Ken sure got around! CEO tied to Kerrys, too...

[sandboxface]

Not sure if this was posted here yet.

Ken sure got around! CEO tied to Kerrys, too

President Bush may know indicted ex-Enron boss Ken Lay as ``Kenny Boy,'' but Sen. John F. Kerry and his millionaire wife also have past financial and personal ties to Lay's shamed energy firm, documents show.

Kerry and Teresa Heinz Kerry reported more than $250,000 in Enron stock ownership before the firm's 2003 collapse. Kerry also was forced to return a campaign contribution from an implicated Enron executive.

And Heinz Kerry served on a charity board with Lay, even after he was implicated in the alleged fraud, records show.

Kerry has railed against the Bush administration's handling of the Enron scandal on the campaign trail.

MORE

http://news.bostonherald.com/national/view.bg?articleid=34958

[GOPisEvil]

1. More shit from the Boston Herald

[rustydog]

62. They sold that stock in 1997! where's the connecton to Lay?

Some iorn-clad connection huh?

They, like tens of thousands of others owned stock in Enron. and sold it in 1997.
Unlike Bush who sold his soul to Lay and the country's energy program to Enron.
which is the more Evil connection?

[sidwill]

2. A Duer linking the Boston Herald?!?!?!

Hmmmmmmmmmmm...........

[sandboxface]

12. I am not familiar with BH

What's your opinion on the Boston Herald?

I read all news sources. Do I take any for fact? No. Facts emerge after numerous reports.

Just reporting...

[a_random_joel]

19. Rupert Murdoch also happens to own this rag...

[sandboxface]

Didn't know, not surprising.

I equate this with what happened in 2000 when the news suddenly changed to Bush winning Florida.

[no name no slogan]

57. So what? JFK's brother's law firm defended Rupert Murdoch

Kerry's brother's firm, his 9th-largest campaign contributor, makes its $$ by defending big-media companies against government regulation. And yes, their past clients have included Rupert Murdoch.

Face it: there's almost no totally clean politicians. Not Shrub, not Kerry, not Nader. All we can do is pick the least repugnant of them, and the one who we think will do what's best for the country, if elected.

For 2004, that's Kerry.

[a_random_joel]

26. Facts emerge after "numerous reports?"

I thought the point was for the reports to get the facts first...

[sandboxface]

29. That's the way it's supposed to work, agreed.

Confusion is the black magic of the corporate controlled media.

[Monte Carlo]

3. Rupert's local rag is not to be taken at face value.

I'm willing to entertain a connection, but not from the Herald.

[Literate Tar Heel]

4. how are those documents

so easy to find, but all the king's courts and all the king's men can't put Bush's National Guard records together again? (and the Cheney energy task force too for that matter)

[oasis]

5. weak. (n/t)

[DaveSZ]

7. Boston Herald = Newsmax

:)

[Mz Pip]

6. This is silly

I can only imagine how many teachers, etc in CA. had Enron stock as part of the mutual funds investments in their retirement packages.

Why is Heinz Kerry being on a charity board with Lay implication of anything?

I'm a Democrat. So is James Trafficant. That does not make me a supporter of James Trafficant.

Geez these people make me nuts with their compleate inability to think critically.

MzPip
:dem:

[Ganja Ninja]

8. Lots of people held Enron stock, they're called victims.

Typical of the right wing media to take loose associations and turn them into vague accusations.

[a_random_joel]

9. OMFG! STOP THE TRAIN!

The Kerry's bought stock in a successful company?

What kind of commie-liberals are they!

</sarcasm>

[tom_paine]

10. The Boston Herald is Bushevik Bullshit

They are going to implicate him by mentioning he was on a charity board with Kenny Boy?

Or that he RETURNED an Enron contribution.

Yah. Damning stuff.

Like the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.

[drscm]

11. Media Matters Responds - Another Crass Repug Talking Point

http://mediamatters.org/items/200407120007

[buycitgo]

13. thank god for groups like

media matters

FAIR

CFAP

the daily howler

who else?

oh yeah

media lies daily

[sandboxface]

32. Thanks for the link

I found it entertaining how Fox put the Enron logo above Kerry and his wife's head during the broadcast. Establish Lay as the bad guy and pin him on Kerry, logo branding and all.

[DrBB]

39. Kerry owned stock in Enron, but Enron bought about $500K worth of Bush n/t

[a_random_joel]

14. 3 quick points

1. Owning stock in a company (especially bought PRIOR to the collapse) means nothing. How does that "tie" Lay to the Kerry's?

2. Campaign contributions are made by corporations to BOTH parties. It is called hedging bets. (Even so, Enron clearly contributed much more the the Pukes) BTW, did you miss the part where it said they RETURNED the contribution?

