In Reply to: No party remains unscathed posted by Maestro on January 22, 2002 at 12:31:14:

...2 of Bush's cabinet appointees were at one time employed by Enron...

Your kind of logic is.. well, illogical! The two appointees are 'guilty' or at least somehow 'tainted' because they once worked for Enron, even though no wrongdoing on either of their part has even been alleged? That means any of us that ever worked for another company is liable for any eventual misdeeds of our former company.. and to be 'safe' I guess all government employees should never have private sector experience.. logical?.. I don't think so!

Alleging 'guilt by association' is not becoming for 'objective' Americans in my view. Assuming employees have integrety and allegence to their current job (as opposed to their prior job[s]) I thought was the American way.. at least until PROVEN otherwise. Sad commentary if you or I forever worked under a cloud of suspicion from our second employer on.

And where is it said that because Party 'A' got most of the money they should "stand to lose more" for a business failure caused ENTRIELY by private sector executives. Seems to me those that think this way should try harder to figure out what the problem is.. is it 1. the 'contributions to political parties and candidates' or is it 2. the impact of 'government policy/actions on the failure of a major US corporation'.

If it is 1. both Dems and Republicans collect huge but unequal amounts from many business and private sectors.. contributions may buy more ready access but not necessarily favorable treatment as the Bush team has proven. If that was Ken Lay's expectations, he was sorely disappointed, was he not?

If it is 2., There was NO Bush adminstration wrongdoing.. but prior Bush government policy and actions (executive and legislative branches) making the Enron tragedy possible are highly suspect, and should be examined thoroughly.. and fixed...

Follow Ups: