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: DuckTapeSunroof who wrote (226280)	2/8/2002 4:21:03 PM
From: Neocon	Respond to of 769670

I am sure he knew that Enron was a big contributor. I am even sure that he was, eventually, friendly with Ken Lay. For the rest of it, I doubt it. Those are not the details you trouble the candidate with.......

To: DuckTapeSunroof who wrote (226280)	2/8/2002 4:53:14 PM
From: Neocon	Respond to of 769670

By the way, my wife does fundraising for a professional association. One aspect of her program is to solicit contributions from corporations, who then get substantial recognition. I know that the CEO of the association has some idea of who the top several contributors are, but also could not tell you what their order of ranking was, either for this year or historically; what dollar amounts they have given; or what they give to competing associations. I know this because my wife could not answer all of it off of the top of her head, and would have to verify her impressions by doing research, and the CEO has never asked for that research. Additionally, there is no ready to hand way of finding out about competitors, the data for that is not in her system. Bush knew very few details about Lay, trust me. (Even Lay probably could not have told you off hand how much he had given to Bush over time).......

To: DuckTapeSunroof who wrote (226280)	2/8/2002 5:16:20 PM
From: Srexley	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

You use the term "I'll bet" 4 times in this post to make your conclusion. That means that you are unsure about these conditions, yet you see no problem in using them to justify your postion. Not to worry, it's a problem most dems have. But it makes for a weak argument. With the same logic I could say that "I'll bet" that Lay knew that GWB does not see things as Lay does relating to his business, so he tried extra hard to get the influence he needed. And he still did not get it. Must be nice to form your opinions and ideas on nothing more than suspicions. I say that says more about you than it does about Bush.