Why Not Give Bush CREDIT -- instead of BLAME -- for Recent Corporate Scandals?

July 20, 2002 | Silly

[Silly]

FReepers, please help me: Please let me know if this line of thinking has been explored by anyone in the conservative press. Provide links if you can. Thank you.

THE CLINTON ERA
During the Clinton era, business flourished – or seemed to, anyway. These were the days when greed ran rampant, when telling the truth was not important, when danger seemed far away, and when being the "good guy" was sneered at, and arrogance was rewarded. Spinning was raised to an art form.

Clinton himself embodied all of these qualities. He was preoccupied with raising money, lying, ignoring danger and generally setting a bad example. Could it be that this mentality took hold in the business world? Aren't these the exact reasons that companies like Enron got in the messes they did? Didn’t Enron both prosper and collapse because it was greedy, deceitful, and arrogant?

THE BUSH ERA
In the Bush era, the world changed. Even as Clinton was in his last days in office, the economy started to get a hangover. It didn't start with Bush. Was everyone anticipating the end of the party, causing the decline of the economy in Clinton's final months?

George W. Bush is thoroughly different in character and personality than Bill Clinton. He is humble, he is not preoccupied with appearances, he is honest. He isn't constantly spinning. He isn’t constantly engaged in scandal. He's not partying with the rich and glamorous as Bill did. He is setting a good example for everyone, and in return, everyone seems to trust and like him.

WHY NOT GIVE BUSH CREDIT?
Why shouldn't we give Bush credit for creating an atmosphere where companies like Enron can no longer hide their crimes? Why blame him when we could thank him?

The SEC is getting a beating in the press. But why should it be? Is it possible that the Enrons of the world are imploding right now is because the SEC is doing its job, and companies can no longer hide their mischief? Isn't it a good thing when crime is exposed?

No fair and honest person can hold Bush personally responsible for the downturn of the economy and the corporate crimes of others. So perhaps some good can come of this: maybe we can give him credit. Under Clinton, corporate crime was ignored and allowed to prosper. Under Bush, perhaps we can count on having it prosecuted instead.

[olliemb]

You can blame Clinton's lack of character on influcen on society . But tell me, when the books were being cooked as far back as the 1997 where was the SEC? Come on, you want me to believe that once Bush came in the doctoring of the books began.

No, I think, once Bush came in it was discovered that there was a lot of crookery going on. The SEC under Pitt took over in July 01. I say Mr. Pitt has been very busy.

[olliemb]

I remember Rubin calling the White HOuse and asking for favor for Enron. I remember White HOuse telling Enron no help on the way. I would say Bush could have very easily helped out Enron but it did not. Pretty honest and straigtforward.

How did Wall Street demand disclosure from Enron?

[Ben Bolt]

Keep your convictions Dianna .

[olliemb]

I disagree with you--i don't think he has been on the defensive. I think he is doing a very good job and has been pushing his agenda. He has been an excellent CIC and we did go after and kicked butt of the Taliban.

If fighting with the democrts is what you are calling being on the defensive--well, what is he to do--the Harken thing--the papers and the lawyrs and the SEC guys and Harken have all come out and vouch for the Pres. The media wants blood and they will continue to look. What do you want the president to do? He already has said he had been absolved. And the reason the SEC looked at it originally was that the second form was late in filing but the original form of intent to sell was on time.

Tonite I heard a commentator on Fox say that the press wanted Bush to win so badly (press cast 90% vote for Gore) that they did not fully investigate Harken. And about Halliburton--just innuendos and personal destruction is all that I have seen--what facts are there on Halliburton. And I don't mean your opinion, but facts.

[olliemb]

I think Moonman would prefer that the whole administration resign.

[olliemb]

You are so totally wrong in your comments. Oh well, free press and free speech is what we have in the USA.

[olliemb]

I agree with you, what with "it is the economy, stupid", the voters would vote for the devil if it meant that they would have money.

But I think that GWB is an honorable man who faces problems head on and I know that he will clean up the corporate world mess. I think he is still waiting for the senate to pass his corporate bill that he submitted in February? Does any one out there remember his 10 point agenda. Tommy was still sitting on it when World com came to lite. Oh, my,I think Silly has it right. Not enough attention has been payed to the positive things this president has done.

