ENRON'S BIPARTISAN WAYS

Do you have the slightest clue why Enron went broke?

Thank you for that response to "the_slayer" where he wrote "there is no question that this Enron fiasco could not have happened without the implicit consent of both Reps. and Dems." Say what? This is nonsense. Enron failed because he was a business failure not a political issue. He was a business failure quite possibly due to illegal activities and fraudulent accounting. Dragging political contributions, which are perfectly legal BTW, into this only clouds the real issues of blue collar crime, both at Enron and probably at Arthur Anderson.

If any influence was exerted on politicians and responded to favorably by politicians, it was Bill Clinton who did so, not Bush. Also to suggest that because Texans received more means something is nonsense. Any Senator or Congressman from in state is going to get more than an out of state senator. Thus, Gramm would naturally receive more than Schumer. CHeck out how much Liebermann gets from the insurance industry and drug companies, many based in Conn. A little common sense would help in some of these discussions.

Having said all that, the media is going to town with this one. They are over reaching again and I hope the public sees it for what it is. Fingers crossed.

In case anybody missed it, there's a full-scale, no-holds-barred air war going on right now. A massive one. Daisy-cutters, 2,000-pound bunker-busters -- you name it. Bombs are dropping faster than you can blink. Squadrons of B-52s -- AKA 'big ugly fat fellows' -- are prowling the heavens, pounding enemy positions, unleashing their fiery wrath, carpet bombing around-the-clock....the works.
What's that you say? Haven't heard of this? Thought the war was over, eh? Well Fuggedaboudit! Flick on the idiot box, kick up your feet, sit back and enjoy (Drum roll, please?) -- OPERATION ENRON!!! Yep, folks, it's Enron at dawn, Enron at noon, Enron at dusk. Enron 24/7. The media high command has declared an air war against the Bush administration; The White House, like the mountains of Tora Bora, has become ground zero for media strike bombardiers.
Kidding aside, never -- ever -- in my life have I seen anything quite like what we're witnessing right now.
Media bias is one thing. We've all seen it. We've all tasted it. Heaven knows we've all groused about it, perennially. Bernard Goldberg's bombshell has soared to near the top of the New York Times best-seller list, and for good reason.
But, Ladies and Gentlemen, what we're witnessing goes beyond simple 'bias' -- well beyond. This isn't bias, this is fraud. Wholesale fraud.
The media is perpetrating one of the greatest frauds ever: To wit, the fabrication of a pseudo-political "scandal" -- out of whole cloth.
This isn't "news" "reporting", this is orgy-making -- a veritable orgy of innuendo. It would take years to tally all the libel and slander, all the malicious rumor-mongering, all the baseless smears -- the torrent of lies, insults and calumnies spewed straight from the bowels of our "major media" these past two days -- alone.
Question: Why is the media doing this? That's simple: Because they can.
Any proof of administration wrongdoing? No, not the vaguest hint, not the slightest intimation of official wrongdoing nor impropriety -- and even the media jackals know it.
Any proof of malfeasance or criminal activity by anyone in the Bush White House? Nope. None has been shown, none has been presented. Nothing even remotely resembling an allegation, even. But heck, who needs proof, anyway? Washington craves a 'scandal', and Enron fills the bill nicely, thank you very much.
No proof of 'cover-up'? Then fabricate some! Of course, we all know Bush had nothing to do with the shredding* of documents, the massive cover-up by Enron's auditor. But oh, yummy, yummy -- how exquisitely delicious to find ominous buzz phrases like 'document-shredding', 'cover-up' and the name George W. Bush jammed together in the same sentence, eh? Who cares if they don't belong together? Who cares if Bush did absolutely nothing wrong? This is not about truth or fairness or facts or evidence: This is purely -- first and foremost -- about vengence. Avenging whom or what, you ask? Why, the media's darling golden-boy, William Jefferson Clinton, who eles?
But the haters have a major problem on their hands, and it's this: Signs are this phony "scandal" is headed in the opposite direction -- away from implicating current administration officials.
Indeed, think of how ludicrous this sounds: Democrats want to know -- not why there were -- but why there weren't any quid-pro-quo shenanigans. Why didn't you do any special favors on behalf of your big campaign contributor, Mr. President? Why didn't you bail out your rich oil buddy when he came beckoning and calling?
In other words, what the heck is the matter with you, Mr. President? Why, O why, didn't you do something wrong? Lotting the treasury to bailout fat-cats; seedy backroom deals, bribery, extortion -- that's what we do here in Washington! How dare you be so ethical, so squeaky clean, Mr. President?!?!
Bottom line: Democrats want to know why Enron's generous contributions didn't buy it any favors from this administration. How utterly UN-Clinton-esque can this President get, eh?
This is the first "scandal" in history in which no wrongdoing IS the scandal du jour. No special favors, no shenanigans, no quid-pro-quo -- now that's an outrage!
The Attorney General recusing himself? What?! This earthshaking! Explosive! How scandalous!
Why the AG recusing himself to avoid tainting the probe should be seen as "scandalous"? You go figure.
But that's the nub of the problem with Enron as political "news": Its string of farcical flaws and fallacies.
It's why "Enron" will soon be running on fumes -- politically worthless, just like the company's stock. Absent some 'hook' -- proof of government cover-up, official malfeasance, etc. -- "Enron" inexorably reverts to its rightful place in the business page of the newspaper.
Already people are asking: Where's the beef?
*Ironies of ironies: The wholesale document destruction by Enron's auditor, Arthur Andersen LLP, raises an interesting dilemma, particularly in light of the close ties between Ken Lay and the previous administration. Clinton was known to personally intervene on Enron's behalf on a number of occasions. Generous campaign donations would follow. The documents destroyed may have revealed a nexus.
My intrepid prediction: Enron will backfire on Democrats. Americans will see them as grossly over-reaching -- the "hearings" as sheer vindicativeness, an unwelcomed extention of Campaign 2000. Their vicious and spiteful crusade will be seen as bloodsport -- a thinly veiled, all-out effort to cripple this President; the Democrats' ultimate goal is to assassinate him, politically, with constant, deadly attacks and smears.
But it won't work, because it can't work. The public will not look to fondly at their "Wanted: Dead or Alive" modus operandi at politics (again, figuritively speaking).
A political party whose sole obession, whose only mission is to bring down the President -- come hell or high water -- is a party destined, rightfully, for the ash heap.
Fate will deal the Democrats, tone deaf and blinded by hate, a cruel blow, indeed. So let them nurse their hatred -- let them beat the dead horse of Enron: They will only bring down the wrath of a people, of a nation, still smoldering over September 11.

