Posted on 01/12/2002 4:59:48 PM PST by A Citizen Reporter
They can't pin this on Bush
By Mark Steyn
(Filed: 13/01/2002)
THE first time I gave any thought to Enron, the world's biggest energy trader, was during last summer's California blackouts, when the state had a go at blaming their woes on the company's chief executive, Ken Lay. "I would love," said Bill Lockyer, California's Attorney-General, "to personally escort Lay to an 8 x 10 cell that he could share with a tattooed dude who says, 'Hi, my name is Spike, honey.'"
Fortunately for Mr Lay, he lived not in California but in Texas, beyond the reach of Mr Lockyer's summary cell-share programme. And, as Enron itself has now short-circuited, in the largest bankruptcy in US history, Lockyer and his fellow Democrats have moved on. These days, they and their media chums are positively salivating at the prospect of using Enron to do to the Bush Administration what the State of California wanted Spike to do to Mr Lay. On Friday on CNN, in the corner of the screen where of late "AMERICA FIGHTS BACK" has been emblazoned, there loomed instead the dread suffix: "ENRONGATE". The New York Times has lapsed into its lethal passive voice: "Questions were being raised."
The only "question" really being "raised" is: How can we pin this on Bush? Short answer: You can't.
For those who want to turn a bona fide business scandal into a political one, Ken Lay is supposedly the unacceptable face of Bush capitalism - of a particular Texan energy-industry backslapping business culture. The argument is that Lay has been writing cheques to Dubya's political campaigns since he first ran for dogcatcher, and that in return he's been rewarded with "access". Thus the headline in Friday's Washington Post: "Enron Asked For Help From Cabinet Officials. CEO Sought Intervention Before Bankruptcy."
Hmm. I must fish out The Washington Post of November 23, 1963: "President Makes Visit To Dallas. JFK Well-Received By Most Texans." The real news in the story is not Lay's phone calls but the officials' response: when Dubya's buddy tried to call in his chits, the Bush guys were unmoved. The headline should have read: "Cabinet Officials Declined To Help Enron. CEO Told, 'Awfully Sorry To Hear About All These Problems, Ken. Look, I Gotta Run, But Let's Get Together And Do Lunch Sometime Next Year.' "
Meanwhile, the Attorney-General, John Ashcroft, has recused himself from the Justice Department investigation on the grounds that he too has been the beneficiary of Enron's largesse. At a stroke, Ashcroft sets the bar at a height the Democrats can't rise to. After all, in terms of their political investments, Enron had a widely diversified portfolio: 71 of America's 100 Senators got cheques from the company, among them half the Democratic caucus, including Ted Kennedy and Hillary Clinton. If Senators and Representatives are as punctilious about conflict of interest as the Attorney-General, there'll barely be enough of them to man the Congressional hearings.
In other words, if this is "another Whitewater", it's a bipartisan one: in Monica terms, it's as if, in between oral sex with the President, she was squeezing in bondage sessions with Newt Gingrich and rounding out the day lapdancing with Strom Thurmond.
In so far as anybody did "special favours" for Enron, it wasn't Bush but the Clinton Administration, which lavished over $4 billion in Federal funds on the company.
But Bush? Ken Lay must be utterly bewildered: he gives half a mil to his Texas buddy and what does he have to show for it? Nothing, except investigations by the Justice Department, Commerce Department, Securities and Exchange Commission and eight Congressional committees. Right now, 30 days with Spike would be a pretty good plea bargain.
Nobody says it better than Steyn....Bump
The press always thinks the things that get to them get to the Amercian people.
The American people react to office holders that do things that hurt them or fail to do things that will help them. The Clasic case was Herbert Hoover. Hoover came into office as the honest man with a big heart. He was the man who fed the starving Europeans after World War II. But when he refused to use government to try to fix the economy in the depression, he became an instantly hated man. He was decpicted as cruel and the cause of suffering. Poor people were said to be residents of Hoovervilles and Hoover and the Republicans became hated by more than half the voters.
When Warren Harding and his administration were caught with their hands in the Teapot Dome the country returned the Republicans of office in a landslide. The reasion is the Teapot dome had no consequences for the average voter. Hoover being seen as a man who was not trying to fix the economy, took a course of action that voters believed hurt them.
Thus a Bush Sr could be blamed for a weakening economy, but a Clinton could not be blamed for having sex in the oval office with an intern.
The weak economy of 1992 could and did hurt voters. Bill getting a blow job from Monica did not hurt voters.
That is the problem with scandals. To make them stick to a politican, it has to be shown that his behavior or actions hurt the public. It he is not hurting the public they don't care what he does.
