if you look you can find many shortcomings in the local area. It is irritating when you see someone claiming another country as his location, bashing your own country when there are quite enough issues of a local nature to be addressed....Personally, I think Americans (not all of us) have the image of the "snooty French" I think you are making a wonderful case to have spain replace France. I know that doesnt matter to you. Anyway...pick and gripe all you want, every day as more info comes out there is less and less pointing to Bush being the bad guy so it really doesnt matter.

---

well, if i took some moral high ground, i didnt notice it and i certainly didnt do it on purpose. i was just voicing my opinion. i do pay attention to the things happening here in spain, but i find it a little inconsistent to discuss them in this forum since nobody would understand (or care) about them.

sadly the us is pretty much grabbing all the headlines when it comes to political and ideological discussion right now. so its unavoidable that it becomes the center of discussion. personally, i think the world bank and the imf are more interesting cases of argumentation of domination of the poor nations via capitalism, but thats another story, isnt it?

oh, and i dont think im snotty, i just happen to be right about everything... ok, that was a joke magik [img]smile.gif[/img] [img]tongue.gif[/img]

[norompanlasolas]

quote:

---

Originally posted by MagiK:
You know there are ways to effect change without getting beaten by riot police ...even in Spain. We had a discussion threead a while ago wherein someone ranted at his poor treatment when he tried to get word out about his "cause" Upon further discussion we found that he irritated people by being pushy and inconsiderate of peoples own right not to talk to him. (thats a very breif description and not completely accurate but close) So if you are suffering beatings when trying to effect change in your local system..try a different tack...think before you act to make sure you will actually accomplish something other than getting beaten.

Rioting is not the answer nor is poor behavior, public insurection, vandalism or anyother action that causes mroe harm than good. Sometimes a little revolution is good but not all the time.
[ 01-25-2002: Message edited by: MagiK ]

---

well, i disagree with you. the system has a way of neutralising all that could change its current status. and police repression is one of them. and im not suffering beatings alone fighting for a personal cause. its a movement with a lot of people involved in many different countries (even your own, i might add). thinking is of course at the basis of everything, and many a different philosopher is at the core of what we try to promote. sometimes rioting and insurrection is all that is left to try to change the system.

this reminds me, pierre bourdieu died yesterday. a symbol of the commitment for the cause against neoliberalism and one of the great thinkers of contemporary society. descansa en paz compañero.