Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Arthur Radley who wrote (220989)	1/22/2002 3:47:55 PM
From: J.B.C.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

I've read some of your post, and trust me I"M not confused. I was merely responding to Karen's post that said there WAS NO mention of Richards in the story. Jim

To: Arthur Radley who wrote (220989)	1/22/2002 7:51:19 PM
From: greenspirit	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769670

No. the issue is this. Is it illegal to accept campaign contributions and call a CEO a nickname? Answer: Of course not! Therefore, the entire horrendous link Demolibs are desperately trying to establish is a red-herring. If we combed the fortune 500 and found out which politician had the most CEO friends, would we have discovered anything horrible? Of course not! The energy business is heavily regulated by government. Government regulates all kinds of issues which effect energy corporations bottom line. So it's perfectly natural to expect CEO's of major energy companies to be friendly with politicians in an attempt to sway their opinion regarding issues which effect the industry. Clinton worked on the behest of Enron, Bush and or Cheney probably did too. So what? Large lawyer groups have filtered millions upon millions of dollars into political campaigns in an effort to create a strong environment in which their companies will succeed. TORT reform has been voted down time and time again by Democrats, no doubt partly due to this heavy influence. The Teachers union is another example. They've funnelled huge sums of money into Democrat campaigns in an effort to keep vouchers off education reform legislation. It's all part of how politics and business work in America. And if anyone reading this board is naive enough to think it has not been happening for years to both parties, they should stop typing and immediately swallow a "reality pill". This issue is not about who is what buddy to who, the issue is; was anything done illegal? Thus far, the only quid-pro-quo to come to light, looks like it can be hung around Clinton's neck regarding Enron's investment in India. That is the issue. Just about everything else is political mudslinging BS.