"he had broken the law"

[wwworry]

from NYTimes 07/02/2002

Now to the story of Harken Energy, as reported in The Wall Street Journal on March 4. In 1989 Mr. Bush was on the board of directors and audit committee of Harken. He acquired that position, along with a lot of company stock, when Harken paid $2 million for Spectrum 7, a tiny, money-losing energy company with large debts of which Mr. Bush was C.E.O. Explaining what it was buying, Harken's founder said, "His name was George Bush."

Unfortunately, Harken was also losing money hand over fist. But in 1989 the company managed to hide most of those losses with the profits it reported from selling a subsidiary, Aloha Petroleum, at a high price. Who bought Aloha? A group of Harken insiders, who got most of the money for the purchase by borrowing from Harken itself. Eventually the Securities and Exchange Commission ruled that this was a phony transaction, and forced the company to restate its 1989 earnings.

But long before that ruling — though only a few weeks before bad news that could not be concealed caused Harken's shares to tumble — Mr. Bush sold off two-thirds of his stake, for $848,000. Just for the record, that's about four times bigger than the sale that has Martha Stewart in hot water. Oddly, though the law requires prompt disclosure of insider sales, he neglected to inform the S.E.C. about this transaction until 34 weeks had passed. An internal S.E.C. memorandum concluded that he had broken the law, but no charges were filed. This, everyone insists, had nothing to do with the fact that his father was president.

[topicolo]

hey wow, maybe bush actually does have SOME intelligence behind that chimp skull of his. If he can get away with insider trading without even a slap on the wrist, he's good (even if he sucked up to his dad).

[wwworry]

A drunk driver, AWOL reservist and now this. How does he get away with it all?

[eyelikeart]

Originally posted by wwworry
A drunk driver, AWOL reservist and now this. How does he get away with it all?

U know what amazes me so much, is how all of these labels can be put to anyone, anywhere in this country.

I'm not saying that Clinton was right, and I didn't like him much to be honest. But he got so much ***** for getting blowjobs in the oval office; the only difference between he & other politicians who aren't being scrutinized is that he got caught.

The point is, everyone does something wrong at some point or another. So why the need to point the finger? Bush must be doing something right with his life, he did get elected President of the United States! ;)

[iH8Quark]

Originally posted by topicolo
hey wow, maybe bush actually does have SOME intelligence behind that chimp skull of his. If he can get away with insider trading without even a slap on the wrist, he's good (even if he sucked up to his dad).

ROFLMAO :eek: :D :p

[wwworry]

Sure Bush's life is going great but that does not mean a thing to us. I'm just wondering how one guy is subjected to a 7 year $70 million dollar investigation that came down his lying about office Hanky-Panky and another guy was a drunk driver (putting lives in danger), insider trader (basically stealing the money of those people who bought the stock he sold) and no one seems to care.

For the record, I think Clinton was being hunted from the day he stepped into office but I also think he ruined his presidency.

But also it's funny that whenever Bush is in trouble people shift the discussion to Clinton. If Bush was unethical why not talk about Bush's ethics? I did not see anyone talking about Nixon's ethics during Clintons impeachment.

[eyelikeart]

Originally posted by wwworry
But also it's funny that whenever Bush is in trouble people shift the discussion to Clinton. If Bush was unethical why not talk about Bush's ethics? I did not see anyone talking about Nixon's ethics during Clintons impeachment.

I suppose he holds a strong backbone to unethical ways of acting and being caught.

[jefhatfield]

Originally posted by eyelikeart


The point is, everyone does something wrong at some point or another. So why the need to point the finger? Bush must be doing something right with his life, he did get elected President of the United States! ;)

even though i spent years fearing and disliking the man, bob dole somehow lost his bid while bush jr got in on his first try

ronald reagan, who many republicans and democrats alike believe was better than w will ever be, failed in his first three attempts at the oval office 1968, 1972, and 1976 with the last failure a close call

then reagan won in 80 and 84 so he ran five times

gore actually made a serious bid for the presidency in 1988 when he was barely old enough to be eligible...he lost in 2000...so him running in 2004 is not that absurd

[SoarEyes]

I’ll gladly talk Badly about Bush. :p
Also Bush is not un-ethical he just doesn’t have any.