3. Does one get to choose who else is on a board, unless I suppose one is chair?


Next.

[sandboxface]

17. Jeez..

Yes, I read about the returned contributions. And I agree that this article is fairly weak.

Personally, I do not have a high opinion of Kerry. I'd like to know more dirt on the guy - what is he all about and what is his history? I found this article and decided to see what you all had to say - if there is any beef to it.

[Bridget Burke]

20. Personally, what's your problem with Kerry?

I was unaware that he had as many blanks in his resume as your president. His life seems fairly documented.

There may be beef in the article--discount ground "meat" that's been out in the Texas sun for a day or 2.

[sandboxface]

28. Why don't you read my response again...

"Personally, I do not have a high opinion of Kerry. I'd like to know more dirt on the guy - what is he all about and what is his history? I found this article and decided to see what you all had to say - if there is any beef to it."

I was just running it past the DU board. I am interested in what you all had to say. Instead of getting constructive feedback, I got flammed. What the hell is that all about? Are we will Freeperville?

And don't give me this YOUR PRESIDENT shit. Your making an idioc assumption. Just because I strongly question Kerry doesn't mean I support * in any way. Electing Kerry may be a short term manuver to eject the PNACers from the White House, but he is NOT a solution the underlying problem.

[a_random_joel]

33. Apologies if I offended in any way. BUT...

I sort of have a problem with you coming in saying you'd like more "dirt" on the guy.

This makes an implicit assumption that there is "dirt" to begin with. Insomuch as there is at least considerably less "dirt" (and blood, I might add) as there is on Bush.

If you want to learn more about candidate Kerry, this is indeed the place to do it. But it is not dirt you will find here. We back our candidate 99%.

With all due respect... the "dirt" you seek is found at FreeRepublic.

[formernaderite]

37. Come on guys....DC politics is totally incestuous....

...am I surprised? NO. They're all doing it. So Kerry hosted Ken after his indictment....again, I'm not surprised. It's the price of running for office.
Let's all act a bit more mature and understand that politicians cozy up with one another and the corporate hogs all the time. No one is immune. They say one thing on the Senate floor and leave for dinner together. Anyone who's worked on the hill (which I did years ago) knows how much bullshit flows.
Yes, it's sad for those of us who truly care to see politicians who don't, but still do their job. Their job is to be partisan and hack away at the other party. The only thing that will break this trend is a true third party emergence....which I know no one wants to hear. Don't worry, I'm pulling the lever for Kerry.

[Worst Username Ever]

15. No big deal, lots of people owned Enron stock.

edit: spelling

[Raven]

16. Now, now, Sandbox...

pretty damning stuff from a newspaper with more ads than news. Teresa on a charity board with Lay? What was she supposed to do, resign? John owned Enron stock? Shame on him! I did too, shame on me. Why bother posting this crap here...you are wasting your time. Try preaching to the choir at FreeRepublic...they would love your post.

[sandboxface]

18. Yes, shame on you....

I don't mind that you disagree with this article, that is totally fine. I didn't state that I agreed. In fact, I don't.

I was just posting it to see what you all thought about it. For fuck's sake, attack the article, not me! Is this not an open forum?

[Raven]

21. Your introduction certainly sounded like you agreed.

You could have said "What do folks think of this?" Something more neutral would have been nice. :-)

[sandboxface]

24. I simply posted the article.

In the future I may consider to include a brief comment to avoid getting flamed....

[Raven]

27. That might be a good idea.

Sometimes it's helpful to know the purpose of a post and this news story is so ridiculous that it might have merited a comment from you. If you were wondering about the significance of Teresa's and John's involvement, I think you got your answers...sitting on a charity board with a crook who hasn't been indicted or convicted yet isn't something to write home about and owning Enron stock was a mistake that alot of good people made. Sorry if I offended you...really. I hope you will continue to post. This is an open forum which means that I am also free to take you on as you are free to do the same to me.

[Bandit]

30. You made the comment that you wish to dig up dirt on Kerry

That automatically makes you quite suspect. Name me any person over fifty that has led a perfect life with no mistakes. I would put Kerry's up against virtually every single person in this administration on all accounts. Owning stock in a huge corporation is now considered being linked to the CEO. Give me a break...... Do you not know any better?

[sandboxface]

34. Hmm.. Do I know any better?

Everybody has dirt. I just want to know about Kerry's. What's his agenda? Who is he connected to?

Would you call me suspect if I said that I don't trust politicians? Would you blame me for looking into Kerry's past?

