The Bushies Couldn't Be Bought: The True Reason Enron Collapsed So Quickly

Free Republic | January 14, 2000 | an amused spectator

[an amused spectator]

If anything, Kenneth Lay could be most faulted for not understanding that giving money to elect "the honest sheriff" was cutting his own throat. ;-)

[alisasny]

Another neglected point is that the bush and cheney clan are all wealthy already before entering the White House...unlike the grifters....

[OldFriend]

Somewhere along the line it will be shown that Greenspan had something to do with propping up Enron while Clinton was president. He has powerful friends in the banking world and had to know this was on the way.

[kassie]

Interesting points. The RATS have certainly changed their tune in recent days.

[RGSpincich]

Interesting points. The RATS have certainly changed their tune in recent days.

The media is still trying to cause trouble.

[WhiteGuy]

Interesting point,,,,

I think that there is far more to it that this.

Just how much would it take to convince A Big Six Firm to commit fraud?

Their fees were over 50 million,

so it was alot more than that.

No, this company was looted. In a big way.

watch the papers for the news that the federal government is stepping in to help those poor investors who lost it all....

Just like the looting of the S&L's back in the eighties...

Wasn't there a bush involved then too? or am I mistaken?

Still an interesting theory though, thanks

[Paraclete]

Let's not put our blinders on with this one folks!

If we really care about this country we need to see all this for what it is: greed is out of control!

Granted, the Clinton crowd was blatant about it. But the Repubs are just as culpable when it comes to being bought. The money in politics is out of control.

I don't want to see the problem solved at the expense of the Repubs, but it is a problem that must be addressed.

[an amused spectator]

Actually, my point is that Enron tooled along happily for 8 years under Clinton. It imploded in less than 1 year under Bush. The numbers don't lie.

We have to begin viewing, and rewriting, the articles put out by the Democrat media through this lens. Otherwise, we'll end up with a situation like 1995, where 'the Republicans shut down the government', a lie perpetrated by the Democrat media, and unchallenged by conservatives.

[Paraclete]

I agree with the need to not be painted unfairly. But we need to be careful that our "defense" robs us of the right perspective in this stuff.

The system sucks and I'm not going to accept it just because our guys are in contol.

[big bad easter bunny]

DEMron

[Jackie]

I agree. I posted the following on another thread this morning, but apparently the thread was pulled since it was a full WSJ article:

Quote from the Wall Street Journal: Rather, the ultimate lesson may turn out to be that Enron was able to play fast and loose in a financial boom and Cintonian moral climate....

Precisely! Dow Jones' performance saved Bubber. The Dow Jones was the ONLY reason why Bubber was able to fake it and remain in the White House for eight years. People (including Enron employees and the media) were getting filthy rich; they did not care HOW crooked and perverted and dishonest the liar (Bubber) was.

The Dow gained almost 8,000 points while Bubber "played" the country. He and Rubin propped up companies AND even countries, which actions have now culminated into a disaster with other disasters soon to follow.

The regulating agencies must have been bought off, as they ignored the day-to-day fraudulence being practiced in the Wall Street casinos

[texasbluebell]

Another neglected point is that the bush and cheney clan are all wealthy already before entering the White House...unlike the grifters....

Exactly what I've always believed. It's much better to vote for the wealthier of the candidates. I've noticed this for years. Then they're not trying to line their own pockets at our expense.

[an amused spectator]

LOL! Great talking point. ;-)

[an amused spectator]

What was the name of the WSJ article? Was it the editorial?

[Republic]

Quote from the Wall Street Journal: "Rather, the ultimate lesson may turn out to be that Enron was able to play fast and loose in a financial boom and Cintonian moral climate...."

Amazing...Methinks perhaps the title of FR's An Amused Spectator's thread here tells a story that carrys the real meat of the truth about the Enron debacle. And to read this short quote from the WSJ that you included in your post is really something. Ah truth emerges.

[Wild Irish Rogue]

I posted the other day,that logic would dictate that when Ken Lay got nothing from the Bush administration-he would have to reach out to Democrats. Presto-Robert Rubin appears-outed by the Bush Treasury Dept, he did not volunteer the contacts. Yesterday,on Fox News Sunday-Dingell was extremely evasive( a prerequisite for being a Dem) when Britt was grilling him, as to the last time he spoke to Ken Lay. What other Dems did he call and what did they do-I cannot believe that he would not reach out to Bill and Hillary. Did he call Daschle?? When will the frothing media get around to asking that.

[Jackie]

I can't recall the title. Ellie Bee posted it. I found my comments in cache and saved them when I realized the thread was gone.

[snakebitevoter]

Kenneth Lay (Texas Bidniss wizard): “Ten be five? How kin ten be five?”

Kenneth Lay’s new lawyer: “No, sir, it’s 10b5, sir, Rule 10b5. It’s a securities rule.”

Kenneth Lay (Texas Bidniss wizard): “Ten be five? Yew sayin me and my boys is goin to prison cuz we dint know dat ten be five?”

Kenneth Lay’s new lawyer: “Yes, sir, I’m afraid that’s correct, sir.”

My take: This Enron mess is just a sneaky way to get more Federal funds for Texas schools.

[Libertarianize the GOP]

Bump List