Let’s not beat around the Bush

Wow Nice Bush you got there!

he he :p

[mischief]

Republican powermongers have been selling out the Constitution to Big Business since (and including) Lincoln. Every "Great act" of the Republican party has been designed to bennefit an industry.

Simultaniously the Democrats have been Half-Assing a Socialist approach since Adams.

With Republicans writing long, complicated Vice Laws with tax breaks tacked on for their Cronies and Democrats writing clumsy, timid Social programs with Agencies tacked on for their Cronies it's Amazing the country has survived so long without a Civil war. Oh, wait there was a Civil War....... that was justified and suppressed.

BTW: Any southerner who votes a straight party ticket as a Republican is forgetting how badly Lincoln ****ed his great grandparents.

Yes, I am trying to start a Flamewar.:D :p

[jefhatfield]

Originally posted by mischief
Republican powermongers have been selling out the Constitution to Big Business since (and including) Lincoln. Every "Great act" of the Republican party has been designed to bennefit an industry.

Simultaniously the Democrats have been Half-Assing a Socialist approach since Adams.

With Republicans writing long, complicated Vice Laws with tax breaks tacked on for their Cronies and Democrats writing clumsy, timid Social programs with Agencies tacked on for their Cronies it's Amazing the country has survived so long without a Civil war. Oh, wait there was a Civil War....... that was justified and suppressed.

BTW: Any southerner who votes a straight party ticket as a Republican is forgetting how badly Lincoln ****ed his great grandparents.

Yes, I am trying to start a Flamewar.:D :p

the powerbase of the dems was once the south, but the south has changed radically and maybe the politics is a reflection of that

years ago, a dual southern ticket like clinton/gore would have won unanimously...but dole and bush sr. had a good turnout in the south and it was their powerbase

the party of lincoln rules the south now but we are talking about 140 years later

140 years from now, it is anybody's guess where politics will all be

[G4scott]

OK, if Bush is such a bad president, then who would you want in office?

[jefhatfield]

Originally posted by G4scott
OK, if Bush is such a bad president, then who would you want in office?

bush is good on the foreign policy front

gore would be a little less adept but keep a better eye on the domestic front...it's a tough call right now since bin laden is still on the loose...or at least some of his henchmen which is just as bad

[jelloshotsrule]

Originally posted by G4scott
OK, if Bush is such a bad president, then who would you want in office?

good point.

i'm nowhere near a republican. i just hate the fact that people attack any one given group when they both need to be attacked hard. often for the same reasons.

who would i rather see? hmmm.... check out my avatar. haha

[eyelikeart]

Originally posted by mischief
BTW: Any southerner who votes a straight party ticket as a Republican is forgetting how badly Lincoln ****ed his great grandparents.

Yes, I am trying to start a Flamewar.:D :p

Which is why I've yet to claim either party. ;)

Sure I voted for Bush, but that was based upon a series of questioning to find where I belonged, along with the fact that I just couldn't see this country being run by Gore. :rolleyes:

[jefhatfield]

Originally posted by eyelikeart


Which is why I've yet to claim either party. ;)

Sure I voted for Bush, but that was based upon a series of questioning to find where I belonged, along with the fact that I just couldn't see this country being run by Gore. :rolleyes:

gore lacks presence and that is his downfall but his ideas are well within the moderate center and some right wing believers who think that gore will go socialist on us is just nuts

[mcrain]

Hey, while talking about his drunk driving and illegal conduct, don't forget he's a former coke head (according to rumor).

