Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 07/09/2002 8:38:53 AM PDT by Sub-Driver
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: Howlin
Looks like a thread is up
2 posted on 07/09/2002 8:39:56 AM PDT by Mo1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sub-Driver
..All compensation gained by the acts of fraud.
3 posted on 07/09/2002 8:40:18 AM PDT by Right_in_Virginia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sub-Driver
he is makes Gephardt and Dashle look like boy scouts
4 posted on 07/09/2002 8:40:26 AM PDT by cactusSharp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sub-Driver
I thought only the rich invested in the stock market isn't that what the liberals always tell us? SO why should we care if some evil-rich people lost their money?

BTW something should be done here, but this just looks like another Bushism--when under pressure from attacks by the media and the democrats, come out and do something liberal to try and silence the critics. Typical
8 posted on 07/09/2002 8:44:09 AM PDT by liberalism=failure
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sub-Driver
Will anyone post the transcripts. I had to go grocery shopping and missed the speech
88 posted on 07/09/2002 9:03:37 AM PDT by Kaslin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sub-Driver
I remarked to a client yesterday that a Harvard MBA as President of the United States seems like a pretty good idea.

It turns out he's a demonrat - you should have seen his face! He choked. He didn't believe our President is an MBA, muttered a little, and finally concluded that an MBA from Harvard doesn't mean much.

Then he said "Those Republicans never want to put any new laws on the books." I said, "What good is it to put new laws on the books if you don't enforce the ones already there?" I cited gun control as an example.

Hope I didn't lose a client, but it was fun to see him turn green at learning W has an MBA.

90 posted on 07/09/2002 9:03:59 AM PDT by mombonn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sub-Driver
Big surprise. Limbaugh has his shorts in a knot over the speech. Limbaugh has developed a political tin ear over the past year.
146 posted on 07/09/2002 9:16:17 AM PDT by zook
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sub-Driver
I'm not watching the speech but some of the comments here regarding making the CEO's more responsible for their actions reminds me of Lloyd's of London.

Members of Lloyds put up their personal fortunes. In the event that their underwriting group fails their entire personal fortune is on the hook.

Does this make sense in America? For public corporations? I'm not sure but some of these pump and dump cowboys need to be slapped and slapped pretty hard.
177 posted on 07/09/2002 9:27:22 AM PDT by isthisnickcool
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sub-Driver
Okay, they're gonna start holding "Big Corporation" responsible. My question is when are they going to hold "Big Government" responsible for something?
285 posted on 07/09/2002 10:08:08 AM PDT by oldvike
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sub-Driver
The part about analysts pushing weak companies that just happen to be contracting to those same analysts, would that apply to gold bugs as well?
297 posted on 07/09/2002 10:15:48 AM PDT by RightWhale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sub-Driver
This will be on record as one of his best speeches!

Without saying so, he smashed the old and often-stated argument of the 90's that personal morality and ethics don't matter just as long as the person in question is "doing his job."

He also tied the corrupt and dishonest practices of the exposed CEO's to the excesses of the 90's and to the environment which produced them.

He brought the idea of "relativism" into the argument and brought back the idea of an "internal moral compass."

Personal character, personal ethics, and personal morality do matter in a leader--whether the person is the President of a small company, the CEO of a Fortune 500 company, or the President of the United States of America.

Those who spent eight long years telling us that it didn't matter were wrong, and Americans are now paying for the atmosphere they and their "Boss Hogg" political leaders created.

For eight years, the "emperor" had "no clothes" and no substance, no real commitment to principles, and no commitment to keep America's defenses strong, either militarily or economically.

Now, we have terrorists who have established themselves as long-time residents of our communities, we have our technology given to the Chinese for a "mess of pottage" to the DNC from the head of Loral, and we have CEO's who believed it when they heard the message out of Washington: "trustworthiness and honesty don't matter if you're 'doing your job.'"

373 posted on 07/09/2002 11:05:21 AM PDT by loveliberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sub-Driver
Poor, poor Democrats. Small wonder they're in trouble.

The zinging tour-de-force the President delivered on Wall Street Tuesday, beyond co-opting yet another issue from struggling Democrats, proves this Texan meant business when he vowed to go after business -- phony business, that is.

On corporate reform, Bush is now center stage.

Terry McAuliff must be flailing in pain.

Cleaning up the mess Clinton left behind is full time work, that much we've learn in the 17 months of this administration. Fixing the problems of Wall Street is part of the clean up.

But it's more than that.

To Bush, the 90s were reckless, a decade of impetuous irresponsibility, of unbridled license, a moral black hole for ethics, a contra bonos mores era run amok. In this crucible, corruption was 'in', integrity, 'out'.

But the tone was set at the top.

As the prince of sleaze, Clinton was the Zeitgeist of that era.

On many levels, the Clinton poison infected the culture, the ethos, the mores of the 90s. Things permissible -- indeed, rewarded -- while Clinton was "president", were unthinkable under Reagan.

Wall Street would not be immune. The harum-scarum emphasis on the bottom line, even to point of fraud -- consequences be damned -- was the Clinton Doctrine applied in the boardroom.

Lying, cheating, stealing, bilking, conning, duping, fleecing, thieving -- who gives a rip?!.

Just don't get caught.

That's the Clinton Doctrine.

Bush's speech was a watershed.

Message: The Clinton era is over. Washington -- there's a new Sheriff in town.

Here's a dirty little secret: To squeeze yet more mileage from corporate fraud politically, Democrats quietly hoped Bush's drive for reform would fall far short of criminal sanctions for wrongdoers.