Well stated. In my opinion, this just helps to keep Bush & Co. humble and on track. People have seen that Bush is a forthright and honest man. He is a man of the people. My father says Bush reminds him of DFR---my Democrat of a father loved DFR.

Normally, I cringe whenever there is criticism of the Republicans but in this case, it doesn't phase me. I know Bush is clean. I think it is funny that Clinton will get "outed" once again.

Thanks for the compliment =^)

I think it is funny that Clinton will get "outed" once again.

YES -- hoisted on his own petard ;^)

Thanks =^)

What I've been saying to friends since 1996, is that all of the Senate is compromised. Whether due to the Clinton Filegate scandal, sexual shennigans, or backroom dealing, the all of the Senate is tainted and should be replaced.

I don't feel so strongly about the House because they are elected by a much smaller constituency and only serve for two years at a time. But the Senate is elected by the entire state, they each serve for six years, and the 100 of them determine the fate of the country on a daily basis.

I would love to see a grass-roots effort to root out all incumbants in the Senate and replace them with newcomers. I don't care so much whether they are Republicans or Democrats so long as the existing bunch are thrown out.

They are all compromised.

-PJ

While congressional Texans - Democrats and Republicans - got the bulk of Enron contributions between 1989 and 2001, the company spread its largesse around.

Enron Contributions to Current Members of the House of Representatives, 1989-2001

Enron Contributions to Current Senators, 1989-2001

Back in 1995, Clinton had his chief of staff, Mack McLarty, push Enron's bid to win a $3 billion power-plant project in India. Four days before it won final approval in 1996, Enron donated $100,000 to the Clinton-controlled Democratic National Committee. McLarty later became an Enron executive.

There's more quid pro quo in this one paragraph than in ANYTHING they've come up with for Bush. Unbelievable.