[jefhatfield]

Originally posted by mcrain
Hey, while talking about his drunk driving and illegal conduct, don't forget he's a former coke head (according to rumor).

as a volunteer social worker for heroin addicts at the local aids project, i have no qualms about an ex-addict/alcoholic or recovering addict/alcoholic...choose your term...running the us

if bush was a democrat, i am sure the republicans would bring up the drug and drinking issues

bush said he found jesus to help him stop, others have gone cold turkey and some have gone to rehab, and many have chosen all of these paths and more

[mcrain]

Originally posted by jefhatfield
as a volunteer social worker for heroin addicts at the local aids project, i have no qualms about an ex-addict/alcoholic or recovering addict/alcoholic...choose your term...running the us

if bush was a democrat, i am sure the republicans would bring up the drug and drinking issues

bush said he found jesus to help him stop, others have gone cold turkey and some have gone to rehab, and many have chosen all of these paths and more

I have no problem with it either, but he acts like he's mr. clean and Clinton was sooooo dirty, when in fact, he's got soiled panties. Yes, I think he wears panties under those chimp suits.

[wwworry]

Originally posted by mcrain
Hey, while talking about his drunk driving and illegal conduct, don't forget he's a former coke head (according to rumor).

not to mention the fact that he probably engaged in illegal insider trading. Why are there no investigations? scandals? recriminations?

Are the democrats that demoralized?

[jefhatfield]

Originally posted by mcrain


I have no problem with it either, but he acts like he's mr. clean and Clinton was sooooo dirty, when in fact, he's got soiled panties. Yes, I think he wears panties under those chimp suits.

bush does kind of look unwieldy in suits...long arms or something...or maybe his head is falling inside his collar...he does look like a gi joe toy or something:p

[mcrain]

Maybe they are taking the high road. Maybe they realize that trying to come up with scandals to ruin a president is a reprehensible act and they don't want to stoop to the same levels as the Clinton era republicans.

(Bush had a quote that went something like "They can't have it both ways. I mean, they can't claim the high horse and then take the low road.")

[mcrain]

Than again, maybe the dems are leaving him alone because we're at war with a noun.

[mischief]

The collective Testicles and moral conviction of the Democratic Party was buried with JFK's corpse.

Clinton did a good job of strapping on a pair of Neuticals and carrying on but it couldn't counter the fact that since Nixon Standard Operating Procedure for the Republicans has been Character Assasination over Debate. When you're a Sex addict you're pretty much screwed in that circumstance.

[3rdpath]

Originally posted by wwworry

not to mention the fact that he probably engaged in illegal insider trading. Why are there no investigations? scandals? recriminations?



tip of the iceberg...

try to figure out how he made a huge sum off the texas rangers baseball team...he got in with no capital and walked out with millions...

connections will take your further than brains or hard work every time.

:mad:

[sturm375]

The insider trading is new to me, but breaking the law doesn't suprise me.

If the Dems are taking the high road, good for them, but bad for the country. After Clinton, and Bush Jr., we need to elect Ghandi or something just to balance things out.

If only I had $40-70 million to blow on an investigation into Bush Jr. Good thing for Bush, we got rid of the Special Prosecuter position:rolleyes:

I still think that the biggest infraction by far has occured recently. Incarcerating an American citizen, without due process, is unconstitutional, IMHO. I do believe that breaks his Oath of office? In normal times that should be more than enough to start an investigation (impeachment).


btw
You know the old saying: "The apple doesn't fall far from the tree." Well I heard yesterday that the Bush Daughters were spotted at a Washington D.C. bar, drinking (under-age) until the bar closed. Imagin if Chelsea did something like that while dad was in office.

[agreenster]

Find me ONE politician who hasnt broken the law at one time or another.

Each one of you has gone at least one mph over the speed limit as well, but we arent burning you at the stake. Get over it already. Im not sponsoring Bush, but please, sitting around finger pointing is childish, unproductive, and frankly, boring.

[AlphaTech]

Originally posted by wwworry
A drunk driver, AWOL reservist and now this. How does he get away with it all?

Probably the same way that Clinton did, and his biatch will do in the future. Remember all the crimes old Slick Willy committed?? He got away with them all... Go figure... :rolleyes:

Polititians, the first ones up against the wall when the revolution comes, right before the lawyers (especially the ones that work for the IRSS). :eek: :eek: :D :cool:

[AlphaTech]

Originally posted by sturm375
btw
You know the old saying: "The apple doesn't fall far from the tree." Well I heard yesterday that the Bush Daughters were spotted at a Washington D.C. bar, drinking (under-age) until the bar closed. Imagin if Chelsea did something like that while dad was in office.