Democrats still don't 'get it'. On Bush, they're clueless, utterly addled and befuddled.

To this President, the first MBA in the White House, the scandals on Wall Street are morally appalling.

As a respectable member of the business community himself, George W. Bush takes umbrage at the sleazeballs and scammers tarnishing the community as a whole in the eyes of the public. As a man of unquestioned integrity and docorum, Bush is bound and determined to bring these criminals to justice, to restore public confidence in corporate America, to bring probity, honesty, decency back to the boardroom.

To Bush, integrity isn't a handicap, it's the key to excellency in business. A fervent believer in free enterprise, he knows free markets can not long survive amid a crisis of confidence, a climate of investor cynicism.

Bush aims to end this crisis, and he will -- by putting corporate criminals in leg-irons, in orange jump suits. Under this administration, these scumbags are going to prison, and will stay in he pokey for a very, very long time, too.

Democrats, in contrast, see corporate sleaze as campaign fodder -- an issue to exploit politically.

For Bush, it's a moral issue -- a question of right and wrong.

Democrats could care less about corporate wrongdoing, per se.

Eh?

That's right. Oh, they posture and handwring endlessly over Enron, WorldCom, Tyco, Qwest and Global Crossing. But political advantage is what they're after -- capitalizing on what they wrongly perceive as vulnerabilities for Bush.

Rather than reaping political windfall, Democrats instead are in quite a pickle. By failing to act aggressively enough against corporate wrongdoing, Clinton allowed it to flourish. Indeed, by forestalling enforcement actions by his SEC, Clinton reaped the rewards -- campaign largess from corporate executives grateful to Clinton for keeping regulators off their backs.

Dittos the Reno "Justice" Department. On Clinton's watch, it was AWOL.

Small wonder Americans lay responsibility for the torrent of sleaze rocking Wall Street directly at Clinton's feet, much to the bitter chagrin of the media and Democrats who have feverishly sought to shield X42 from questions over his role as the book-cooking burgeoned while he was "president."

In the latest CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll, 51% of Americans say Clinton is "at least partially responsible ... because of the climate he set in office with his moral failings."

Haunted by the ghost of Clinton past, Democrats and WorldCom share startling similiarities:

1) Both are battling to avoid bankrupticy; For Democrats, it's political bankruptcy; For WorldCom, it's financial bankruptcy.
2) Both are champions at cooking the books. Democrats, through cut outs, concealed millions of illegal campaign donations from abroad. WorldCom listed nearly $4 billion in expenses as capital outlays.
Neither of the two possess a modicum of ethics -- not a scrap of basic morality.

Nor care that they don't.

And while Democrats and their media puppets have done their damndest to link the President with corporate sleaze -- indeed, they've smeared him as a crook and a criminal himself -- polls show their efforts have mostly boomeranged.

Despite politically motivated, coordinated Democrat/media slander, Americans overwhelmingly give President Bush the moral highground on this issue.

Week after week, month after month, this President has been libeled, maligned, denigrated, disparaged, vilified, impugned, defamed. He's been pummelled with every ugly name in the book.

The Bush-haters spared no effort to bring down the President.

Yet, all was for nought.

Indeed, their hateful vendetta conflicts with their goal of assassinating the President politically. While Democrats thought they saw a chance to tar Bush with the WorldCom brush, 64% of Americans believe "big business has too much influence on" Democrats in Congress, again according to Gallup. While the President gets similar numbers, the survey puts the lie to media claims that Democrats have a built-in political advantage to press.

Moreover, on questions of morals and ethics, this Presidents continues to garner exceptionally high marks.

On issue after issue, the Democrat disconnect is staggering.

Democrats desire a crippled President, even while the country is at war; Americans pray for Bush to stay strong.

Democrats would love to see a double-dip recession; Americans are optimistic on the future.

While Democrats try to undercut public morale, and undermine resolve, Americans overwhelmingly bond with the President; on matters of security, they trust him immensely.

Having failed to dent Bush's popularity, and with midterm elections looming ominously, Democrats are reduced to recycling inane "questions" over 12-year old stock deals at Harken Energy, where Bush was a director. For years, campaign opponents of the President have beaten the Harken drum, to no avail. The SEC investigated Bush ad nauseam, but found no evidence of impropriety.

But the haters aren't about to let niggling facts stand in their way. Senator Daschle, appearing on CBS's Face the Nation, continued to level vicious attacks, insinuating criminal wrongdoing on Bush's part.

Never mind that Linda Daschle, his wife, moved from airline lobbyist to acting administrator of the FAA, then left FAA to resume lobbying for the airlines. Her clients included some of the biggest government contractors of the airline industry.

Nuff said.

Yet, for all the sniping, all the slander, all the insults -- the fierce torrent of hate, bitter Democrats have zip, zero, nada to show for.

A whopping 76% approve of Bush's job performance, according to Gallup, and 65% are confident Bush will take corporate miscreats to the cleaners.

No more fuzzy ethics, no more fuzzy math. There is, indeed, a new Sheriff in town, O Democrats, and he's aiming to stay in your face.

So get over it.

Anyway, that's...

My two cents...
"JohnHuang2"


381 posted on 07/09/2002 11:17:45 AM PDT by JohnHuang2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sub-Driver
Now what we need to see is a couple of corporate bodies hung out to dry on the fence. Take away all their ill gotten gains, and wipe them out totally, and MAYBE the corporate state will stop lying, stealing, and cheating. Maybe.

...at least until the next time.

412 posted on 07/09/2002 12:10:49 PM PDT by RISU
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson