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

Skip to comments.

The Stench From Enron's Crash-And-Burn
Fort Worth Star-Telegam ^ | December 11, 2001 | Molly Ivins

Posted on 12/11/2001 8:45:11 AM PST by bigdog

AUSTIN - Hail and farewell, O Enron! What a flameout. The Establishment media, sucking its collective thumb with unwonted solemnity, is treating us to meditations on two themes: AUSTIN - Hail and farewell, O Enron! What a flameout.

The Establishment media, sucking its collective thumb with unwonted solemnity, is treating us to meditations on two themes: "How the mighty have fallen" and "Who would have thunk it?" Pardon me while I snort, in lieu of ruder noises, and offer two themes of my own: "What took so long?" and "Anyone with an ounce of common sense."

If you want to know what this story is about, pretend that Bill Clinton is still president. Pretend that Clinton's long-time, all-time biggest campaign contributor - a guy for whom Clinton has carried water for over the years, a guy with unparalleled "access," a shaper of policy, a man with a veto on regulatory appointments affecting his business, with connections at every level of the administration, a political fixer beyond the wildest dreams of James Riady - imagine that this guy's worldwide empire has tumbled into bankruptcy in just three months amid cascading reports of lies, monumental accounting errors, evasions, iffy financial statements, insider deals, a board of directors rife with conflicts of interest, top executives bailing out with millions while regular employees see their life savings shrink to nothing. Imagine all this back in the day of Bill Clinton.

Holy moley, we'd have four congressional investigations, three special prosecutors, two impeachment inquiries and a partridge in a pear tree by now. The Republicans would all be drumming their heels on the floor in full tantrum.

But this is not President Clinton; it is President Bush - so of course different standards must apply. The fact that Ken Lay, Enron's chairman, has been Bush's chief money man and key backer since he first went into politics is mentioned only in passing. The media don't want to be impolite. They have been credulously swallowing Enron's PR and overlooking the obvious for years.

The main problem with Enron is that it has never produced much of anything in the way of either goods or services; it has not added a single widget to the world widget supply. Enron is in the business of "financializing," making markets, trading in wholesale electricity, water, data storage, fiber optics - just about anything. One Enron executive told The New York Times that the company's achievement was to create "a regulatory black hole" to suit its "core management philosophy, which was to be the first mover into a market and to make money in the initial chaos and lack of transparency."

Enron started as a gas pipeline company that went into trading natural gas, and even then the company's critics claimed that Enron was making profits by stoking volatility in gas prices. The same charge showed up again in spades with the newly deregulated electricity markets. Enron had lobbied for utility deregulation relentlessly, formidably and very expensively at both the state and national levels.

The company seemed to spend more time influencing government than doing business. Like Long Term Capital Management, the hedge fund that went awry, it seemed to have only a parasitic relationship to actual economic activity. The problem with deregulating utilities is the reason that they were regulated in the first place: Monopoly power and the threat of market manipulation are a set-up for unholy price-gouging. How many times do we have to relearn that lesson?

Just a few spiffy eye-openers on Enron's connections:



TOPICS: Editorial; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS:
Molly's off her meds again.
1 posted on 12/11/2001 8:45:11 AM PST by bigdog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: bigdog
Yes, Molly, let's imagine this is Bill Clinton's term. Kindly allow me to post the following excerpt from CorpWatch, certainly no Republican water carrier:

"Enron's political luck did not run out after Bush's (Sr.) departure. Lloyd Bentsen, another Texan, and Clinton's first treasury secretary, was already a recipient of Enron's largesse.

In one Senate election campaign, the Democrat received more than 14,000 dollars from Enron. According to data provided to IPS by the research group, Centre for Responsive Politics, the amount is the second highest paid out by Eron to a political campaign.

Bentsen quit his job as secretary of the treasury at the end of 1994 and was succeeded by Robert Rubin, a business associate of Enron's when he was at the investment bankers, Goldman Sachs.

Clinton first hired Rubin to head his National Economic Council. Soon afterwards, Rubin wrote on Goldman Sachs stationery to former clients, including Enron, in which he ''looked forward to continuing to work with you in my new capacity.''

In the meantime Lay has wasted no time in cultivating friends with the new Clinton administration.