Nothing would have happened... Slick Willy would have had it stuffed under the carpet (or desk) fast... Or if it did get out, who would really give a rat's flaming rectal cavity?? How old are these people anyway?? If they are close to 18, and are not driving, who cares??? I sure as hell don't.

[mischief]

Originally posted by agreenster
Find me ONE politician who hasnt broken the law at one time or another.

Each one of you has gone at least one mph over the speed limit as well, but we arent burning you at the stake. Get over it already. Im not sponsoring Bush, but please, sitting around finger pointing is childish, unproductive, and frankly, boring.

You raise an interesting point. There are so many laws that it's nearly impossible NOT to break one. With over 100 beurocrats doing nothing but making new laws for 200+ Years and only 9 guys to dig through it all it turns into a legal rats' nest faster than you can say "violation of due process".

[Durandal7]

Both parties are too moderate! I am a proud member of of the Socialist party and if you have kids they should be in the Young People's Socialist League (http://www.ypsl.org/)

(In case anyone didn't catch it, this is my weird sense of humor.:D )

[wwworry]

Originally posted by AlphaTech


Probably the same way that Clinton did, and his biatch will do in the future. Remember all the crimes old Slick Willy committed?? He got away with them all... Go figure... :rolleyes:

Polititians, the first ones up against the wall when the revolution comes, right before the lawyers (especially the ones that work for the IRSS). :eek: :eek: :D :cool:

Like I said before, whenever some kind of illegality comes up wih GWB all his apologists start talking about Clinton.

Really insider trading is a bit different than going one mile an hour over the speed limit. The fact is that he basically stole a lot of money from the people to whom he sold his stock.

What's boring is this constant Clinton bashing as a smoke screen for our current president's illegalities. I am no fan of Clinton. Forget Clinton. I do agree that the fate of this country is being decided by the person with the better hairstylist.

[mcrain]

Originally posted by AlphaTech
Polititians, the first ones up against the wall when the revolution comes, right before the lawyers (especially the ones that work for the IRSS). :eek: :eek: :D :cool:

Since I enjoy pointing out the painfully obvious, but any revolution will of course have to be led by someone or some people who are politicians by definition. Therefore, you'd have to shoot your own leaders.

Second, if you kill all the lawyers, you end up with anarchy. That's not very smart.

Third, if you focus on the IRS, how do you plan on funding whatever government you end up with? Also not very smart.

I take it you'd line the doctors up too cause they charge too much.

Oh, kill the computer techs too cause they're overpaid? We won't need computers anyway in our caves.

By the way, what crimes did Clinton commit? He purjured himself, and in the process obstructed justice. All, as a direct result of the character assassination being performed by the contract with america republicans. Seems like Jr. commited his crimes without the assistance of any lynch mob.

[AlphaTech]

Clinton did plenty of crap while he was a govenor... screwed his state up big time. As well as committed more then a few illegal acts... I don't have the details in front of me, but it all came out around the time he was running the first time (if I can remember that far back).

As for the IRS, since it was only supposed to be a temporary thing, do away with it all together. There are other ways to raise revenue.

For funding the revolution, any/all donations will be accepted, from any source. :p Of course, they will all be 'tax free'.

Kill the lawyers, at least the scumbag varients (which is most of them). Keep a close watch on the few that are left, and you have a better system.

You don't need lawyers, just a good police force (get rid of the corrupt cops as well).

As for tech's being overpaid, only the server tech's get paid too much. Us desktop tech's don't, since we don't bother with that m$ certification crap. :p

As for the doctors, we would force them to charge fair rates. They might have to give up their BMW's and second house, but them's the breaks.

[mcrain]

Originally posted by AlphaTech
Clinton did plenty of crap while he was a govenor... screwed his state up big time. As well as committed more then a few illegal acts... I don't have the details in front of me, but it all came out around the time he was running the first time (if I can remember that far back).