[sangh0]

48. I have no dirt

You shouldnt make such assumptions about how other people have hidden dirt. And if you do so, you shouldn't be asking what other people's agenda are.

If everyone has dirt, that means that YOU have dirt, which raises all sorts of questions. Do you think it would be reasonable for us to now embark on an effort to investigate your past?

Would you blame me for looking into Kerry's past?

Yes, I would. Not only have scores of "journalists" investigated Kerry's past and found NOTHING, but there's also the Nixon administration which devoted the enourmous resources of the entire Federal govt to investigate Kerry, and they came up with nothing also.

But yeah, I'm sure you'll come up with something the rest of them missed. After all, your efforts have already uncovered the lies of a right-wing rag whose owners hate Kerry.

[a_random_joel]

50. Ouch.

"But yeah, I'm sure you'll come up with something the rest of them missed. After all, your efforts have already uncovered the lies of a right-wing rag whose owners hate Kerry."

You nailed the dismount.

[sandboxface]

61. Misunderstanding

Owning stock in a huge corporation is now considered being linked to the CEO. Give me a break...... Do you not know any better?

My first read of this was wrong, so my reply was out of context. I agree that the stock owenership is totally bogus. As I wrote before, I was simply posting this article to see how people would react and if there was more to the story.

[Old and In the Way]

31. Here's what I think about the aricle.

No Sale. You couldn't tell by reading it, that it was a hit piece? And if you want to post dumb, biased articles....you ought to be prepared to take a little heat from it.

If you a "looking for dirt", I suggest mining over at the Free Republic or Lucianne....I think you'll find plenty there......just not the truth.

[sandboxface]

36. St. Kerry thanks you...

All I am asking for are details on Kerry. And in some cases, that means dirt. If there can't be critical discussion about Kerry on DU, then what is it worth? I admit, I just threw the article at you all with no context. I usually comment on other posts, so I am not used to what people expect in a post. That won't happen again.

[drscm]

44. And the RNC thanks you. Please READ the following and learn.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200407120007

[sandboxface]

47. Uh huh...

I have already commented on this link, above.

It would be more appropiate if you were well informed before you ask others to LEARN.

[Manix]

22. hey! he's a whore........that is the nature of the beast.

[yellowcanine]

23. BS! Lots of people owned Enron stock. It is a public company. That's not

a "link". Charity boards? Please. Do you know how people get on charity boards? By donating lots of money. So Ken Lay and Theresa Heinz donated to the same charity. That is not a link. A $1000 donation from an Enron Executive? How is that a "link" to Ken Lay? The Boston Herald should be ashamed of themselves.

[Zorra]

25. So? This is nothing. Freepers heads are exploding over the fact that

Enron was the largest historical contributor to Bu$h's campaigns, over $500,000!!! Freepers are getting desperate. Bu$h was good friends with Ken Lay and even had Lay sleep in the WH, Bu$h adopted 7 out of 8 recommendations that Dick Cheney received in a memo from Ken Lay in his WH energy policy, and Bu$h refused to help California during it's energy crisis because he was Enrons little "cabin boy".

If Ken Lay tells what he knows about Bu$h, and turns state's evidence, Bu$h may go to prison.

So, what is the big deal about Kerry and Enron? These are plainly completely innocent and harmless details. For example:

"Kerry's campaign took $1,000 from an executive of Enron Wind in November 2001, a check he returned a few months later. He also took $250 from an Enron accountant in May - a check he won't return, Meehan said, because that donor hasn't been implicated in the alleged fraud."

Yawn.

"A Heinz family trust bought between $250,000 and $500,000 of stock in December 1995, just days before Heinz Kerry announced Lay would serve as a member of the Heinz Center philanthropy, Kerry's Senate financial disclosure documents show."

Yawn. Kerry married Teresa in 1995. I doubt he had anything to do with the Heinz family trust. Enron didn't go down until 2001-2002.

"The stock brought between $5,000 and $15,000 in dividends in 1996 before it was sold in 1997, the disclosure forms show."

Yawn.

"Kerry and Teresa Heinz Kerry reported more than $250,000 in Enron stock ownership before the firm's 2003 collapse. Kerry also was forced to return a campaign contribution from an implicated Enron executive."

As noted above, they sold the stock in 1997. Years before Enron collapsed. I would be interested to see if the statement that Kerry was forced to return a campaign contribution is true. I bet he returned it voluntarily. It is possible that Senator Kerry could file a libel lawsuit against the author and the Boston Herald if this statement is not accurate.

This article is a worthless piece of propaganda garbage.

All paragraphs in quotation marks were taken from this link:

http://news.bostonherald.com/national/view.bg?articleid=34958

[a_random_joel]

35. Dear sandboxface.

You got flamed here, and questioned the openness of our forum.

