George Bush and Ken Lay

[tdoc]

Few people seem to talk about the fact that Ken Lay of Enron fame still has not been charged with any crimes. Does this bother anyone besides me. Does it bother anyone enough to vote for anybody but Busch next year?

[j8ear]

It bothers me.

What crimes should he be charged with?

-bear

[james t kirk]

Originally posted by j8ear
It bothers me.

What crimes should he be charged with?

-bear

Well, Fraud for one.

The guy was the CEO of a company that essentially bankrupted 1000's of hard working people by lying about the finances.

You can bet your sweet ass that Ken Lay is still living a life of luxury.

Why is it that a guy who robs a bank of 10 or 20 thousand dollars gets 20 years, yet the guy with the suit and tie who robs people of BILLIONS of dollars gets a pass?

Lay, Skilton, Ebbers, that fat fuck from Global Crossing, they are all nothing more than thieves.

[2wolves]

Originally posted by j8ear
It bothers me.

What crimes should he be charged with?

-bear

Continuing criminal enterprise to avoid paying Federal taxes? RICO is written broadly enough that it might apply.

2Wolves

[Ustwo]

Lions and Tigers and Bears, oh my!

If mobsters, who have people murdered, can get away with it for decades, even though everyone KNOWS they are mobsters, why does it surprise you that a CEO might have some plausible deniability to cover their tracks?

Oh wait my bad it MUST be Bush doing it!

[j8ear]

What fraud? If wishes were fishes, huh? Can you elaborate? Do you have any evidence? I mean aside from the mean old big bad company versus the poor out of work, retirement savings squandered employees anecdotes. Diversify people. It is only the greediest and easiestly hoodwinked employees who lost it all. Jobs come and go.

What tax evasion? What continuing 'criminal enterprise?' What RICO violations? (which in my opinion is one of the worst trespasses on our freedoms ever handed down by the federal governement. Guilt by association? WTF? Best intentions I guess). Your right though 2wolves, RICO probably does apply. Those take years to put together though from what I understand.

I feel for those effected by what happened, but blame largely poor judgement. I remember being offered a chance to invest in Enron in 1997. Turned it down because that company 'felt' shady to me. Energy futures, and shell games? Utility deregulation and all that hoopla, about cheaper more efficient, new ways to meet your energy needs? Please. Idiots fall for pyramid and other get rich schemes. It happened to ALL KINDS OF PEOPLE WHO fell for the bloated inflated markets of the Clinton era. Gazillion dollar companies not even PROJECTED to make a penny for 10 years trading at $150.00 a share. What the fuck were those people thinking?

Finally what does Bush have to do with it? Do you think they are not pursuing every single solitary avenue available to them to secure some kind of conviction for all of those corporate crooks? They got Sullivan (WCOM CFO) and Enron's CFO too if I recall. And they have passed all kinds of NEW laws to hold people accountable for these types of failures in the future. It would seem that maybe they were needed because the FEDS have nothing. Those who have read my theories before no I am a fan of very few laws, especially nanny, poor judgement protecting laws. Why not Clinton? After all, all of the activity which led up to the Enron fall occured under his watch.

my immediate thoughts to what has been offered so far,

-bear

EDIT: Took out some personal TMI I included for some reason.

[james t kirk]

Originally posted by j8ear
What fraud? If wishes were fishes, huh? Can you elaborate?

Are you F'ing serious???

What fraud?

How bout altering the books to make a drowning company look like a viable investment.

How bout violating every accounting principle out there.

How bout pressuring your accounting firm - Arther Anderson to break the law and agree with your fraudulant books.

How bout giving speeches to your employees encouraging them to buy shares stating that "never has our business model been more sound"

Originally posted by j8ear
I feel for those effected by what happened, but blame largely poor judgement. I remember being offered a chance to invest in Enron in 1997. Turned it down because that company 'felt' shady to me.

You must be mezmo. "It felt shady"

Wow, can you give me some other stock tips based on your "feel" of them. Most people or investment firms aren't so gifted, so we rely on certain financial statements to be accurate. Like the balance sheet for example. Most of us do our Due diligence and determine whether or not something is a viable investment and at what level of risk.

We don't always have your gift of ESP when it comes to stock purchases. We mere mortals have no choice but to count on the integrity of the auditors.

Originally posted by j8ear
It happened to ALL KINDS OF PEOPLE WHO fell for the bloated inflated markets of the Clinton era. Gazillion dollar companies not even PROJECTED to make a penny for 10 years trading at $150.00 a share. What the fuck were those people thinking?