In Aug. 1993, McLarty arranged an invitation for Lay to play golf with Clinton in Vail, Colorado. This date irritated Oscar White, chief executive of Coastal, another natural gas company that had helped the Clinton election campaign raise funding.

These connections to the Democratic administration have helped Enron considerably, says Ken Silverstein, who publishes Counterpunch, a fortnightly newsletter here.

Clinton officials publicly helped Enron win the contract in India as well as in Indonesia. And in the last two years, Enron has received U.S. government funds to build power plants in China, the Philippines and Turkey. Enron also won contracts in Pakistan and Russia while accompanying senior U.S. government officials on state trips."

In your words Molly: Holy Moley!

2 posted on 12/11/2001 8:53:56 AM PST by Mr. Bird
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bigdog
The scandal that is Enron will grow big time. The greed and avarice of the top executives at Enron is deplorable and their criminality will be their undoing.

Eldar Pompov
Topeka, KS
3 posted on 12/11/2001 8:55:39 AM PST by ahmedtousay1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bigdog
.....pretend that Bill Clinton is still president.

I couldn't get past this. If Clinton were still president we would be so up-to-our-ears in terrorists that we would not have even noticed Enron's collapse.

4 posted on 12/11/2001 8:59:33 AM PST by Mind-numbed Robot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bigdog
This is hilarious.

Just a few observations:

The main problem with Enron is that it has never produced much of anything in the way of either goods or services; it has not added a single widget to the world widget supply. Enron is in the business of "financializing," making markets, trading in wholesale electricity, water, data storage, fiber optics - just about anything.

Molly therefore is an adherent of the "labor theory of value" - a preposterous notion which not only places Molly firmly in the Marxist camp, but which also places all Marxists in the Flat Earth Society.

Like Long Term Capital Management, the hedge fund that went awry, it seemed to have only a parasitic relationship to actual economic activity.

This kind of Stalinist rhetoric is laughable. Why doesn't she just make an outright call for the abolition of banks and money?

Enron started as a gas pipeline company that went into trading natural gas, and even then the company's critics claimed that Enron was making profits by stoking volatility in gas prices. The same charge showed up again in spades with the newly deregulated electricity markets.

Hmmm . . . "stoking volatility". Let's have a little experiment, shall we? Now that Enron is bankrupt, let's check up on the gas and electric commodity markets a year from now and see if volatility has been eliminated from them. Let's also check up on the same market data from the years preceding Enron's debut as a commodities market maker and see if volatility was lacking in those days.

I can't believe that this passes for economic analysis among hundreds of thousands of this country's most well-to-do morons.

5 posted on 12/11/2001 9:00:58 AM PST by wideawake
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Bird
Thanks for the information, Mr. Bird. Will you kindly forward that little bit of information to our dear sweet Molly, as well as the publiations who printed her column?
6 posted on 12/11/2001 9:03:57 AM PST by Mind-numbed Robot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Bird
Right on! And from the same source:

"In 1995, the CLINTON Administration threatened to cut off development aid to Mozambique if it did not sign a deal with ENRON to construct a pipeline from Mozambique to South Africa. Declared Mozambique's natural resources minister, John Kachamla: "Their diplomats, especially Mike Mckinley (deputy chief of the U.S. Embassy), pressured me to sign a deal that was not good for Mozambique. He was not a neutral diplomat. It was as if he was working for ENRON."

Clinton has his share of mud on him, Molly...start digging.

sw

7 posted on 12/11/2001 9:05:52 AM PST by spectre
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: bigdog
Karl Rove, Bush's top political strategist, sold between $100,000 and $250,000 worth of Enron stock earlier this year after being accused of conflict of interest.

A a good thing for Rove in the end. Today that stock would be worth $1.50

8 posted on 12/11/2001 9:09:07 AM PST by Phantom Lord
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bigdog
Enron, the equal party opportunist.......


9 posted on 12/11/2001 9:10:36 AM PST by deport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bigdog
Monopoly power and the threat of market manipulation are a set-up for unholy price-gouging. How many times do we have to relearn that lesson?

One would expect that, with a question like this followed by a list of bullet items, that the list would attempt to give examples of how the Enron situation meets this criteria or how market manipulation is a set-up for price-gouging. Why was I not surprised that Molly gave no examples? There aren't any, of course. California's power crisis was caused by California's energy policy, not Enron's power trading.

