Author Topic: Anti-Bush Propaganda or the Ugly Truth? (Read 1121 times)

Shuckins · « **Reply #15 on:** June 02, 2004, 08:28:09 AM »

Large industrial concerns have been trying to take advantage of presidential administrations since the Reconstruction period.

However, this proves nothing, except that there is good reason for Enron to be under investigation. I'm certain that there were idiots in other business concerns making the same types of statements about Clinton when he was in office.

If evidence is found that Bush was directly involved in this, rather than just the subject of offhand remarks by greedy neo-Mafia types, I'll help you vote him out. Otherwise, this is just an exercise in innuendo.

Shuckins/Leggern

lazs2 · « **Reply #16 on:** June 02, 2004, 08:32:12 AM »

inuendo has allways been a tactic of the left... they usually get the shrillest and least truthful right before the election when the lies can't be proven in time.

This is a constant and one of the reasons that as people get older they lose their love affair with the left.

lazs

slimm50 · « **Reply #17 on:** June 02, 2004, 08:53:37 AM »

For me: I voted for Bush (no surprise to anyone in here, I know) and I plan to stay the course. Things aren't as bad as the left likes to portray them, and I shudder to think how truley fluffied up things'd be if a real lib like Gore, or a Dem congress, had been in control these last several years.

Toad · « **Reply #18 on:** June 02, 2004, 08:55:59 AM »

Enron was very comfortable with the Clinton administration too. What a suprise! All large companies are aware of the importance of sucking up to the government.

lazs2 · « **Reply #19 on:** June 02, 2004, 08:58:24 AM »

imagine if that war damaged kerry were appointing judges. Imagine what he will do every time a bill restricting firearms rights crosses his desk for him to sign.

the french like kerry.

lazs

rpm · « **Reply #20 on:** June 02, 2004, 09:23:40 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Toad
Enron was very comfortable with the Clinton administration too. What a suprise! All large companies are aware of the importance of sucking up to the government.

Enron had no where near the level of influence with the Clinton Administration that it had with Bush. This can't be denied.

Toad · « **Reply #21 on:** June 02, 2004, 09:24:55 AM »

Ken Lay was on Kerry's wife's BOD!

The horror!

And Enron benefitted from sweetheart deals arranged with the help of the Clinton Admin.

But go ahead and act like that stuff didn't happen.

AKIron · « **Reply #22 on:** June 02, 2004, 09:31:54 AM »

Anyone that screws Kalifornia can't be all bad.

ygsmilo · « **Reply #23 on:** June 02, 2004, 10:06:59 AM »

RPM I am no neo con but I am a commodity trader -

Thats trading 101.

wklink · « **Reply #24 on:** June 02, 2004, 10:34:08 AM »

RPM, your first bit of 'proof' shows a connection between Bush I and Lay, not Bush II. Your second link doesn't work

What ticks me off at CBS is them turning what is a legitimate news piece into a hit job on GB. The whole idea of a Presidential candidate being lobbied and wooed by a big corporation has to be a brand new thing huh? Heck, isn't John Kerry literally in bed with the Heinz corporation?

The story was legitimate and really shows the moral corruption of the Enron corporation. THAT should be the story, not the 10 second little Bush jab that I guess the editors had to get in there.

BTW, if the deregulation was to bad, why didn't Clinton stop it? He had 8 years to do it.

rpm · « **Reply #25 on:** June 02, 2004, 10:50:02 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by wklink
RPM, your first bit of 'proof' shows a connection between Bush I and Lay, not Bush II. Your second link doesn't work.

From the 1st link:

Quote

Ken Lay developed connections among business and political leaders. He chaired the 1992 Republican national convention in Houston and sat with George H W Bush in the presidential box. After Bush lost the 1992 election, Lay maintained strong ties to the Bush family.
Bush's sons lobbied on behalf of Enron: Neil and Marvin in Kuwait and George W in Argentina.

If working for the man is not a connection, what is?

2nd link now works.

Toad · « **Reply #26 on:** June 02, 2004, 10:53:43 AM »

Put "Lay Enron Clinton" into Google and see if you find any "links" there.

This whole thing is a "duh!".

Big Business and Big Government in bed together... who'd a thunk it?

rpm · « **Reply #27 on:** June 02, 2004, 11:04:36 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Toad
Put "Lay Enron Clinton" into Google and see if you find any "links" there.

This whole thing is a "duh!".

Big Business and Big Government in bed together... who'd a thunk it?

Odd, I don't recall Bill Clinton running for public office this year.

Toad · « **Reply #28 on:** June 02, 2004, 11:20:03 AM »

Odd, I don't recall you making a big deal of it when Clinton was running. But Enron/Lay and Clinton were helping each other out then.

How very odd, eh?

Holden McGroin · « **Reply #29 on:** June 02, 2004, 12:19:34 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by rpm371
Odd, I don't recall Bill Clinton running for public office this year.

Is Enron contributing to anyone's campaign this year? I thought they were bankrupt.

If you are going to be timely about your criticism, why are criticising Bush on a relationship to a ghost?