That is a totally different scenario. Enron was not supposed to be a high risk speculative buy. It's balance sheet showed strong earnings and a healthy financial situation.

Enron was not like buying shares in bid.com.

Originally posted by j8ear
Finally what does Bush have to do with it? Do you think they are not pursuing every single solitary avenue available to them to secure some kind of conviction for all of those corporate crooks? They got Sullivan (WCOM CFO) and Enron's CFO too if I recall. And they have passed all kinds of NEW laws to hold people accountable for these types of failures in the future.

What Bush has to do with it is that his administration has taken NO action against the perpatrators of the crime at Enron. And make no mistake, these guys were criminals. As far as I am aware, no-one at Enron has done any time whatsoever. I am sure that if Bush wanted to get tough with crook CEO's, they would do something to deter this from happening again in the future, but they have not. That's why Bush. It's because it's his watch now.

The stock market tanked completely after Enron because investors simply lost their faith in the markets.

[james t kirk]

Re: Bush and Lay.......

Here's an interesting website. Looks like it's run by some former Enron investors and employees. Ouch.

http://www.thedailyenron.com/enron101/political.asp

Why Bush you asked......., well, I will crop from the website.......

Over 50 high-level Bush administration officials have had meaningful ties to the now defunct energy company. For example, the Secretary of the Army Thomas E. White worked at Enron for nearly two decades, and he served as vice chairman of Enron Energy Services. The President's top economic advisor Lawrence B. Lindsey and Trade Representative Robert B. Zoellick served on Enron's advisory board. According to financial disclosure forms, at least 40 administration officials owned Enron stock. These officials include senior officials at the White House, the Departments of the Treasury, Commerce, and State, the U.S. Trade Representative's office and EPA. The President reportedly refers to Enron CEO Ken Lay by the affectionate nickname "Kenny Boy."

Or this........

Enron Corporation is President Bush's number-one career patron, having given him more money throughout his political career than any other contributor. Enron Corporation PAC, and Enron executives, employees and their family members contributed a total of $736,800 to President Bush from 1993 to 2001. Enron also contributed $250,000 to the Republican National Convention for its 2000 convention.

Kenneth and Linda Lay gave $276,500 to George W. Bush from 1993 to 2000, including $100,000 to the President's inaugural fund, $10,000 to his election recount fund and $40,000 to his 1999 State Victory Fund Committee.

But it was not just the Bush campaign that raked in Enron contributions. From 1989-2001, Enron Corporation PAC, and Enron executives, employees and their family members gave a total of $5,951,570 in hard and soft money to federal candidates and parties. Of this amount, 74% ($4,404,162) went to Republicans and 26% ($1,547,408) to Democrats.

[Liquor Dealer]

Enron was a legitimate company for years. The fact that various people, including the president have had dealings with them in the past has nothing to do with Lay's current quagmire. Lay is going to delay this thing forever - just like everyone else with money does when they are in trouble. That does not mean, in any way, shape, or form, that George Bush has or had anything to do with current legal problems. Let's start a thread about Lay and the Pope! You probably could make the same case.

[Ustwo]

You people have heard of Global Crossings right?

While the news media have shown much enthusiasm in highlighting the monetary ties between top Republicans and the bankrupt energy corporation Enron, they have almost completely ignored such connections between Democrats and another big company that went belly-up nearly three weeks ago.

On January 28, telecommunications firm Global Crossing filed the fourth-largest bankruptcy in history, costing its stockholders millions and leaving thousands of employees without jobs. Its stock, which once traded for over $60 a share, now yields just 7 cents a share.

Global Crossing's bankruptcy, however, is just one of the many characteristics it shares with Enron. Like Enron, Global Crossing is now the subject of investigations by both the FBI and the SEC, which are looking into whether the companies deceived investors by inflating earnings and revenue in their financial statements. Auditor Arthur Andersen LLP, which has fired or demoted more than a half-dozen senior partners because of their dealings with Enron, also checked the books for Global Crossing.

In addition, Global Crossing, like Enron, was a major campaign contributor, donating $3.6 million since it started up in 1997. In 2001, the company was one of the top ten soft money contributors, with a majority of its donations filling Democratic coffers. In fact, Global Crossing gave more money to Democrats than Enron gave to Republicans.

It appears that the relationship between Democrats and Global Crossing was mutually beneficial.

Terry McAuliffe, who is now the Democratic National Committee Chairman, invested $100,000 in Global Crossing in 1997 as the company was just getting started. He sold his shares in the company a few years later for a reported $18 million.

