COMMENTS: 42
Enron Bosses--Guilty; George Bush--Guilty
Sign up to stay up to date on the latest headlines via email.
On the sixth day of deliberations following the conclusion of a long-delayed federal trial, a Houston jury found Lay guilty on six counts of fraud and conspiracy. In a separate decision, US District Judge Sim Lake ruled that Lay was guilty of four counts of fraud and making false statements.
The same jury that convicted Lay found Enron's former chief executive, Jeffrey Skilling, guilty on 19 counts of fraud, conspiracy, making false statements and engaging in insider trading.
Lay, who President Bush affectionately referred to as "Kenny-boy" when the two forged an alliance in the 1990s to advance Bush's political ambitions and Lay's business prospects, contributed $122,500 to Bush's gubernatorial campaigns in Texas. Lay would later explain to a PBS "Frontline" interviewer that, though he had worked closely with former Texas Governor Ann Richards, the Democrat incumbent who Bush challenged in 1994, he backed the Republican because "I was very close to George W."
Needless to say, once Bush became governor, Lay got his phone calls returned. A report issued by Public Citizen in February 2001, months before the Enron scandal broke, identified Lay as "a long-time Bush family friend and an architect of Bush's policies on electricity deregulation, taxes and tort reform while Bush was Texas governor."
No wonder Lay had Enron give $50,000 to pay for Bush's second inaugural party in Austin in 1999 -- a showcase event that was organized by Karl Rove and others to help the Texas governor step onto the national political stage. After Bush gave Enron exactly what it wanted in 1999, by signing legislation that deregulated the state's electrical markets, Lay knew he had found his candidate for president.
When Bush opened his campaign, Lay opened the cash spiggots.
As a "Bush Pioneer" in the run-up to the 2000 presidential election, Lay was a key member of the Bush campaign's fund-raising inner circle. Under Lay's leadership, Enron ultimately gave Bush $550,025, making the corporation the Texan's No. 1 career patron at the time the 2000 election campaign began, according to the Center for Public Integrity. Lay personally pumped almost $400,000 into Republican hard- and soft-money funds, while Enron slipped another $1.5 million into the GOP's soft-money cesspool.
But that was just the beginning. Lay sent a letter to Enron executives urging them to contribute to Bush's campaign. More than 100 of them -- including Skilling, a major Bush giver since 1993, when he cut his first $5,000 check to GW's gubernatorial campaign -- did just that. Dozens of spouses wrote, including "homemaker" and frequent $10,000 donor Linda Lay, gave as well, making the Enron "family" a prime source of the money that gave Bush his early advantage over Republican rivals such as Arizona Senator John McCain.
All told, it is estimated that, over the years prior the company's bankruptcy, Lay, his company and its employees contributed close to $2 million to fund George W. Bush's political rise.
Lay found other ways to help, as well. He put Enron's corporate jets at the disposal of the Bush campaign in 2000. He kicked in $5,000 to pay for the Florida recount fight, while a top Enron "consultant," former Secretary of State James A. Baker III, ran the Republican's recount effort. He even paid for his own bookkeeping, chipping in $1,000 to help the Bush-Cheney campaign comply with campaign-finance laws. And Lay and Enron gave $300,000 to underwrite the Bush-Cheney inauguration festivities in 2001. Did all that giving pay off? You bet!
Lay was appointed as one of five members of the elite "Energy Department Transition Team," which set the stage for the Vice President Dick Cheney's energy task force and administration policies designed to benefit corporations such as Enron. A report on "Bush Administration Contacts with Enron," compiled at the request of Congressman Henry Waxman, D-California, by the minority staff of the Special Investigations Division of the House Committee on Government Reform, U.S. House of Representatives, found evidence of at least 112 contacts between Enron and White House or other Administration officials during the month prior to the corporation's very-public collapse in late 2001. At least 40 of those contacts involved top White House officials, including Vice President Dick Cheney, presidential advisor Karl Rove, White House economic advisor Lawrence Lindsey, White House personnel director Clay Johnson III, and White House energy task force director Andrew D. Lundquist.
As Waxman explained in a 2001 interview, "The fact of the matter is that Enron and Ken Lay, who was the Chief Executive Officer of Enron, had an extraordinary amount of influence and access to the Bush Administration. Lay was called a close friend by both the President and the Vice President. When the Vice President chaired an Energy Task Force, Ken Lay had an opportunity to meet privately with the Vice President and to have a great deal of influence in their recommendations."
Bush and his aides have worked hard since the Enron scandal broke to suggest that Lay was just another generous Texan. But the attempts to deny linkages to the now-convicted corporate criminal never cut water with Lone Star-state watchdog Craig McDonald, the director of Texans for Public Justice.
"President Bush's explanation of his relationship with Enron is at best a half truth," McDonald said after Bush first tried to distance himself from Lay and other Enron executives. "He was in bed with Enron before he ever held a political office."
