-------------------- Great is the guilt of an unnecessary war. ~ohn Adams
Once again the Bush Administration is worse than I had imagined, even though I thought I had already taken account of the fact that the Bush administration is invariably worse than I can imagine. ~Brad DeLong
You're just babbling incoherently. ~C. Montgomery Burns
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
Saltah'na
Chinese Canadian, or 75% Commie Bastard.
Member # 33
posted
In this instance, I doubt that the Democrats would have acted any differently.
-------------------- "And slowly, you come to realize, it's all as it should be, you can only do so much. If you're game enough, you could place your trust in me. For the love of life, there's a tradeoff, we could lose it all but we'll go down fighting...." - David Sylvian FreeSpace 2, the greatest space sim of all time, now remastered!
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
Saltah'na
Chinese Canadian, or 75% Commie Bastard.
Member # 33
posted
No it does not make it right. But it is something that Republicans should look into.
For one thing, this was probably written by one of those anti-corporate maniacs, given the tone and wording of the comic. While #1, #2 and #4 have some value in truth, #3 and #5 are somewhat mundane. If Wendy Gramm was hired by Enron in 1993, then she was there around the same time Clinton took office.
Right there #5 has lost some credibility. That incident happened under the Democrat's watch.
Like I said, it would be no different if it happened under the Democrat's watch. But it doesn't make it right.
-------------------- "And slowly, you come to realize, it's all as it should be, you can only do so much. If you're game enough, you could place your trust in me. For the love of life, there's a tradeoff, we could lose it all but we'll go down fighting...." - David Sylvian FreeSpace 2, the greatest space sim of all time, now remastered!
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
Saltah'na
Chinese Canadian, or 75% Commie Bastard.
Member # 33
posted
The Republicans are now starting to chew out on Enron's rear end about this entire fiasco. Just like any other normal polical party would do.
And I'll smack anyone who claims that the Democrats are not normal.
-------------------- "And slowly, you come to realize, it's all as it should be, you can only do so much. If you're game enough, you could place your trust in me. For the love of life, there's a tradeoff, we could lose it all but we'll go down fighting...." - David Sylvian FreeSpace 2, the greatest space sim of all time, now remastered!
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
It's turning out that Enron seems to have given a lot of money to certain Democrats, as well as Republicans. So sniping on their giving might be lessened for that reason.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
I believe that "assumption" came out quite a while ago, even though there's no evidence to support it (especially since Bush and Enron's CEO seemed to be great friends).
In other words, it was an attempt to turn attention off the scandal. Failed! So sorry.
posted
In other words, it was an attempt to turn attention off the scandal. Failed! So sorry.
Scandal? What scandal? The scandal caused when Bush didn't give money to Enron when they asked for it? Oh, wait...
-------------------- "This is why you people think I'm so unknowable. You don't listen!" - God, "God, the Devil and Bob"
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
You TALKED to the guy, therefore you MUST have helped him and be under his payroll.
Enron gave $$ to the Treasury Sec. Under Clinton, too. Wonder where that went.
It's fairly common for large corporations to donate to both sides in an election. It's called 'hedging your bets.'
-------------------- "The best defense is not a good offense. The best defense is a terrifyingly accurate and devastatingly powerful offense, with multiply-overlapping kill zones and time-on-target artillery strikes." -- Laurence, Archangel of the Sword
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
I have to agree with the "hedging your bets" statement if you go on the books of any large company you will find donations to most political parties in whatever country you are in.
-------------------- "and none of your usual boobery." M. Burns
Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
quote: The [Democratic] party and its candidates received $1.3 million from Enron sources between January 1991 and mid-2001, although the GOP take was nearly three times larger.
Also, the Clinton administration did business with Enron. A study by the nonpartisan Center for Public Integrity found that Enron secured foreign contracts with Clinton administration help after making substantial soft-money donations to the Democratic National Committee. And last autumn, Clinton's treasury secretary, Robert Rubin, tried to intercede for Enron, in the hope of staving off the firm's collapse.
Charles Cook, a nonpartisan Washington analyst, said: "The Democrats' case [against Bush and Enron] is between flimsy and nonexistent. A charge doesn't necessarily have to be true in order to work, but it needs more foundation than this one. If you say, 'Where was the Bush administration?' then you have to say, 'Where was Clinton?' and 'Where was Congress?'
-------------------- "The best defense is not a good offense. The best defense is a terrifyingly accurate and devastatingly powerful offense, with multiply-overlapping kill zones and time-on-target artillery strikes." -- Laurence, Archangel of the Sword
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Re #3: So, the wife of a Senator (I think that's who Phil Gramm is, not sure, or which party he belongs to either) first serves on an oversight committee reviewing (and passing regulations relating to) this company, then a few weeks later joins the board of the same company, right? This is surely enough to warrant some sort of investigation, yet all you're concerned with is which party the serving President at that time belonged to? That's just plain weird.
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