In 1999, McAuliffe arranged for Global Crossing founder Gary Winnick to play golf with then President Bill Clinton. Soon after, Winnick pledged $1 million for the Clinton Presidential Library Fund, although DNC spokeswoman Jennifer Palmieri said Winnick has fulfilled just $100,000 of his pledge.

Last summer, Global Crossing was awarded a $400 million Defense Department contract, which called for an extensive phone and data network linking more than 6,000 scientists and engineers at defense test centers, laboratories, universities and industry locations around the country. However, the deal, which was decried by critics as a political prize left over from the Clinton Administration, was canceled just a month later.

Finally, two of the most vocal critics of Bush's connections to Enron, Senator Tom Daschle (D-S.Dak.) and Representative Henry Waxman (D-Calif.), were beneficiaries of Global Crossing. The company held a fundraiser for Daschle, and donated thousands of dollars to Waxman.

The media have done numerous stories on Enron, but despite the similarities between the two disgraced companies, they have almost completely ignored Global Crossing. In addition, most of the Global Crossing stories that do make it into print or on the airways fail to reveal the company's links to the Democratic Party. One notable exception is the Washington Times, which has run front-page stories on Global Crossing and has revealed some of its connections to top Democrats.

For the most part, though, the major media are dedicated to keeping the public focused on Enron and its ties to Republicans, despite the fact that there is still no evidence that political favors were exchanged for campaign contributions. There are at least indications that the previous Administration did engage in such exchanges with Global Crossing. As long as the media play up the demise of one company and ignore the reality of the other, they will continue to prove where their loyalties really lie.

Are all these guys in jail?

[Locobot]

Originally posted by j8ear
What fraud? If wishes were fishes, huh? Can you elaborate? Do you have any evidence? I mean aside from the mean old big bad company versus the poor out of work, retirement savings squandered employees anecdotes. Diversify people. It is only the greediest and easiestly hoodwinked employees who lost it all. Jobs come and go.

Enron employees were REQUIRED to invest in company stock if they wanted a retirement plan. I'm sure those elderly Enron employees who will now spend their time working multiple blue-collar jobs to get by instead of having a comfortable retirement will apprieciate your monday-morning-quarterback critique of their investment plans. You ask "what fraud?" but many more people are asking "what justice?" Why did Enron execs receive exorbitant severance and retirement packages when the rank-and-file was S.O.L.?

I feel for those effected by what happened, but blame largely poor judgement. I remember being offered a chance to invest in Enron in 1997. Turned it down because that company 'felt' shady to me. Energy futures, and shell games? Utility deregulation and all that hoopla, about cheaper more efficient, new ways to meet your energy needs? Please. Idiots fall for pyramid and other get rich schemes. It happened to ALL KINDS OF PEOPLE WHO fell for the bloated inflated markets of the Clinton era. Gazillion dollar companies not even PROJECTED to make a penny for 10 years trading at $150.00 a share. What the fuck were those people thinking?

Oh I see, this too was all Clinton's fault. I think he had something to do with my car needing new struts too. Not everyone had your Nostradomus-style prescience with regard to Enron's business dealings. In fact up until someone spotted Emperor Ken Lay without clothes Enron was considered a strong investment touted by every major firm and magazine as a safe buy.

Finally what does Bush have to do with it? Do you think they are not pursuing every single solitary avenue available to them to secure some kind of conviction for all of those corporate crooks? They got Sullivan (WCOM CFO) and Enron's CFO too if I recall. And they have passed all kinds of NEW laws to hold people accountable for these types of failures in the future. It would seem that maybe they were needed because the FEDS have nothing. Those who have read my theories before no I am a fan of very few laws, especially nanny, poor judgement protecting laws. Why not Clinton? After all, all of the activity which led up to the Enron fall occured under his watch.

Bush and Lay have long had close ties. Bush/Cheney were regularly flown around the country using Enron Lears throughout their 2000 campaign. Enron and Lay were among the largest Bush campaign contributors. Bush, Cheney, and Lay are close personal friends. Bush is our president now and from him the people are right to expect him to look out for their interests, not solely the interests of his corporate $$$$ connections. Unfortunately he has proven again and again that he will bend to the whims of corporate culture rather than serve the people he purportedly represents.

I'd just like to see an iota of the vigor with which Bush and Ashcroft prosecute people who sell bongs over the internet applied to the persecution of corporate criminals. Tommy Chong is in jail while Kenneth Lay walks free, where is the justice? I realize that j8ear, with your liberitarian views, you most likely don't support the incrimination of bong-salesmen. I don't either.

