Enron got greedy and started dealing in the intangibles — derivative commodities that may or may have no real value. Within that corporate culture, certain people within got even greedier and sucumbed to pencil-whipping their quarterly targets and reports. In essence, Enron got caught short trying to offload gobs of debt tied up in junk worth pennies on the dollar.

But I plead guilty to readily using counterspin hyperbole to eventually come around to the truth. Should I use some sort of marker to separate my spin vs the truth?

That said, as a professional Jack-of-all-trades, I am indeed master of none, so I do appreciate it whenever anyone corrects whatever misconceptions I may have blathered, if for no other reason than to stick it in my knowledgebase.

No, I’m not from La-la land — occasional visits suffice to remind me why it’s not for me. Deregulation, on the face of it had nothing to do with your mess. The root of your mess is excalating consumption of energy and water without the corresponding increase in production, leading to importation. Gray Davis, who you had until last Fall, artificially intervened in the distribution of energy, amongst other policies.

Cause & effect. Whenever the free market is impinged by irrational policies, inefficiencies will follow. Wherever there are inefficiencies, a market will develop to mitigate those problems — or take advantage if you will.

And you’re blaming the vast TexEA conspiracy? Someone will have to enlighten me. I’ve heard of the Maryland Energy Administration, but I’m not familar with the Tex Energy Administration, or is that some sort of shadow organization.

Enron was as much a friend of the Bush administration as it was of Clinton, Ann Richards and Gray Davis — an equal opportunity lobbyist/campaign contributor. All Enron cared about was lobbying for deregulation and trying to position itself for 1st mover advantage whenever possible. This is not the same as being in bed w/donors, as was the case with the TexDems and their Sharpstown stock fraud scandal.

Furthermore, to use your logic, McCain is corrupt and untrustworthy for being associated with Keatings.

As for secret meetings with Cheney, so what if the eco-freaks weren’t invited. Without being privy to the meetings, speculating on the significance is moot. What if Bush was considering attacking Iraq and needed advice on kickstarting the Iraqi infrastructure in the aftermath? The last thing they’re going to do is advertise that. Or perhaps it was to discuss how to reopen the issue of drilling in Alaska without needlessly riling up the greenies? That’s not necessarily a nefarious thing — to blunt the anti-oil crowd. Cheney can have all the secret meetings to formulate the policies he wants, but nothing becomes official w/o congress’ stamp of approval.

All the same, just because Enron was mismanaged, doesn’t mean that Lay don’t know energy and energy policies. Edison was a genius with electricity and established various industries, but never managed a company — does that mean Edison should be discredited in assisting in formulating electrification policy. Or how about the Rockefellers? Getting rich from your expertise in a certain industry is not “EVIL”

Let’s clear up some urban legends. Certain greedy schemers within Enron came up short trying to capitalize on the margins — technically not illegal under Clinton, but devasting nonetheless for the economy and market confidence. No one proved Lay complicit in defrauding the stockholders, but I can support the rationale that the buck stops at the CEO’s desk and this is something that Lay avoided.

As an aside, while I feel sorry for those former employees who lost everything, it must be said that they were STOOOPID for putting all their eggs in one basket instead of diversifying their 401K. But that’s greed for you.

Honest Liberals in CA agree that Gray was a dismal failure. This view of evil corporations is economically clueless.

If you thik deregulation is evil, then you should petition to reinstate pre-deregulation rules for Ma Bell and the airline industry and watch your costs double/triple overnight along with sinking quality of service. If we didn’t have deregulation, we wouldn’t have cell phones, broadband, Southwest or Jet Blue today.

If one is profitable in the status quo, why even seek change? Monopolists are by nature conservative — risk nothing. I thot Liberals were all about progressive change. Although I understand Liberals also hate to see any industry/business lose in a cutthroat market and will do anything to prop up economic dinosaurs.

As for the economic woes, they’re all self-inflicted, from over-inflated property costs to expulsion of businesses. Systemically, the problem was the Dems thot they could kill the gold-laying goose in perpetuity. With the resources that Cali has, there’s no reason why it couldn’t be flat out the richest State in both GDP and per-capital stats.

My sympathies to Ah-nuld in trying to turn that shipwreck around. Perhaps Tom will get his chance to continue growing the economy after the Guvernator breaks the back of the Cali legislature and tires of dabbling in Cali politics.

Stan in San Diego

Stan in San Diego

Perception is reality. SEEMS everything the Clintons touch is corrupted. You would think at some point, someone would tell them to just go home. Then again people who go up against Slickster and the Hilldabeast have a way of meeting face to face with EXTREME misfortune.