Really? Funny, I remember lots of allegations, but nothing that wouldn't have been slander/libel had he not been a politician.

As for the IRS, since it was only supposed to be a temporary thing, do away with it all together. There are other ways to raise revenue. Such as?

For funding the revolution, any/all donations will be accepted, from any source. :p Of course, they will all be 'tax free'. That is a tax you are just calling it a gift, and who's going to give money to the government that doesn't have to. No one wants to pay their taxes already. Within a week, you'll have to levy taxes.

Kill the lawyers, at least the scumbag varients (which is most of them). Keep a close watch on the few that are left, and you have a better system. Ok, I'm sure everyone will trust your opinion of lawyers when they trust mine about techies.

we don't need lawyers, just a good police force (get rid of the corrupt cops as well). Again, I'm sure everyone will just blindly trust your opinions about cops. Oh, how are you going to decide who is corrupt? Won't the accused cop have a right to say he or she isn't corrupt? Who's going to decide? Sounds a lot like lawyers and judges to me.

As for tech's being overpaid, only the server tech's get paid too much. Us desktop tech's don't, since we don't bother with that m$ certification crap. :p We don't need techs anyway, just get rid of them? Get rid of the corrupt techs who write viruses and don't run the firewall and server correctly?

As for the doctors, we would force them to charge fair rates. They might have to give up their BMW's and second house, but them's the breaks. Wow, that sounds an awful lot like Clinton's health care reform!

ALPHATECH SUPPORTS CLINTON'S HEALTH CARE REFORM! ANOTHER SIGN OF THE APOCOLYPSE!

:D :D :D

[AlphaTech]

You know mcrain, I never said I was going to lead the revolution, or even be part of it... :rolleyes: Although, at this point, if they agree to go after the IRSS, I might join up.

Go ahead, put words into my mouth, I hope you enjoy the taste of lead and gunpowder. :p

As for slick willy, people didn't want to think that he could be that bad, and that he would ***** up the country as bad as he did his own state. Then again, we survived all of his corruption and such, so I guess we are stronger as a country then he was a leader.

Every time I saw slick willy come onto the tv, I would either change channels to get away from him, turn it off, or pop in a movie. Then again, I pretty much do the same for Bush Jr... Either that, or I just happen to be watching cable tv, and don't have to deal with it.

The president I vote for has yet to get into office, so don't blame me when they ***** things up. :p

With that, I officially end the politics thread... Go ahead, mcrain, rant all you want about how slick willy was so great, and GW is so bad.. I won't be listening. :p :D

[G4scott]

Just a note about drinking in the Bush family...

One (If not both) of the Bush girls was charged with underaged drinking.

Now, about drinking in Texas...

It's everywhere. Many teenagers drink when they're only 15 or 16. Not all people drink alot, and I also know people who do not drink at all, but it's kind of a big part of the Texas culture, along with BBQ...

Aah, screw Bush, Gore, and Nader... Lets vote Ross Perot for prez!

[AlphaTech]

Originally posted by G4scott
Aah, screw Bush, Gore, and Nader... Lets vote Ross Perot for prez!

For that you get a "HELL YEAH!!!" :D

It might take a successful business man to put the country back on the path. Then again, he also could ***** things up as well. But, really, how much worse could he make things then slick willy did??? :D :p :D

[mcrain]

Originally posted by AlphaTech


For that you get a "HELL YEAH!!!" :D

It might take a successful business man to put the country back on the path. Then again, he also could ***** things up as well. But, really, how much worse could he make things then slick willy did??? :D :p :D

I think the head of Enron and the head of Worldcom are available.

[Durandal7]

Originally posted by G4scott
Just a note about drinking in the Bush family...

One (If not both) of the Bush girls was charged with underaged drinking.

Now, about drinking in Texas...

It's everywhere. Many teenagers drink when they're only 15 or 16. Not all people drink alot, and I also know people who do not drink at all, but it's kind of a big part of the Texas culture, along with BBQ...

Aah, screw Bush, Gore, and Nader... Lets vote Ross Perot for prez!

