SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Impeach George W. Bush -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: jlallen who wrote (8821)12/27/2001 4:06:27 PM
From: jttmab  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 93284
 
My point exactly. Bush had nothing to do with the failure. This "scandal" is a non starter propagated by whining demolib pinheads who can't deal with how successfully Bush has handled the Presidency thus far.

I suppose I need to elaborate. I'm sure that you thoroughly read the CNN article, which pointed to the deregulation that Bush pushed through Texas, which consequently enabled Enron to pull off the derivitives game. The association between Bush and Enron through contributions is more than clear. If Enron gave funds to Bush in return for de-regulation [or other favorable treatment] that's quid pro qou, irrespective of whether Enron went bankrupt. That should be obvious.

jttmab



To: jlallen who wrote (8821)12/27/2001 4:12:26 PM
From: jttmab  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 93284
 
Now if you would like another example of potential quid pro quo where the contributing party clearly benefits...we can look at the campaign contributions of Microsoft to the beloved John Ashcroft. A piddly $10,000 from Microsoft to Ashcroft campaign. Once Ashcroft becomes Attorney General what happens to the Microsoft anti-trust case?

Someone in Microsoft most certainly said: "That was the best 10 grand we ever spent."

jttmab