Am I wrong about the current SEC Chief? : LUSENET : Unk's Troll-free Private Saloon : One Thread

That he used to be a top lawyer for Arther Anderson, who argued himself blue in the face against any further government rules and oversight over the accounting profession?

-- Peter Errington (, February 01, 2002


Nope, you're dead right about that one. It stinks, too.

-- Stephen M. Poole (, February 01, 2002.


Coming from a very political family, I suspect I have a tendency to overestimate my political astuteness. But here's my prediction: The Democrats will figure that although both parties will take some hard blows with regard to Enron and related matters, the Republicans will get hurt a lot worse, in a full-scale brawl. Therefore there will be a hell of a brawl.

-- Peter Errington (, February 01, 2002.

Poole is mistaken if he thinks it is only Democrats that want the truth about Enron. Most of the employees who worked there and got burned out of their life savings were repugs. Now they are very pissed-off repugs.

-- (repugs@waking.up), February 01, 2002.

against any further government rules and oversight over the accounting profession?

You are incorrect on one VERY important point. He argued for removal of the rules that were already in place.

Unfortunatly, Bush Sr's pick for head of SEC approved the changes asked for. Leaving the door open for corruption.

-- Cherri (, February 01, 2002.

All of a sudden Dubya is now pretending he is interested in changing the rules so investors won't get screwed. Too little, too late. He did nothing about it until the problem was exposed because he knew his corporate buddies would benefit. Now he is only doing it to save face and to try to convince the public that he is one of the "good guys" in hope that they will back down on the Chenron scandal.

-- (dubya@stinking.scumbag), February 01, 2002.

He's not trying to convince the public of anything. The sad fact is, most Americans DON'T CARE.

-- Stephen M. Poole (, February 01, 2002.

No, the sad fact is that ignorant repugs like you think you have the right to speak for "most Americans".

You're wrong Poole Fool, most Americans DO care, and we're not going to let ourselves become apathetic just because YOU say we should.

Over 50% of Americans own stocks, and their concern about the Chenron scandal was witnessed recently by several days of negative activity in the market.

-- (shove@your.propaganda), February 01, 2002.

Hope you've a bigger audience somewhere else cause it sure looks like you're wasting your time around here.

-- Carlos (, February 01, 2002.

Yeah Poole, you should go somewhere else to spew that repug propaganda! You could start at your own ridicule web page, your fellow ignoramuses should make a good audience.

-- (we seek truth @ not. deception), February 02, 2002.

"He's not trying to convince the public of anything."

That's funny, I just saw two of the world's leading market analysts on Louis Rukeyser, saying that Dubya was trying to cover up his association with Enron by announcing his proposal to reform the securities system.

I suppose Poole knows more than those guys though. ROTFL! Yeah, right!

-- (poole is @ damn. fool), February 02, 2002.

To the background static here: Do you really think that most Americans watch Louis Rukeyser? :)


Well, well. It has just come out that GAO Comptroller General David Walker used to work for Arthur Anderson, and was a member of their Board of Financial Advisors!

I posted "Shedding A Little Light" because the legal shennanigans weren't adding up. It is possible -- though unlikely -- that Walker is setting up a suit that he KNOWS will fail. Why hasn't he done as the White House has repeatedly requested, and simply submitted another, narrower request? I quote Andrew Card again from that CNN article:

If the GAO did resubmit a more narrowly focused demand letter, Card said that would restart the process.

Why won't the GAO do this? The waters are getting very muddy again.

I'll keep saying this until I'm blue in the face: the tentacles on this thing go all over Washington and touch just about EVERYONE. There is NO WAY that the Democrats are going to be able to focus this on the Republicans alone.

And Peter, speaking as someone in the Media, that's the reason why the coverage has changed tone in the past few days. The targets -- rightfully -- are Enron and its leadership, NOT Bush, NOT Cheney, NOT Lieberman, Daschle, Jesse Jackson or any other political type who has had dealings with Enron (and they all have).

The media, rightfully, is focusing on the real criminals: the people at Enron who set up those dummy partnerships to defaud those who were buying their stocks, and those who prevented the poor employees from selling their stock when Enron tanked.

-- Stephen M. Poole (, February 02, 2002.

"Do you really think that most Americans watch Louis Rukeyser?"

No, but most Americans heard in the news that Dubya announced that he wants to pass some kind of new rules for stocks and 401k plans. It was hard to miss, since his PR people made sure it was on every media outlet available in their attempt to change the subject from Chenron. The more intelligent people, which in your case is about 85% of the population, could see that this was an obvious attempt by Dubya to play "cover your ass".

I know it is difficult for you to imagine that most Americans could be more intelligent and perceptive than you Poole, but that is merely a circumstance of your own unfortunate condition. You see, from your perspective, it is impossible for you to imagine what it is like to have higher intellectual ability, because you've never had it yourself. You are like the guy who assumed that the Earth was the center of the Universe, while the more intelligent people understood that there were many other possibilities.

-- (know@your.limitations), February 02, 2002.

And you are not intelligent enough to answer a simple question that I've asked you several times now.

Name JUST ONE THING that Bush and Cheney have done that was in direct violation of US Law.

Can't you do that?

-- Stephen M. Poole (, February 03, 2002.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