[Tophat665]

OK, this does not piss me off enough to vote ABBA. Not by itself. By itself it's just another instance of justice moving slowly and, one hopes, surely. While I think Ken Lay is probably liable for most everything he owns, I know I would want every benefit of the law before I were deprived of my assets. Extending the same to him is nothing more than self interest. That Bush (or Arnold or Carl Rove or Dick Cheney) may have something to do with slowing down the process of justicee even further is not such a big deal. By itself.

Taken as part of a pattern of behavior on the part of the current administration of extending privilege (privi = private, lege = law) to wealthy friends, this would be almost enough to make me vote for anyone else but Bush. If there were anything else wrong with this administration, I would most certainly have to vote against.

Well, let's see, they're racist (U. Michigan friend of court brief against what seemed to me to be the most fair and balanced affirmative action plan ever), they're power mad (USA Patriot act. Yes, I am pissed off at the Democratic congressmen who voted for it too), they're dishonest (campaign promise to reduce CO₂ emissions reneged on after election), they're corrupt (or they never would have gotten past Florida), shortsighted (current Forest use act, consistent opposition to environmental regulation), incompetent (how else does one go from surpluses as far as the eye can see to the largest deficits in history), and hobbled by delusional religious convictions (global gag order on abortion, effective halting of stem cell research).

That all taken together with Ken Lay and a pattern of misbehavior, malfeasance, and high crimes and misdemeanors that will never be recognized by a republican congress, and I would vote for Al Sharpton, Louis Farrakhan, or even Joe Leiberman before Bush.

[nirol]

Originally posted by 2wolves
Continuing criminal enterprise to avoid paying Federal taxes? RICO is written broadly enough that it might apply.

2Wolves

Hey 2wolves,
Enron's crimes are many, but I doubt that the above charge applies.
1) Enron's main crime was overestimating the demand for its products, energy and fiber-optic bandwidth. The economy slowed down, reducing demand for both when Enron had bet heavily on a shortage in the market, not the present surplus.
2) They also sold each of these products among subsidiaries and other suppliers (Duke Energy, Global Crossing) to inflate the demand for the product and therefore increase price. This contributed to the California energy crisis.
3) They bought products and companies with their inflated stock value and capitalized the price of these assets for 30 yrs. This spread out the cost of the purchase so that to service the debt each year was 1/30th. They sold these or other assets (a one time occurence) and showed the proceeds as part of their income, inflating their bottom line, which triggered bonus targets for the executives.
To your point:
1) Avoidance of taxes is legal, evasion is not.
2) Enron actually overpaid in Federal and state taxes by paying these on the phantom earnings. I believe the Bankruptcy Trustee has petitioned with the IRS for a refund of these taxes to help satisfy creditors.

I still believe that RICO may apply to Enron for other crimes, and I am not sure why this case hasnt gotten further.
In response to the initial question of the post. I doubt that Enron will persuade anyone to vote for or against Bush. It is a small issue relatively.

Thanks, and to steal a line from Analog:
SORRY FOR BEING SO LONG!

Merry Christmas everyone

[tdoc]

As far as what crimes he should be charged with- I leave that up to the more knowledgeable legally and financially. However, surely driving a 100 billion company into the ground using falsified documents etc merits at least a misdemeanor, say jaywalking. I am not particularly worried about people who put all their money into Enron stock, but Enron's bankruptcy hurt everyone in this country. Nonstock-owners were hurt as well, because some of this money would have been used to purchase their goods and services and employ them.

What does bush have to do with it? Ken Lay contributed enough to bush and apparently it was enough for a "get out of jail free" card. Plenty of other white collar criminals are being charged and prosecuted, but mysteriously Ken Lay is not. Actually, RICO would be fitting, as there really isn't that much difference between him and the mob.

[Ustwo]

Because Enron contributed to Bush, therefore Bush must be guilty of protecting him?

Nice logic.

[SLM3]

Perhaps if you explained why the logic is not sound you would come off less condescending. Unless of course there's no sarcasm at all in your message, in which case I apologize.



SLM3

[Ustwo]

Originally posted by SLM3
Perhaps if you explained why the logic is not sound you would come off less condescending. Unless of course there's no sarcasm at all in your message, in which case I apologize.



SLM3

One would hope for PROOF before conviction. I don't think this is a difficult concept to grasp.