Fair enough. I invite you to post the following at FreeRepublic.com

"Which is the bigger Lay link?"

1. Kerry's stock in Enron?

OR

Bush's use of Enron corporate jets during the Florida Election debacle?

2. Teresa's presence on a charity board with Lay?

OR

Lay's presence in the secret Energy meetings with Cheney?

3. Kerry's returned campaign contribution?

OR

The hundreds of thousands of dollars contributed to the Republican party on behalf of Enron, none of which have been returned... including contributions used by Tom Delay towards redistricting?

Or how about all the former Enron people who hold or have held posts within this Administration (at last count there was well over a dozen).

Want to see a real flamefest? Go for it...

[sandboxface]

41. Reply

I replied to your other post at the link below. I can imagine what type of response I'd get at FreeRepublic. We don't have to go there. The thing I like about DU is that people are usually more open to entertaining alternatives. Flamming is ok, and sometimes well deserved.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=1984453&mesg_id=1985576

[ElsewheresDaughter]

38. nice try...but i believe i read somewhere that Kerry returned the money to

Enron employees who lost money in 401s

[sandboxface]

40. Let's get something straight...

from: a_random_joel

I sort of have a problem with you coming in saying you'd like more "dirt" on the guy.

This makes an implicit assumption that there is "dirt" to begin with. Insomuch as there is at least considerably less "dirt" (and blood, I might add) as there is on Bush.

If you want to learn more about candidate Kerry, this is indeed the place to do it. But it is not dirt you will find here. We back our candidate 99%.

With all due respect... the "dirt" you seek is found at FreeRepublic.

I am posting this on a new thread as it pertains to the overall thread.


My understanding is that this is DemocraticUnderground.com, not JohnKerryForPresident.com

I came across a post here about a week ago titled: A vote for Kerry is a vote for Bush out of office. I happen to strongly agree with that statement, as did many other DUers. (My candidate of choice is Dennis Kucinich, someone who openly stands for ending the occupation of Iraq, universal health care, repealing the patriot act, etc.) Kerry does not impress me, at all. He seems like another wimpy Democrat who, once in office, will continue with his own personal agendas. My opinion.

As a_random_joel pointed out, dirt may not be the appropriate word. What I want to know is this: Who's behind Kerry and why? What are his corporate ties? I want to know his past and how that might conflict with today. I am simply questioning, something I think is necessary for a healthy democracy.

In response to a_random_joel, I confess, I have the assumption that there is "dirt" to begin with. I don't trust politicians. That dirt may be a petty smear by Fox OR it may have some substance. That is for us to decide individually.

Electing Kerry may be a short term maneuver to eject the PNACers from the White House, but he is NOT a solution the underlying problem. The problem stems deep into our daily lives. American lifestyle is determined by the corporate bottom line. Our consumption, our interests, our relationships, our communication methods and our government is shaped by a methodology designed to benefit a few elite by taxing the populous and raping the planet.

The only real way out, as I see it, is sustainability. Before we can take back our government, we need to take back our lives.

[Raven]

42. What does "sustainability" mean? And

what would you have me do with my life...other than voting for Kerry? And how does quoting a rancid article in the Boston Herald help further this discussion?

[sandboxface]

45. ????

In the picture I am painting, sustainability means having more control over one's life. Most Americans are at the mercy of corporations for their basic needs. Food is pretty much out of our hands - it is grown, transported and sold, not by us, but by corporations. Sustainability also means effective working with our environment, not destroying it.

I am not suggesting you do anything with your life.

When did I quote the Boston Hearld article, other than on my original post? If you read my other responses, I was simply posting the article for discussion. I was not aware of Boston Hearald being owned by Murdock and its inherent bias.

[a_random_joel]

46. Fair Enough, BUT...

We are not talking mere partisan politics here.

This Administration has done more damage in a shorter time than any in recent history; as you are a Kucinich supporter, I'm sure I don't have to paint the picture.

Yes, this is an open PROGRESSIVE forum, and clearly you are to the left of Kerry ideologically. I might add that I am too, and many of us here are.

But right now we need to concentrate on the big problem - namely the war-profiteering, war-inducing, class warfare engaging, civil liberty reducing, terror provoking, hardcore Right Wing squatters that currently reside at 1600 Pennsylvania.

We can have a nice discussion on progressive values and how far left to steer later.

But such discussions are not well-suited on Iraqi frontlines or from "re-education" camps. So, first things first.

Let's talk about where to put the rug, after we move the furniture...

On Edit: Posting such fallacious drivel does nothing to "elevate" the debate.