[olliemb]

Remember Senator Barbara Boxer wrote $40000 hot check in the bank problem that congress had several years ago. How come she is not in orange suit? Do you think that someone needs to monitor the congress?

I agree with you I would be cleaning toilets in the pen if I had done that.

[olliemb]

What are you talking about?

[olliemb]

Ah, so you would rather we hug and sing kumbaya with the Iraqis or better still, lets hand over more secrets to the Chinese.

In my opinion, this war will take forever, because the enemy is everywhere. So quit trying to do a Clinton--I don't think Pres Bush is going to nail a tent or an aspirin factory.

[olliemb]

I don't know what you are smoking but you better calm down. Cite for me what the SEC did during the Clinton era. SEC Pitts is investigating Enron, World com, Global Crossing, Johnson and Johnson and has asked over 1000 large companies to file by August 14th their vouchers for their books.

Again, what did the SEC during CLinton do? Most of these books, ENron and Worldcom, for sure happened 1996 onward.

[XBob]

It seems to me that fraud has been illegal for a long long time. Now just who has the SEC or the Bush admin even charged, let alone arrested?

[olliemb]

Now you really got my goat--"There is no war and has been no war. There was a terrible act of terrorism by ingrates from a country other than the one we sent a military expedition to, but nothing that constitutes a war".

Remember the WTC bombing in 1992?--ingrates?
Remember Kobar?--ingrates?
Remember African embassy--ingrates?
Remember our naval ship--ingrates?

With attitudes like yours and the same with Clinton and the media,these were just ingrates but they come from a bigger family of ingrates-Iraq and Iran. Do you still want to risk waiting for the next set of ingrates to come knocking at our door?

[Texasforever]

Now just who has the SEC or the Bush admin even charged, let alone arrested?

Uh, how about Arthur Anderson? We just had a nice little trial right here in Houston. You may have missed it.

[olliemb]

And Arthur Andersen was easy. The complicated and convoluted defunct corporations will most likely need more time. But I do believe that they too will be brought to justice.

[XBob]

35-"To me the most damaging part of Clinton's influence was that he was actually reelected even though most people, including many who voted for him, knew what a fraud he was - IMO this sent a loud and clear message to every con-artist and opportunist in the country that the public didn't really care about ethics, right or wrong, consequences for improper behavior, or the rest of that sort of old-fashioned thinking - let the party roll on! Now the party's ending with a crash, and we can only hope Bush can put the pieces back together....."

Let's see, ENRON unraveled 7 months ago. How many have Bush or his SEC charged?????? arrested????????? convicted??????

[Texasforever]

So 7 months is a long time for you? How old are you...12?

[captain11]

Absurd, huh?

The proposed Income Equity Act does not cap salaries, but rather would limit deductibility of executive compensation to 25 times that of the lowest paid worker in the company. Agree or not, the intent was to address these issues. The bill, HR 2691, has not been passed.

[Aquamarine]

"...The U.S. will continue to pay a price, perhaps a heavy one, for the excesses of the second Clinton term. Bull markets come along quite regularly in financial history, perhaps once a decade. Bubbles do not come so often. They are so foolish and so damaging that it takes at least a generation to forget the horrors they teach..."

Source---dailyreckoning.com

[backhoe]

Seriously, I think it is a combination of the right climate as you indicate here AND the desire on the part of libs and their media friends to fan the flames of bad news for the masses to consume. How else can you call for "change" in November if you don't find a fiend? Sadly, I believe the masses are dumbed-down enough to think all this is W's fault. Even if they like him personally (as they claimed to like Clinton professionally), their memories are just too short and there is a need for a scapegoat. In their tiny little minds, it can't be Clinton's fault because they are still vested in their votes for him in 92 and 96.

You put that very well. Most of us here have noticed and lamented the "short attention span theatre" that seems to plague the TV-numbed, Public School dumbed-down general populace.

And I have noticed that even after their little cheap god left office and there is nothing left to defend, the clinton-worshippers are still out in droves defending the SOB. I think you are right about that, too-- they invested so much of their heart and souls and very decency defending him that they just can't stop doing it. If they did, what would they have left to show for all of it?
A fistful of sand- the harder you grasp it, the faster it flows away...