Replies

Two days ago I would have completely agreed with you, and still do to an extent: the Dems/Media don't know which story they want to tell---that Bush "did something inappropriate" (which was the original spin) or the Waxman spin that Bush "did nothing." The latter, of course, is true, but the problem is the media already cut the legs out from under any populist appeal that might have had (you know---the "poor employees who lost their pensions" and "the poor helpless stockholders").

HOWEVER, there is a REAL DANGER here, and that is the Return of the McCainiacs. That's right, "campaign finance reform" is already being touted again by Capt. Queeg, and if the media latches onto this it diminishes concerns that "the Dems did it too." So far, the media boobs don't appear to have glommed onto this approach, but it's only a matter of time. That is why it was important for Bush to move fast and decisively to fix the problems at the pension/stock ends of this. But even then it may not be enough.

"HOWEVER, there is a REAL DANGER here, and that is the Return of the McCainiacs. That's right, "campaign finance reform" is already being touted again by Capt. Queeg..."

I'm not so sure. Although you make an excellent point and draw a quite logical conclusion, McCain has one little-bitty problem:

There's no "there" there.

It's already well-known that there was no quid pro quo here; the White House didn't jump to Enron's salvation even after repeated (around 8 or so) phone calls from Mr. Lay. They refused to dance.

No, McCain will (once again) fall flat on his face if he tries to make hay out of this one..................