And Enron's fall is caused by Enron's financial misdealings, not by it's relationship with (or lack thereof) the President of the United States.

By the way, if this were the Clinton presidency there would be no Congressional demands for a hearing, because nobody would have known about the trouble. Enron would still be flying high. The SEC would have been told to keep their noses out of it and nobody would have investigated Enron until Bill Clinton was worth at least $1 billion more than before the problem started. (Hillary would have made the billion trading natural gas futures, dontcha know.)

It's too bad about the employees who lost their life savings. I hurt for them. But you won't solve their problems by trying to convince people that President Bush is as bad as X42 was.

Shalom.

10 posted on 12/11/2001 9:11:52 AM PST by ArGee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bigdog
I'd sure hate for Molly to actually view the freaking campaign contributions. Here's a first pass from just one of Enron's zip codes...

Individual Donors Search

23 records found in .03 seconds.

SEARCH CRITERIA:
Donor name: ENRON
Donor zip code: 20006
Election cycle(s): 2002 2000

Start another search

Sort by Name
Sort by Date
Sort by Amount
Contributor Occupation Date Amount Recipient
ENRON CORP
WASHINGTON, DC 20006
  3/27/2000 $100,000 NRCC/Non-Federal Account 
ENRON CORP
WASHINGTON, DC 20006
  3/26/1999 $60,000 NRCC/Non-Federal Account 
ENRON CORP
WASHINGTON, DC 20006
  6/15/2000 $25,000 DNC/Non-Federal Corporate 
ENRON CORP
WASHINGTON, DC 20006
  3/26/1999 $25,000 NRCC/Non-Federal Account 
ENRON CORP
WASHINGTON, DC 20006
  6/23/2000 $700 NRCC/Non-Federal Account 
ENRON CORP
WASHINGTON, DC 20006
  2/4/2000 $700 NRCC/Non-Federal Account 
ENRON CORP
WASHINGTON, DC 20006
  7/14/2000 $5,000 NRCC/Non-Federal Account 
ENRON CORP
WASHINGTON, DC 20006
  9/5/2000 $50,000 DNC/Non-Federal Corporate 
ENRON CORP
WASHINGTON, DC 20006
  9/5/2000 $50,000 DNC/Non-Federal Corporate 
ENRON CORP
WASHINGTON, DC 20006
  9/5/2000 $50,000 DNC/Non-Federal Corporate 
ENRON CORP
WASHINGTON, DC 20006
  8/16/2000 $15,000 NRCC/Non-Federal Account 
ENRON CORP
WASHINGTON, DC 20006
  8/21/2000 $15,000 NRCC/Non-Federal Account 
ENRON CORPORATION
WASHINGTON, DC 20006
  9/29/2000 $10,000 DCCC/Non-Federal Account 1 
ENRON CORPORATION
WASHINGTON, DC 20006
  6/30/2000 $10,000 DCCC/Non-Federal Account 1 
ENRON CORPORATION
WASHINGTON, DC 20006
  6/30/2000 $25,000 DCCC/Non-Federal Account 1 
ENRON CORPORATION
WASHINGTON, DC 20006
  7/19/2000 $10,000 RNC/Repub National State Elections Cmte 
ENRON CORPORATION
WASHINGTON, DC 20006
  10/23/2000 $2,500 DCCC/Non-Federal Account 1 
ENRON CORPORATION
WASHINGTON, DC 20006
  4/20/2001 $2,050 DCCC/Non-Federal Account 1 
ENRON CORPORATION
WASHINGTON, DC 20006
  4/25/2000 $1,565 DCCC/Non-Federal Account 1 
ENRON CORPORATION
WASHINGTON, DC 20006
  6/29/2000 $50,000 DSCC/Non-Federal Corporate 
ENRON CORPORATION
WASHINGTON, DC 20006
  10/25/2000 $1,000 NRCC/Non-Federal Account 
ENRON CORPORATION
WASHINGTON, DC 20006
  11/2/2000 $1,000 NRCC/Non-Federal Account 
ENRON WASHINGTON INC
WASHINGTON, DC 20006
  1/25/2001 $2,500 RNC/Repub National State Elections Cmte 

2000 cycle data downloaded from FEC on November 1, 2001.

