Subject:
|
Re: Newsbits: CA Recall and IMF-Argentina Negotiations
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 15 Aug 2003 20:49:05 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
348 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Carl Nelson wrote:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler wrote:
> > Not at all. Bush, as an appointed maker-of-policy, is directly positioned to
> > engage in heavy-duty cronyism.
>
> As is any elected governor or president, which proves nothing. I, as a male, am
> directly positioned to commit rape. That doesn't mean that I do it.
But Bush *has* engaged in Lay-favorable cronyism and protectionism, as Bruce
has already ably discussed. That (presumably) separates
Bush-the-potential-cronyist from Carl-the-potential-rapist. And you haven't
addressed McAuliffe in this regard at all.
> > His intimate friendship with Lay directly paid off for Lay in the form of a
> > key advisory position in closed-door policy meetings.
>
> For this charge to stick it must be demonstrated that Lay's advisory position
> was solely through his friendship with Bush, rather than his position within
> the industry. Otherwise it's speculation.
Alas, thanks to Herr Bush's ubersecrecy, speculation is all that is possible.
However, since Bush has denied close friendship with Lay, despite the fact that
his close friendship is well-known, then it is reasonable to conclude that Bush
is deliberately omitting facts of their involvement.
> > The fact that Lay's fraud came back to bite him is secondary; his
> > close ties to the administration implicate both Lay and the administration,
> > especially considering that Lay and Enron benefitted directly from Dubya's
> > energy policies (eg, California, etc.).
>
> But implication isn't sufficient to make your case (nor mine, for that
> matter). It certainly wouldn't stand up in court, or else we'd be seeing
> both W and McAuliffe on the witness stand.
But Bush has denied his employers (us) any chance to review the facts, since
he (and Cheney) have invoked "Executive Privilege" to cover up their energy
policy dealings. Therefore we are unable to explore the matter, and Bush's
secrecy is what implicates him. If there is nothing funny about his energy
policy meetings (funded by public money) then let the public review the
information.
> > If you're trying to equate McAullife's role in Global Crossing with Bush's
> > role in Enron
>
> No, I'm showing that there are things that McAuliffe has to explain too
> before he has the moral authority to question others' business dealings.
"First stone?" Come on, that's garbage. Bush, as the self-appointed
restorer-of-integrity to the Whitehouse, has set a higher standard for himself
than for previous administrations. Bush has failed by his own yardstick.
Additionally, Bush is President and should therefore be held more directly
accountable for his actions than any other citizen. After all, Republicans (and
the "liberal" media, I hasten to add) were only too happy to exploit every
single moment of Clinton's entire past; where is the similarly voracious
exploration of Bush's past?
> After all, he invested $100,000 in Global Crossing to have it turn into $18
> million and got out at precisely the right time for maximum profit. Martha
> Stewart's being pilloried for far less (defending herself from charges of
> insider trading when no charges were filed) right now!
Are you accusing McAuliffe of insider trading? That's libel, unless you can
back it up. Let's hear your evidence. If you are not accusing him, then please
restate the point of that paragraph.
> Taxation, after all, represents a loss of freedom, both freedom to choose
> how we spend our money and the time that is required to earn the money for
> taxes.
Taxation is the service charge we pay for citizenship. I've already shown you
one way to get out of the tax-loop.
> Therefore, Bush is making the right call on another front too.
I'm still waiting for him to make the correct call on *any* front.
Dave!
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
Message is in Reply To:
41 Messages in This Thread:
  
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
