"Will Bush Be Tarnished by Enron's Collapse?"

By Andrew Leonard

Published December 6, 2001 8:30PM (EST)

Read the story

Amazing! When Enron was flying high, it was all about greed, bilking California and "unfair" profits. Now that they've failed, you're kicking them when they're down. Well, they took risks and they paid for them. Companies fail, that's why successful entrepreneurs should keep their reward. However, if there's criminal behavior it should be prosecuted; if not leave them alone. I also hope the government does not bail them out.

As said before, companies fail all the time. I challenge you to look up all the donors of all the presidential candidates and see how many were businessmen whose companies are now in trouble. You'd be surprised. It's tough out there. Failure alone is not criminal, neither is success.

-- John Hay

I enjoyed reading your article about Enron, as I have been delighted to witness the destruction of this reprehensible company.

I am puzzled, however, to see nothing in either your coverage, or in the recent coverage by other journalists, regarding Enron's alleged violations of human rights in India. Is it worse that they screwed investors, or that they destroyed the lives of some peasants in India?

I also want to make sure that you're aware of the allegation, reported in March 2000 by Mother Jones, that in 1988 George W. Bush used his influence to secure a $300 million deal for Enron in Argentina.

-- Damion Matthews

Why does any branch of the government bear responsibility for the debacle at Enron? In a truly free market caveat emptor applies across the board -- to employees, customers and investors. If a company you invest in, do business with or work for engages in practices that you don't understand then don't do business, invest in or work for them. Be responsible for yourself and your choices and quit being a victim.

One of the key principles of investing is don't invest in any business that you don't understand. If people really followed this advice there would have been no dot-com meltdown and there would have been no Enron debacle.

-- Jeffrey R. Bailey

Great article about Enron and the close ties to Bush, but will Americans pay attention to what Bush and father Bush have done over the years because of oil and how they have made their money? No! The major press organizations will hide the stories! Thank goodness for BuzzFlash; that is where I get my news and from Salon and Slate. I hope Bush goes down, it is time to impeach Bush and Cheney. Bush is a dictator!

-- Arlene Carlson

I don't expect any fallout to occur regarding the Bush relationship with Enron. With the media controlled by the right wing, I expect they will try to blame the Enron fiasco on Clinton. The double standard by the media is so obvious to me.

-- Charles Hills

So what's new? After decades of indulgence on the part of mainstream media and the public (the Wall Street Journal and GOP did their usual bidding), who are we to hold accountable for the utter greed and incompetence implicit in Enron's catastrophic demise? I suggest mainstream media's lack of depth and courage to even see and report the story, our growing sense of detachment from such things and congressional corruption over campaign financing should get the most credit.

-- Tom DeLuca

I don't get it. What lack of regulation? Isn't the SEC involved in regulating such things already? Gee ... someone was clever enough to fool the regulators, and, evidently, Arthur Anderson & Co. And dishonest too! Oh my! Look at the criminal codes of any state, or the U.S. government. They're really thick, with lots and lots of words and laws and stuff. And people still do dishonest things. I can't imagine!

Listen -- Enron screwed up, and now it's toast. That's the way capitalism works. Investors lost some money. (I think that's why they always put that fine print in the brokerage house pamphlets about there being a certain amount of risk in investing in stocks.) You'd prefer some regulatory agency keeping this outfit afloat? The Amtrak of energy? Let it go under. Prosecute those that have committed criminal acts. That should suffice.

-- Mark Muniak

By Salon Staff

MORE FROM Salon Staff

Related Topics ------------------------------------------