2002 cycle data downloaded from FEC on November 1, 2001. Date of request: December 11, 2001

11 posted on 12/11/2001 9:14:41 AM PST by Southack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bigdog
More mush from the plagiarist.
12 posted on 12/11/2001 9:24:26 AM PST by Eric in the Ozarks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Southack
RNC Donations = $235,900
DNC Donations = $276,115 - $40,215 MORE than Republican Donations!!!!

Hey Molly! Come up from Ann Richards rug and lookie here! Looks like your party benefited from Enron more than the RNC!

13 posted on 12/11/2001 9:25:13 AM PST by Bommer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: bigdog
"The main problem with Enron is that it has never produced much of anything in the way of either goods or services"

Molly is clearly no businesswoman. Enron's main problem was that it had too much debt. That problem was able to be hidden via off-balance-sheet deals facilitated by Big-5 Arthur Andersen, but after a while the truth finally came out.

Molly's bizarre claim that Enron manipulated energy markets sounds as though she's been frequenting Democratic Underground. For one thing, Enron claimed profits of only $600 Million on $101 Billion in sales, for a net margin of less than 0.6%, hardly the stuff of monopoly manipulation. To get that $600 Million, Enron borrowed at least $23 Billion, most of it on the sly due to hidden transactions via 3rd party corporations and unethical accounting by a big-5 firm that clearly had a conflict of interest via their sister firm's (Andersen Consulting/Accenture) lucrative "consulting" fees at Enron.

The kicker, however, is that Molly is clearly willing to put on her partisan kneepads to avoid any mention of Enron's $250,000 in donations to put in place Houston's mayor Lee Brown, or any mention of Enron's contributions to ANY Democratic candidate for that matter, such as Shiela Jackson Lee and Lloyd Bentson (Clinton's Treasury Secretary).

But hey, since when has poor Molly ever let facts stand in the way of her mindless Socialistic, anti-Western rants?

14 posted on 12/11/2001 9:29:56 AM PST by Southack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bigdog
Why do you people even READ this aging has been? She is just like Geraldo, Rather, and Maher, leftist propagandists who care nothing for the facts. Their job is to progress soscilaism and knock anything that is not ultra-liberal. Molly is part of the Disney left wing, fairy conspiracy. There is very little that explains her employment by the Startlegram. Her column ALWAYS is propaganda and ALWAYS says nothing more than "the Republicans did it." If you are an ultra-left wing, flaming extremist liberal, then I guess you's like her. For anyone else, she's just another reason to spend less time with your newspaper.
15 posted on 12/11/2001 9:41:08 AM PST by Tacis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Southack
Molly and Helen Thomas need to get together and share a good shrink.

BTW Over the years, in catching an occasional rant of hers, I have never seen her offer any type of solution, remedy or or alternate course. She is a good commie though.

16 posted on 12/11/2001 9:43:01 AM PST by cibco
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Tacis
Why do you people even READ this aging has been?

Laughs

17 posted on 12/11/2001 9:47:28 AM PST by bigdog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: bigdog
Enron bought influence on both sides of the aisle and overseas as well. There's no use trying to defend them. Chairman Lay seems like a snake to me. Always has.

What chaps me is that they have cast utilities deregulation in such a bad light that a $250 million natural gas-fired generating plant in my area may never be built because of the fallout from this scandal.

It would have created hundreds of jobs during the construction phase and at least 40 permanent jobs.

