Enron largesse spread widely in Washington

More than 250 members of Congress received political contributions from Enron, and at least 15 high-ranking Bush administration officials owned stock in the now-bankrupt energy company, according to two government-watchdog groups.

The stockholders included Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, senior Bush adviser Karl Rove, deputy EPA Administrator Linda Fisher, Treasury Undersecretary Peter Fisher and U.S. Trade Representative Robert Zoellick, according to an analysis of financial disclosures by the Center for Public Integrity.

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.

--you very well could be totally right on this. You are right on the media immediately jumping on this issue and starting their spin, but it's also a fact this 'enron' example exists, and is just one of many involving many politicians over the years. Take yer pick there's hunnerts and hunnerts of them...

%^)

You have to remember, unlike the bulk of the posters here at free republic, I am not here as a member of the Republican party, nor do I hold any of the two major parties in this nation as any sort of terribly 'good" organization (not anymore anyway, I used to, though) or "without sin". That was decades ago I still thought that way, but I don't any longer. For a variety of reasons actually. I am content to have all the facts come out,and let the political chips fall where they will,(yes, I can readily see ultra liberal media bias though). I am more interested in 'busting' globalist traitor fatcats and politicians "in general" than in supporting or destroying any named political party. I -truly honestly speaking-have very little use for either of the top two parties, nor do I ever push any named third party on this forum. I am an independent in the fullest sense of the word. I look at things just a shade differently, I am more interested in named individuals than in partisan politics. I start from a default position-forced on me over the years- that they are crooks until proven over a LONG period of time "honest". I believe partisan politics is incredibly destructive at this point in our society. I think the top two parties are almost completely run outside the grassroots level by global citizens of the world mercenary profiteers and crooks. I wouldn't go so far as to advocate oulawing political parties, but I am definetly not a cheerleader for any of them, so I really have no personal dog in the fight beyond sympathy for the people screwed in this scandal, the salt of the earth working-class normally understood defintion type people.

The fatcats involved-whomever they may be, can hang for all I care, and I hope they do, even if that means the total collapse of the government as it's run as a junta for the past few decades, with the bulk of the politicians pulling hard jail time or worse under the laws of sedition. As in **** 'em! To me, a crook is a crook is a crook, other labels are immaterial, which gang or clique they belong to is immaterial, I stopped believing in those names and look at global factions and power/finacial cartels instead, as I beleive that more fully reflects reality of description.

Now I might change my opinion on that and enthusiastically embrace a political party again,like I first started out my political life as a Republican working for the goldwater campaign as a young teenager, but at this point I have made a decision not to. I have recognized the fix as having been in for too long now to be faked out. My sympathies and belief structure is conservative/traditional/constitutional/soverign independent, but I honestly don't see either party as it's run today-or the past 30 years or so- to be reflective of those values except in various campaign rhetoric and the occassional odd vote.

I know that is a very unpopular and debated and flamed and dissed position on free republic, but I would be typing lies if I typed differently from what I believe in my heart. And in fact if this website becomes an officially named "Republican" party membership website, by having this posted by the owner in the posting guidelines, I would cease to lurk or read or post here.

Hope this clarifies my position on a few things. I dissed clinton and the democratic party soundly, deservedly so, I reserve the same right for any named person or org in politics if I think it's warranted, on this or any other subject, as I reserve the right to dis 'reporters' who are clearly biased, or any other anti american people or organizations..

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.