[sandboxface]

55. I disagree

You seem to have faith that there will be a 'later' point in time where we will be able to discuss these issues. I'm not so sure of this reality. We always seems to be in limbo, settling for the best option given to us. I am of the opinion that that mindset is part of the problem and the terrorists in the White House are VERY aware of it. They use it to their advantage.

*If* Kerry is elected in November, what will change? Even if he makes real efforts to turn America around, the forces that put Bush in the White House and continue to defend him are still there and will do everything in their power to counteract Kerry (if they don't adopt him.) As I said, the problem is much bigger than the facade of the Bush Administration.

I also understand there is a game to be played - the game of politics. Kerry has his strategy and I believe he is getting help from other places in the government that want Bush out. But I don't think any REAL change will come from playing this game, at least not the way it is currently set up. I'm not saying we should abandon the game all together. I think we need to play this game sharply, with the goal of changing the game clearly defined (or at least actively discussed).

I am proposing that a way to shift the game is through sustainability. People have been talking about sustainability for over 35 years. Look where we are today. Why haven't we taken these ideas seriously? One reason is because we are distracted by one thing or another. This election, I argue, is another distraction.

Here's a quote from Chomsky:

"Activist movements, if at all serious, pay virtually no attention to which faction of the business party is in office, but continue with their daily work, from which elections are a diversion -- which we cannot ignore, any more than we can ignore the sun rising; they exist."

The last thing I want to throw in is part of the reality of what we are up against:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=1974581&mesg_id=1974581

There are a lot of people out there who don't vote because they have zero faith in the system. They don't care about Bush doing this or that, because to them Kerry is the same shit, different name. I can understand their claims, but I disagree with their actions. I vote because I have faith in the idea of democracy.

I feel the people who agree that "a vote for Kerry is a vote for Bush out of office" should speak up. They should be clear on what they really mean. For me, Kerry is a short term fix. We need to be thinking about other approaches to our overwhelming problems.

[a_random_joel]

59. Short Term Fix better than no fix.

I understand the points you are making, and while I disagree with what you present, again, based on the sheer mendacity of this Misadministration and the amount of damage it is has done, I do respect your POV.

That said, I still do not see where the content you originally posted validates such a position.

[sandboxface]

60. If you're gonna settle with a short term fix..

YOU BETTER BE THINKING OF YOUR NEXT MOVE OR YOUR SHORT TERM FIX WILL BE NO FIX AT ALL IN THE LONG TERM. We have become a nation of 'short term fixes' rather than addressing the problems head on. I playing along with the short term fix for this election, but I am not lying to myself by thinking things are actually going to 'fixed'.


That said, I still do not see where the content you originally posted validates such a position.

I'm confused, what post are you talking about? My original? I just posed an article with no commentary. Didn't we go through this already?

[sandboxface]

56. Oops!

I ment to change the subject. I was going to write something starting with "I", but then decided to come back to it later. Auto-fill left its mark. The title should be: I think it's more complex than that

[sangh0]

49. Why do you assume that Kerry has "dirt"?

In addition to being investigated by scores of reporters and his Republican opponents in the various races he has run in, Kerry has also had the Nixon administration use the resources of the Federal govt to investigate Kerry's past, and not one of them has found anything that can stick.

So what makes you think that you could succeed where scores of professionals have failed?

[FredScuttle]

43. POOP

That's all this bullshit post deserves

[West Coast Democrat]

51. How does this article link Kerry to Ken Lay?

How does owning Enron stock make you connected to Ken Lay? Lots of people owned Enron stock. What an inane article!

[seabeyond]

52. he was also connected to clinton

why i havent put much stalk into the bush lay story. he paid every president off and more. maybe their company wouldnt have gone to such dumps if they werent paying everyone off

[Redleg]

53. The Kerry's sold their shares in 1997- well before the Enron collapse.

Perhaps you should do your homework before posting such flamebait.

[sangh0]

54. Maybe s/he DID do the homework

and maybe it was an assignment where penmanship counts more than accuracy. :-)

[Inland]

58. Dude, if Kerry owned Enron stock, that makes him a victim, not a friend.

>>Kerry and Teresa Heinz Kerry reported more than $250,000 in Enron stock ownership before the firm's 2003 collapse.<<

And therefore lost the value. That makes them victims of Enron==and you use that as a "tie" to Ken Lay? Disgusting.

>>And Heinz Kerry served on a charity board with Lay, even after he was implicated in the alleged fraud, records show. <<

I guess she should have just stopped her charity work right then and there. She does charity, and this is the thanks she gets. Some tie.

You want ties? Here's a tie:

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/