As governor and president, Bush maintained that intimate relationship. Now that his strange bedmate have been convicted of fraud, isn't it time for the president to end the fraud of claiming that he was ever anything less than a political partner of Lay and the Enron team?
Stay up to date with the latest AlterNet headlines via email
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Wesley69 on May 25, 2006 12:29 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Scandal fatigue
Posted by: outtolunch
» RE: Scandal fatigue
Posted by: adp3d
» RE: Scandal fatigue
Posted by: Buckaroo
Comments are closed-
Posted by: NoPCZone on May 25, 2006 1:19 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Bush is a scalawag and has a lot to answer for, but most of the Enron misdeeds happened on Slick Willie's watch.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: The Big Question
Posted by: chica
» RE: The Big Question
Posted by: Doubtom
» Oh my God!!
Posted by: russianblue1
» RE: Oh my God!!
Posted by: aussidawg
» RE: Oh my God!!
Posted by: Doubtom
» RE: Oh my God!!
Posted by: babs
» RE: Oh my God!!
Posted by: mkeeling@jam.rr.com
» RE: The Big Question
Posted by: edgar_michel
» RE: The Big Question
Posted by: lindalee
Comments are closed-
Posted by: ws on May 25, 2006 1:27 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
They Have Been Wrongly Accused and Convicted
I do not mean that Lay is innocent of the 6 counts on which he was convicted today or that Skilling is innocent of the 19 for which he was convicted. They are guilty as sin of those and more. No, I mean they have been wrongly accused of being a couple of rotten apples in the otherwise pure and pristine barrel of Corporate America. They are not the exception, they are the rule. There is something rotten in Wall Street, and it is not being directed by Heaven. Nay if we follow it, the stench, we find it to be Wall Street itself.
Wall Street and Corporate America have tried to hide behind a façade of amorality. They attempt to cover-up their misdeeds and illegalities by assigning them to a nebulous and ill-defined world of ‘business’. They are not accountable for their actions, “It’s only business,” magic words that relieve them of all responsibility. It is quite ironic that Big Business would adopt such an attitude after all the trouble it went through to get the government to declare that Corporations have the same rights as living breathing human beings. This the government finally did in 1886 when it was so decreed by the Supreme Court in its Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad decision. They want and have all the rights but none of the obligations. Thus it has been for the past 120 years, and the result is the devolution into Bush World.
David Sirota in his new book, Hostile Takeover, gives this warning from Thomas Jefferson,
"I hope we shall crush in its birth the aristocracy of our monied corporations which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength, and bid defiance to the laws of our country."
Jefferson said this in 1816, almost 200 years ago. Like all aristocracies, corporate behavior has not improved with age. It has steadily declined. The trial is over and Corporate America has won, it is now the government.
Oh, its all been legal, bought and paid for on the open market. Greg Palast facetiously says we have “The Best Democracy Money Can Buy.” Of course it is neither the best nor a democracy. It is Bush World 2006. It is the world of Ken Lay and Jeff Skilling.
The Bush Credo - No Sacrifice Is Too Great For Others To
Make.
Lay
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: In Defense Of Bush and his Poquita Brain.
Posted by: aussidawg
» RE: In Defense Of Ken Lay and Jeff Skilling
Posted by: edgar_michel
Comments are closed-
Posted by: ZPaul on May 25, 2006 2:01 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
(Jan. 10, 2002)
" I got to know Ken Lay when he was the head of the -- what they call the Governor's Business Council in Texas. He was a supporter of Ann Richards in my run in 1994. And she had named him the head of the Governor's Business Council. And I decided to leave him in place, just for the sake of continuity. And that's when I first got to know Ken, and worked with Ken, and he supported my candidacy. "
Who Lay actively supported, according to W, in 1994 seems to not coincide with what´s stated here. Correct me if I´m wrong.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: How Well Do W´s Claims Jive With What Is Stated Here?
Posted by: allen1249
» RE: How Well Do W´s Claims Jive With What Is Stated Here?
Posted by: ZPaul
Comments are closed-
Posted by: VZEQICVA on May 25, 2006 2:33 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: WHERE DOES GOD LIVE ?sickofsleaze
Posted by: ladybug1@carrollsweb.com
» RE: WHERE DOES GOD LIVE ?sickofsleaze
Posted by: aussidawg
» RE: WHERE DOES GOD LIVE ?
Posted by: Abushite
Comments are closed-
Posted by: ladybug1@carrollsweb.com on May 25, 2006 2:36 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: ladybug1@carrollsweb.com on May 25, 2006 2:39 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Elmowilcox on May 25, 2006 2:57 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Campesino on May 25, 2006 5:29 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
These guys have all been prosecuted and sentenced to jail under the watch of the guys you say were totally influenced by them. The facts undercut your argument.