[james t kirk]

Originally posted by Locobot

I'd just like to see an iota of the vigor with which Bush and Ashcroft prosecute people who sell bongs over the internet applied to the persecution of corporate criminals. Tommy Chong is in jail while Kenneth Lay walks free, where is the justice?

That is brilliant.

Makes you wonder what it's all about.

Don Henley once wrote, "A man with a brief case can steal more money than any man with a gun."

So true.

Anyway you cut it, Lay, Skilton, Ebers, the fat guy from Global Crossings are all just tarted up theives.

[onetime2]

Yep, I'm sure it's George Bush who personally signed the arrest warrant for Tommy Chong and is stopping the Enron investigation. For all the things he is supposedly behind, I'm surprised he has any time left over to eat a pretzel.

My driveway is icy, do you think I can somehow blame Bush?

[lordjeebus]

Originally posted by onetime2
Yep, I'm sure it's George Bush who personally signed the arrest warrant for Tommy Chong and is stopping the Enron investigation. For all the things he is supposedly behind, I'm surprised he has any time left over to eat a pretzel.

My driveway is icy, do you think I can somehow blame Bush?

I think that the point is that because he is the head of the Executive branch, Bush could do the right thing if it was important to him.

He could pardon Chong.
He could direct the government to actively investigate and prosecute Lay.
But he does not and likely will not -- and this is why many are frustrated and angry. With his executive power comes responsibility to apply it fairly.

[Liquor Dealer]

Originally posted by lordjeebus
I think that the point is that because he is the head of the Executive branch, Bush could do the right thing if it was important to him.

He could pardon Chong.
He could direct the government to actively investigate and prosecute Lay.
But he does not and likely will not -- and this is why many are frustrated and angry. With his executive power comes responsibility to apply it fairly.

Because of the way our government is designed the Executive Branch has very little influence over the Judicial Branch. He has perhaps the power of sugestion but, do you really want him messin' in legal affairs - this is exactly what many of you try to infer in some areas and curse him for in others - criminal investigation takes time - the bigger the fish the more time it takes. Lay will get his and when the time comes I'm sure none of us want to see him walkin' out on a technicality someone over looked.

[Endymon32]

I have to point out that Micheal Moore in his book "Stupid White Men" told his readers that Enron was a great opportunity and they should invest in it. LOL

Stupid White Men Page 24.

[tdoc]

My thoughts exactly lordjeebus. LD-the executive branch brings the charges. Bush directs Ahcroft who directs some federal prosecutor to sharpen his pencil. If you have faith that he will eventually see a courtroom you have more faith than I, and no I wouldn't want him to walk on some technicality.

[filtherton]

Wasn't lay also part of bush's top-secret energy task force? That's the kind of integrity i long for in the folks who shape our domestic policies.

Is it relevant that at one point bush himself was also under investigation for business improprieties?

[Locobot]

Originally posted by filtherton
Wasn't lay also part of bush's top-secret energy task force? That's the kind of integrity i long for in the folks who shape our domestic policies.

That's correct. The transcripts from this task force have illegally been kept from release. Starting to sound a little cozy? Too bad Ken Starr destroyed the credibility and purpose of the independant counsel.

[onetime2]

As an update, my driveway is still icy. Will Bush ever get his act together?

[james t kirk]

trying to reserect a thread in which it would seem to me that it's pretty clear that people feel cheated that Lay got away with it?

Where the hell in NJ do you live that your driveway is still icy by the way?

It was +10 C yesterday here in Toronto for crying out loud. There isn't a surviving snow flake for miles.

What, is your driveway coated with Ice9 ?

[Ustwo]

Originally posted by Locobot
That's correct. The transcripts from this task force have illegally been kept from release. Starting to sound a little cozy? Too bad Ken Starr destroyed the credibility and purpose of the independant counsel.

and then...

WASHINGTON (AP) - Democratic presidential contender Howard Dean has demanded release of secret deliberations of Vice President Dick Cheney's energy task force. But as Vermont governor, Dean had an energy task force that met in secret and angered state lawmakers.

Dean's group held one public hearing and after-the-fact volunteered the names of industry executives and liberal advocates it consulted in private, but the Vermont governor refused to open the task force's closed-door deliberations.

In 1999, Dean offered the same argument the Bush administration uses today for keeping deliberations of a policy task force secret.

"The governor needs to receive advice from time to time in closed session. As every person in government knows, sometimes you get more open discussion when it's not public," Dean was quoted as saying.

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20031228/D7VNLUIG2.html

[onetime2]

Originally posted by james t kirk
trying to reserect a thread in which it would seem to me that it's pretty clear that people feel cheated that Lay got away with it?