Not to mention that they are old enough to vote,smoke,be a legal adult,join the military and drive, just not drink. Seems kind of odd doesn't it?

[Nipsy]

Originally posted by G4scott
OK, if Bush is such a bad president, then who would you want in office?

Bill Gates:

He ran a profitable company, only extracting $199-$499 per person, every coupla years. It would be nice to see the gov't do the same.

He's proven he's not very good at software, lets see that nefarious skill applied to govt, where pandering and mediocrity are the keys to 'doing it well'.

All US security breaches would have a figurehead, based on security track record. No more FBI blames CIA blames FBI. Blame Bill.

Whiny Democrats who want funding for the California Wisconson Cheese Olympics could tap Bill's own philanthropic pockets. Stodgy Bible thumping Republicans would be deferred to Vice President Ballmer.

And best of all...it might mean Windows being relegated only to govt use, where its poor interface and general clunkiness would complement the bureacray perfectly.

[Gelfin]

A very important truism to come out of Plato's Republic is that nobody who wants to helm a society ought to be actually permitted to. Unfortunately, I'm not sure any deserving soul has truly had greatness thrust upon him, as it were, in at least a couple hundred years. Our system is one in which, at least ostensibly, a good man can rise all the way from local government to the Presidency by earning the acclaim of his constituents through his consistent ability and integrity. These days it's hard to even read that sentence without laughing. As a reasonable tradeoff, it's fair enough that the system attempts to block any one person or group from making and enforcing social policy unilaterally. As much as partisan bickering and inter-branch wrangling makes U.S. politics annoying and cumbersome, I'd much prefer that sort of periodic gridlock to having either of the major parties or any one of the governmental branches able to assert its will unchallenged.

Back to the tangible, on the subject of cocaine use, I thought that was Neil Bush. Or was that the S&L bailout? Maybe it was both. It's been a while.

WRT Clinton's record, I certainly don't believe that he was as clean as a preacher's sheets (<cheapshot>maybe a catholic priest's</cheapshot>), but the man was the subject of what was probably the most intensive criminal investigation in the history of the nation. If he's so dirty, and has committed so many flagrant illegal acts (as conservative "common knowledge" asserts), then how come that investigation was only able to prove that he got a little head on the side and said he hadn't?

I really don't have any reason to believe that Clinton was any more dirty than any other politician in high office. In fact, I've heard it suggested that there's probably no coincidence that politics and dirty dealing are associated. The psychological mindset required to successfully navigate in politics (kind of an alpha male thing, or alpha female as the case may be) predisposes one to adhere to the rules of society in a more casual, convenient way than one who doesn't picture himself at the top of the social heap might do. Should we tolerate it? Hell, no. But neither should we be terribly surprised when we encounter it.

[jelloshotsrule]

Originally posted by wwworry
Like I said before, whenever some kind of illegality comes up wih GWB all his apologists start talking about Clinton.

Really insider trading is a bit different than going one mile an hour over the speed limit. The fact is that he basically stole a lot of money from the people to whom he sold his stock.


just so you realize. he did much more than the affair... don't get me wrong, i don't like bush either, and of course he is a jackass and of course he's committed crimes... almost all politicians have...

however, there were people that "disappeared" and such surrounding clinton and the whole thing out in arkansas and someone died right before he was supposed to testify or something... it wasn't just having his dong sucked...

being neither a democrat or a republican i'd say that both sides woudl be just as quick to point out the other ones' faults when their own side is attacked. that's how politics is....

[wwworry]

Originally posted by jelloshotsrule

don't get me wrong, i don't like bush either, and of course he is a jackass and of course he's committed crimes... almost all politicians have...

So as long as a past president has, you know, offed some some people, well then.... it's cool that this new guy did some **** too, like stealing ***** 'n *****.

Is that you are getting at???

It still seems hard for GWB apologists not to bring up Clinton. I realize many people really hated Clinton but that does not have any bearing on what GWB did. Unless (!) you are suggesting that besides killing anyone who knew too much Clinton also made Bush sell his shares in Harkin Energy at an inflated price.
Then he was truely diabolical.