18 posted on 12/11/2001 9:58:40 AM PST by longleaf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bigdog
this enron mess will make whitewater seem like a picnic. I'm sure that the good folks concerned with influence peddling and financial impropriety that gave us that piece of history can't wait to get their teeth on this one.
19 posted on 12/11/2001 10:19:55 AM PST by gfactor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bigdog; ArGee
So far only one post that directly addresses Molly's charge that Congressional Republicans would be up in arms if the situation were reversed and the Enron meltdown had happened while Clinton was in the White House with the same dollars and access going to Clinton as have gone to Bush. ArGee writes: "By the way, if this were the Clinton presidency there would be no Congressional demands for a hearing, because nobody would have known about the trouble. Enron would still be flying high. The SEC would have been told to keep their noses out of it and nobody would have investigated Enron until Bill Clinton was worth at least $1 billion more than before the problem started. (Hillary would have made the billion trading natural gas futures, dontcha know.)" ArGee, Enron would not be "flying high" if their stock went from $80 to $.80, which it did. The SEC, or even the devil Clinton himself could not cover that up.
20 posted on 12/11/2001 10:25:35 AM PST by eyesofTexas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: bigdog
I thought big energy was going to thrive under W. Molly and the dumb clucks were going to track all the excessive profits these companies were going to realize with Bush and Cheney in the White House. But first thing you know, ooops, Enron goes belly up. Yet somehow, she thinks Enron's failure is good for the Republicans? Molly's got both synapses firing today.
21 posted on 12/11/2001 10:27:34 AM PST by laredo44
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bigdog
Karl Rove, Bush's top political strategist, sold between $100,000 and $250,000 worth of Enron stock earlier this year after being accused of conflict of interest.

For the life of me, I can't figure where Molly is going with this. Rove was forced to unload his stock. There's no suggestion he used insider information to unload a bad position early. What's the point of this statement?

22 posted on 12/11/2001 10:30:35 AM PST by laredo44
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: longleaf
What chaps me is that they have cast utilities deregulation in such a bad light that a $250 million natural gas-fired generating plant in my area may never be built because of the fallout from this scandal.

That's because "deregulation" as regulated by regulators has no good light. "Deregulation" is a word that's lost it's meaning. "Deregulation", where ever it's instituted is riddled with regulation, price controls and a bailout for utilities "stranded costs" (debt)...simply put it's a scam on the end user. You in Texas will soon find out.

Everyone thought California had a shortage of supply...what happened?...Suddenly, in less than a year, there's an oversupply, only a few plants have come on line and some investigations/lawsuits are threatened.

23 posted on 12/11/2001 11:12:58 AM PST by lewislynn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: bigdog
HoustonChronicle.com chart
graphic

E-Mail This
-->

24 posted on 12/11/2001 11:16:11 AM PST by lewislynn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: laredo44
I beleive at the time of Rove's sale that Enron employees were forbidden to sell their own stock. That makes this very smelly.
25 posted on 12/11/2001 11:25:44 AM PST by SBeck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: bigdog
I think the point is being missed here. The Enron stench blankets both parties and the executives at Enron were both duplicitous and greedy. They acted like Amway distributors and played loose and fast with the facts. Regardless of how you slice it, or cut it, the amount of flatulence in the air over this shell game is overpowering.
26 posted on 12/11/2001 11:28:19 AM PST by SBeck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Phantom Lord
Karl Rove, Bush's top political strategist, sold between $100,000 and $250,000 worth of Enron stock earlier this year after being accused of conflict of interest.

This is actually very funny. The Democrats were falling over each other crying corruption regarding Rove's investments. In the end it backed fired on them. If they had not made such a stink about Rove's investment in Enron in the first place and he had sold the stock on his own when it began to fall, they could have used it against to much greater affect. Not only did they save his butt, but they saved him as much as a 1/4 million dollars. The Democrats are on a serious losing streak, dating back to the November/December election debacle.

27 posted on 12/11/2001 11:38:37 AM PST by Pres Raygun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: lewislynn
Hey Lewis -

Thanks for the informing chart. My ridicule of Molly should not be mistaken as support for Enron or its management.

Several previous posts call into question unethical and possibly illegal acts that may have swindled employees and other shareholders.

There probably will be a SEC investigation, and there should be. But, there aren’t any persuasive arguments in this article linking the White House or the Republican Party to these shenanigans.

Note the previous post illustrating the near equal contributions to the two parties.

28 posted on 12/11/2001 11:39:10 AM PST by bigdog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: SBeck
I beleive at the time of Rove's sale that Enron employees were forbidden to sell their own stock. That makes this very smelly.

You've got to be kidding! According to your logic Rove would be guilty regardless of what action he took regarding his Enron stock. If he hung onto it he would have been guilty of a conflict of interest. If he sold it he would be guilty of selling his own private property. The fact that Enron employees were forbidden from selling their stock (however unfair that may be), has no bearing on Rove since he was neither an employee or an executive in Enron when he sold his stock.

29 posted on 12/11/2001 11:49:24 AM PST by Pres Raygun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: bigdog
You're right about the equal campaign contributions. Unfortunately, that only suceeds in showing that Enron plays both sides equally as an unelected influencer over our lives. Once again, this entire mess smells to Hell and hopefully Lay and his cohorts will get to spend some time in a crowbar Hilton in the near future.
30 posted on 12/11/2001 11:52:33 AM PST by SBeck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Pres Raygun
Karl Rove had access to Enron's executives, who were, coincidentally, not forbidden to sell their options as previously posted, while the average Enron employee could only watch their retirement turn into used toilet paper. Regardless of how you feel about conflict of interest or whether Rove had inside information - you don't think for a second that CEO Lay didn't have a guy with direct access to the President on his speed dialer do you - is irrelevant, the fact that this mess is even tangentially connected to the WH smells.
31 posted on 12/11/2001 11:57:17 AM PST by SBeck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

Comment #32 Removed by Moderator

To: Rooper
One question.

Do you beleive any Administration official mentioned new about Enron's executives illegal or unethical behavior?

33 posted on 12/11/2001 12:04:18 PM PST by bigdog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

Comment #34 Removed by Moderator

Comment #35 Removed by Moderator

To: SBeck; Pres Raygun
Karl Rove had access to Enron's executives, who were, coincidentally, not forbidden to sell their options as previously posted, while the average Enron employee could only watch their retirement turn into used toilet paper. Regardless of how you feel about conflict of interest or whether Rove had inside information - you don't think for a second that CEO Lay didn't have a guy with direct access to the President on his speed dialer do you - is irrelevant, the fact that this mess is even tangentially connected to the WH smells.

Sorry, but your point remains unclear. Rove was hounded by partisan Democrats to sell his energy stocks after Bush was confirmed as President because they were convinced that Bush/Cheney would mean big benefits/favors/speical treatment for big energy. [Democrats know these things because several of them profited handsomely by selling pharmacuticals short just before the Clinton Administration began bashing drug company profits]. Rove sold to quiet the Democrats. Enron was supposed to do swimmingly under the new administration and the jackals that pressured Rove would have a good laugh about how much their grandstanding cost Karl in capital gains. So what does Rove's divestiture have to do with Molly's rant?

And what exactly is the point that Lay had the White House on his speed dialer? Exactly how are you implying that Lay made use of it? I could see a connection if Bush sent Enron a big bailout but they didn't. What's the scenario? Lay called Bush or Cheney and what?

36 posted on 12/11/2001 1:52:47 PM PST by laredo44
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: SBeck
Regardless of how you feel about conflict of interest or whether Rove had inside information - you don't think for a second that CEO Lay didn't have a guy with direct access to the President on his speed dialer do you - is irrelevant, the fact that this mess is even tangentially connected to the WH smells.

Give it a rest. Rove didn't need someone at Enron telling him to sell. The Dumocrats did that for him. You can't have it both ways. Rove sold the stock just like the Rats wanted him to do and now you and Molly want to complain about it. If Rove was Enron's man in the White House, then the Rats unwittingly provided cover for him by raising such a stink over the potential conflict of interest in the first place.

37 posted on 12/11/2001 1:54:51 PM PST by Pres Raygun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: bigdog
Yes, Enron slept with both parties. Who do you think was going on those Commcerce Dept. junkets around the world with Ron Brown back in 1994? Check the passenger lists.

Ken Lay and Jeff Skilling were Republicans, but businessmen first.

List Of Executives On Brown Trip

38 posted on 12/11/2001 2:08:00 PM PST by machman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: machman
Forgot to add this, who was greasing palms for Enron in places like China, India, Africa, and South America?

I wouldn't doubt if Rebecca Marks was a Clinton "girlfriend".

39 posted on 12/11/2001 2:10:19 PM PST by machman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: laredo44
My point should be crystal clear - no double standards. None were tolerated from ex-42's WH, none should be tolerated from the current administration. President Bush should take a chapter from Rudy Giuliani and announce his extreme displeasure regarding Enron and any members of his staff who played the slime game.