Where the hell in NJ do you live that your driveway is still icy by the way?

It was +10 C yesterday here in Toronto for crying out loud. There isn't a surviving snow flake for miles.

What, is your driveway coated with Ice9 ?

Well, as I watched the news today, I got to see some "pundits" trying to stir things up by blaming Bush for the Mad Cow "outbreak" this thread sprung to mind.

And yep, there's still some ice on the driveway, maybe Bush will speed this global warming thing up and I won't have to worry about it anymore. I mean, if all these allegations are correct, he's probably got a little switch on his desk that controls that too.

[nanofever]

Originally posted by Endymon32
I have to point out that Micheal Moore in his book "Stupid White Men" told his readers that Enron was a great opportunity and they should invest in it. LOL

Stupid White Men Page 24.

And this is on-topic how again ?

Oh right, if you can't make a coherant argument, attack someone unrelated who you don't like...

[james t kirk]

Some news today regarding ENRON.

To the previous posters who said "What Fraud", well, looks like one of the bigger boys is charged with 98 counts of fraud and may be going away for 10 years.

Buh bye....

Interesting to note that Enron stock surged 88% on the news. (From 4 cents to 7 cents, hmmm, used to trade for 90 bucks at one time.)

Here's the link and one of the paragraphs...

http://msnbc.msn.com/Default.aspx?id=3897128&p1=0

Andrew Fastow, 42, is charged with 98 counts of fraud, money laundering, insider trading and other charges for allegedly masterminding a web of schemes that hid Enron’s debt, inflated profits and allowed him to skim millions of dollars for himself, his family and selected friends and colleagues. He has pleaded innocent and is free on $5 million bond. He has asked the court to move his trial, scheduled for April, out of Houston — preferably out of the state.

[Endymon32]

Originally posted by nanofever
And this is on-topic how again ?

Oh right, if you can't make a coherant argument, attack someone unrelated who you don't like...

Not an attack, just presenting a fact. If you think its an attack, then that shows how you feel about Moore.

[filtherton]

Originally posted by Endymon32
Not an attack, just presenting a fact. If you think its an attack, then that shows how you feel about Moore.

And if you think it is relevant, then that shows how you feel about topical discussions.

[j8ear]

Originally posted by james t kirk
Some news today regarding ENRON.
*snip dripping with sarcasm snip*
Buh bye....
*snip uninteresting 'interesting to note' comment and sparsely detailed excert snip*

You provide the fraud charges which didn't exist before you posted the question, and offer a self congratulatory...

buh-bye.

Your a wierd cat. Don't break your arm patting yourself on the back big guy...

Actually to me it looks like one of the bigger guys and his fucking wife have made a deal with the devil in order to secure some remainder of their existence on our side of prison bars. Ten years. Peanuts. Watch, and mark my words, these two song birds are going to wrap Lay and probably a pant load of yes-bitches, and pencil-necked arthur anderson bean counting pukes into staggerringly severe federal prison sentences.

This is but a small step down a very long road.

I will refrain from commenting further in this thread until that happens.

out,

-bear

[filtherton]

Originally posted by j8ear


Actually to me it looks like one of the bigger guys and his fucking wife have made a deal with the devil in order to secure some remainder of their existence on our side of prison bars. Ten years. Peanuts. Watch, and mark my words, these two song birds are going to wrap Lay and probably a pant load of yes-bitches, and pencil-necked arthur anderson bean counting pukes into staggerringly severe federal prison sentences.

This is but a small step down a very long road.

I will refrain from commenting further in this thread until that happens.

out,

-bear

Good riddance(the executives, not you).

[james t kirk]

Originally posted by j8ear

Your a wierd cat.
-bear

That's "you're" (as in YOU ARE contracted to you're), not "your" [sic] (as in YOUR level of intelligence).

When you learn to conjugate your verbs and spell at a grade 6 level, i might take you a little more seriously.

[Ustwo]

Originally posted by james t kirk
That's "you're" (as in YOU ARE contracted to you're), not "your" [sic] (as in YOUR level of intelligence).

When you learn to conjugate your verbs and spell at a grade 6 level, i might take you a little more seriously.

I've always thought that the surest sign of winning a debate on a message board, is when the counter argument is based on correcting some ones spelling and grammar.

[Lebell]

Too much BS in this thread that has nothing to do with the topic, including sarcasm and personal attacks that are walking the edge of a warning/banning for some of you.

Thread Closed.