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.
A: Bush refused to re-regulate electricity in California for 6 months.
B: Enron raked in $70,000,000,000 during that time.
C: After allowing Enron to gouge California, Bush finally re-regulated electricity, and then prices fell.
The next test for Bush? clinton's minions protected Swartz to the degree possible...let's see if W. tries to protect Lay. I think he'll pass.
Citicorp will take a huge loss from this. It's almost as if the dems and GOP are doing battle at the donor level.
Basically, I agree with your analysis. But I'm not sure how many "little people" were hurt by Enron's bankruptcy. It's certainly horrifying that those who were heavily vested in their pension funds, etc. lost quite a bit of money, while the top executives saved their own skins.
I haven't noticed the public at large being all that angry, but I think they could be...but I think Congress is too involved in the situation to run a decent hearing on the matter.
Agreed W4T.
P.S. - Will freepmail that catch-up soon - ; *)
Common Tator is so on the mark with his assessment and the recent poll by Fox et al confirms that. The Dems are seen as trying to obstruct the economy recovering from its' fits, while GW is seen as working on trying to assist the economy in doing better.
The near orgasmic fervor that some Dems have over Enron will really, really hurt them. Months and months of hearings and all while a war is going on. We can only hope that the Dems continue to do what they are doing. 2002 could be a better than expected election year for Repubs...
Enron, Ron Brown and Indonesia
Also, FYI--
enron:
| To find all articles tagged or indexed using Enron_List, click below: | ||||
| click here >>> | Enron_List | <<< click here | ||
| (To view all FR Bump Lists, click here) | ||||
Another example is the GOP "shutdown" of the government (which we know was at least as much Clinton's fault, but the press reported it as GOP fault ad nauseum). The ones "held responsible" for obstructing progress on issues important to the electorate get slammed. It's the old "Lead, Follow, or Get Out of The Damn Way" syndrome.
No it is not my work. It is my play. I run a software company for work. But for 35 years I was a broadcasting company owner and newscaster on Radio and a little TV.
Anyone who prepared and delivered 4 newscasts a day for 35 years has a lot of 'old news' stored in his brain. I do have a great memory. I can even remember things that never happened.
If everyone hurt by Enron voted they could not elect a governor or defeat one for that matter.
The Enron thing is no bigger than the Teapot Dome, the Vicuna Coat, LBJ's Radio and TV Stations, Iran Contra, Monica, or White Water. None of those defeated or elected anyone.
The third of the population that always votes for Democrats will still vote for Democrats. The third of the population that always votes for Republicans will still vote for Republicans.
If you do a survey of the remaining group of voters on the question of "Who or What is Enron?", the most common answer will be "One of those Rap Groups that hate cops". The number two answer would be, "A big oil company that finally got what was comming to it." And the third most common answer would be "Didn't he used to date Madonna?"
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.