Even a remote whiff of a perception of conflict of interest or something fishy is enough to unbalance his Presidency.

40 posted on 12/11/2001 7:11:22 PM PST by SBeck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: bigdog
I love Molly. She is never shrill. (/sarcasm)
41 posted on 12/11/2001 7:16:44 PM PST by EricEssig
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: deport
If you have read Ayn Rand's novel "Atlas Shrugged" then you have met Ken Lay in the person of James Taggart. His specialty is what Rand call "pull-peddling" or what I would call "cronyism."
42 posted on 12/11/2001 7:21:53 PM PST by Iwo Jima
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: bigdog
I have heard alot of folks talking about how close Enron and G.W.are, and how they basicly own tons of politicians. The Dems are trying so hard to tie this to Bush. My question is, if Enron had bought so many in washington How come their broke. Can someone give me a brief summary of this mess. Thanks.
43 posted on 12/11/2001 7:25:20 PM PST by BurFred
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bommer
The Democratic Party has people who function like TR's "Black Horse Cavalry" - they get campaign contributions from businesses not so much as a "what we'll do FOR you", but as a "what we'll do TO you", if you don't cough it up. Sad.
44 posted on 12/11/2001 7:39:26 PM PST by 185JHP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: BurFred
"if Enron had bought so many in washington How come their broke."

Read Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand. You can only cheat reality so long, regardless of how many friends you have in government.

Basically, Enron did not provide a good or a service which the market wanted. It only lasted as long as it did due to "smashmouth" tactics which intimidated anyone, including stock analysts, from declaring that the Emperor had no clothes.

But, finally, the fact that the Emporer had no clothes became too obvious to ignore, and then the whole house of cards came tumbling down. This is really a vindication of capitalism. What Enron was engaged in was anything but proper free market principles.
45 posted on 12/11/2001 7:42:31 PM PST by Iwo Jima
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: wideawake
"I can't believe that this passes for economic analysis among hundreds of thousands of this country's most well-to-do morons."

You presume that Miss Molly has an abiding interest in being correct.

You would be wrong.

Miss Molly has an abiding interest only in being clever. And in bashing conservatives while she's being "clever".

Like Maureen Dowd, it makes for thin gruel...

46 posted on 12/11/2001 7:48:22 PM PST by okie01
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Southack
Enron's main problem was that it had too much debt. That problem was able to be hidden via off-balance-sheet deals facilitated by Big-5 Arthur Andersen, but after a while the truth finally came out.

Ah yes, good old AA. My roommate worked for them. They were as 'creative' as possible in everything they did, and were quite smug about it to boot. Good at shystering too, the State of Iowa paid them a 6 or 7 digit figure for them to do a study on why Iowa can't attract companies. AA of course was supposed to be the analytical wunderkind that would find the secret key to the Golden Kingdom. Their brilliant answer, which everybody had been telling the State for years, was that our tax structure is oppressive and makes the cost of doing business to high. AA milked 'em good on that one.

47 posted on 12/11/2001 7:53:01 PM PST by Free Vulcan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: eyesofTexas
ArGee, Enron would not be "flying high" if their stock went from $80 to $.80, which it did. The SEC, or even the devil Clinton himself could not cover that up.

Enron stock started to fall when it was announced that the SEC was investigating Enron. It is likely that their stock would be doing very well, with a Dynegy purchase still on the table, if it had not been for the investigation.

The SEC did not conduct this investigation while Clinton was in office. Perhaps this is because there was no hint of the wrongdoing to cause an investigation to start. It is also possible that there was no investigation because Enron had been pouring money into the Clinton White House. He has a reputation for making sure contributors aren't investigated. President Bush has no such reputation.

Shalom.

48 posted on 12/12/2001 6:28:54 AM PST by ArGee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: bigdog
This is what is so disgusting about loyalists of both ends. Molly off her meds? What about the facts and what about Silverado and what about baseball ownership and what about everything else? When I screamed about clinton my family called me an extreme right winger, when I screamed about Nixon my family called me an extreme left winger. What about the truth? Loyalists and apologists should all just go to hell so that the rest of us can try and find the truth unimpeded by idiots.
49 posted on 12/12/2001 6:50:19 AM PST by RWG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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.

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