Enron is a nothing going nowhere. It will hurt Bush far less than White Water hurt Clinton. The monica and white water events were not a big deal becuase they did not hurt people. But the attacks on Bush can hurt people because they are seen as being used to keep Bush's plan to fix the economy from being implemented. That hurts people.
Republicans could never figure out why their attacks on FDR never worked. Time magazine was the most influential voice in the media in the 30's. At that time it was a REPUBLICAN leaning publication. Much of the media was Republican and lots of attacks were made on FDR.
But FDR kept talking about fixing the economy. That created the images that the emphasis on attacking FDR was keeping FDR from fixing the economy. The public reacted to that by electing more democrats and reelecting FDR.
It boiled down THEN to the following. It boils down NOW to the following. Bush is percieved as trying to fix the enconomy. The Democrats are seen as trying to keep Bush from fixing the economy. That means the Democrats get the blame for the bad economy. Bush gets credit for trying to fix the economy.
The media will be totally surprised when Republican congressional candidates and Bush do better than the media expects. It is a repeat of the FDR syndrome. It is the best of all worlds. If the economy improves, Bush will get the credit. If the economy gets worse, the Demcorats will get the blame.
Er, no. Details?
Maybe this was what Lanny Davis was referring to when he said the dems better leave this one alone!!
Bush let them go bankrupt.
A fine cast of Enronians: Daschle, Gephardt, Lieberman, Schumer, Dorgin, Hollings, Kennedy, Toricelli, Graham, Conrad, Bayh, Bingaman, Breaux, Reid, Harkin, Hillary, plus weasel Jeffords and campaign finance reformer McCain.
Sheila Jackson Lee. (38K!)
And the lawyer-lobbyist Jack Quinn, late of the Clinton-Marc Rich quid pro Denise & dough; later of the Clinton counsel's office.
Democrats shouldn't play with guns--they've shot themselves in the foot.
Mark Steyn--deadly accurate; unfailingly funny.
I caution everyone to be very, very skeptical about media coverage of the Enron story. I've almost finished reading "Coloring the News" (McGowan), an excellent book that opened my eyes to the extent and reach of liberal media bias. To support their pet causes and belief systems, the Leftist media lie by comission. They lie by omission. They lie by doing shallow, sloppy fact-checking and almost no in-depth research. They lie by deliberately presenting the favored side of a story in the best possible light, while presenting the non-favored side as virtual monsters. They lie when they go over the top on a story -- like the purported black church burnings -- then fail to follow up just as vigorously, if at all, when the story turns out to be false. They lie when they protect one of their own who gets in trouble, such as the constant "the American people are tired of this" and "it's just about sex and doesn't rise to the level of impeachment" drumbeat we heard day after day and night after night from the media to help keep Clinton in office.
So be very, very careful in sifting through news about Enron -- especially the political aspect. The Dems and their media allies have been looking for any peg on which to muddy up President Bush. They will do their best to twist whatever they can into daggers at this administration's ability to function. Very unpatriotic and very dangerous considering the fact that we are in the early days of a very real war against militant Islamicists that's already cost over 4000 American lives.
What we as FReepers can do is to put pressure on all the Democrats who've taken Enron money over the years. How many of them did any quid pro quos for Enron?
B I N G O!! You are astute! This was madness trying to blame this on Bush; and their short memories over who is in control of the media is amazing; and they are totally blinded by losing power.
Rush always said these people were much more fun when they were out of power.
But, we must also remember who is in control of the dems: CLINTON
With Bill and Hill calling the shots (through their goon they had installed at the DNC), you can bet they will try to blame Bush for everything.
But the other thing the dems have forgotten is America is awake and this stuff just won't stick to an honest man.
Is this your work? Just wondering.
Thank Heavens for Free Republic where sanity reigns!!!!
1 Citigroup Inc $56,750
2 Northwest Airlines $44,150
3 Joseph E Seagram & Sons $38,000
4 US West Inc $32,500
5 HealthSouth Corp $29,300
6 Bear, Stearns & Co $24,500
7 Time Warner $23,500
8 Occidental Petroleum $22,500
9 Gallo Wine Distributors $22,000
9 Gateway 2000 $22,000
11 Bank of America $19,000
12 Verner, Liipfert et al $16,850
13 DreamWorks SKG $16,500
14 Morgan Stanley, Dean Witter & Co $14,500
15 Cassidy & Assoc $14,310
16 Invacare Corp $14,000
16 Prudential Insurance $14,000
18 Walt Disney Co $13,998
19 Loral Spacecom $13,500
20 Holland & Knight $13,499
So, one of Daschle's biggest contributors NWA, (who's wife just happens to work as a lobbyist for) gets a government bailout and it doesn't even warrant a blip on the screen, but Enron gets a "Hey, sorry about your business but we can't do anything", from Bush and it's Enrongate?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.