If you could say that Lay et al. were not prosecuted or were pardoned because they gave money to Bush and the Republicans you might have a point. But you can't do you don't
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Lookitme!!!! My name in lights!!!
Posted by: Father Paul
» RE: Lookitme!!!! My name in lights!!!
Posted by: aussidawg
» RE: Lookitme!!!! My name in lights!!!
Posted by: donmac
» Crooks !
Posted by: ShoShenQ
» Why campesino flunked logic 101...
Posted by: Wesley69
» RE: Campesino
Posted by: Doubtom
Comments are closed-
Posted by: fairleft on May 25, 2006 9:11 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Enron scandal, one of many go-go '90s scandals (was Bush President back then?), was most specifically aided by scandalous NONrevisions of accounting laws, that would have kept the big accounting firms out of business consulting. (Accounting firms, to get that business, were fatally tempted to make annual and quarterly reports into a pack of lies.) The revision was strongly recommended by the technocrats and more strongly opposed by the accounting industry... Who's Senatorial heavy lifter was, I believe, Corporate Demo Numero Uno Joseph Lieberman. Of course, B. Clinton didn't do a thing to get the important and right thing done in this little-noticed policy area.
Our country is in deep doo doo on many fronts. But a sure sign on this particular front is that nothing has been done about the scandal of accounting firms selling out their integrity to get those business consulting deals. Still happens, still messes up the books incredibly I'm sure...
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: rsaxto on May 26, 2006 4:09 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: right now
Posted by: dougii
Comments are closed-
Posted by: ladybug1@carrollsweb.com on May 26, 2006 5:01 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: sickofsleaze
Posted by: montims
Comments are closed-
Posted by: concerned Canadian on May 26, 2006 5:02 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Lincoln fan on May 26, 2006 8:42 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There are people who think that the evil could be eliminated by campaign financing and lobbying law reform. It could. But we won't get effective reforms because neither the corporate establishment nor either political party wants them.
There are people who believe that a "good" candidate could eliminate the evil. He/she could. But neither party will back a candidate who will buck the system and risk losing their share of campaign funds.
There are people who believe putting a third party in power could purify our corrupt system. It could. But a third party has almost no chance of winning on a national level. The fear that the "greater evil party" will win makes us vote for the "lesser evil party".
Their are people who belive that winning local elections will gradually affect national politics. It could. But it won't. The corporatocracy is mainly interested in national and international issue and don't fight hard on local issues. Local politicians below the rank of governor are usually unknown outside their locality so they need party backing. Neither party will back a cabdidate who will rock the boat.
We know that the corporations are the enemy and that they are abetted by both parties; it's logical to take control of the leadership of both parties. If the parties won't back candidates who support our issues it's logical to take control of both parties' platforms.
Join the Lincoln Initiative. Make "government of the people, by the people, and for the people" a reality. Click on Do it Now
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Wesley69 on May 25, 2006 12:29 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Scandal fatigue
Posted by: outtolunch
» RE: Scandal fatigue
Posted by: adp3d
» RE: Scandal fatigue
Posted by: Buckaroo
Comments are closed-
Posted by: NoPCZone on May 25, 2006 1:19 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Bush is a scalawag and has a lot to answer for, but most of the Enron misdeeds happened on Slick Willie's watch.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: The Big Question
Posted by: chica
» RE: The Big Question
Posted by: Doubtom
» Oh my God!!
Posted by: russianblue1
» RE: Oh my God!!
Posted by: aussidawg
» RE: Oh my God!!
Posted by: Doubtom
» RE: Oh my God!!
Posted by: babs
» RE: Oh my God!!
Posted by: mkeeling@jam.rr.com
» RE: The Big Question
Posted by: edgar_michel
» RE: The Big Question
Posted by: lindalee
Comments are closed-
Posted by: ws on May 25, 2006 1:27 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
They Have Been Wrongly Accused and Convicted
I do not mean that Lay is innocent of the 6 counts on which he was convicted today or that Skilling is innocent of the 19 for which he was convicted. They are guilty as sin of those and more. No, I mean they have been wrongly accused of being a couple of rotten apples in the otherwise pure and pristine barrel of Corporate America. They are not the exception, they are the rule. There is something rotten in Wall Street, and it is not being directed by Heaven. Nay if we follow it, the stench, we find it to be Wall Street itself.
Wall Street and Corporate America have tried to hide behind a façade of amorality. They attempt to cover-up their misdeeds and illegalities by assigning them to a nebulous and ill-defined world of ‘business’. They are not accountable for their actions, “It’s only business,” magic words that relieve them of all responsibility. It is quite ironic that Big Business would adopt such an attitude after all the trouble it went through to get the government to declare that Corporations have the same rights as living breathing human beings. This the government finally did in 1886 when it was so decreed by the Supreme Court in its Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad decision. They want and have all the rights but none of the obligations. Thus it has been for the past 120 years, and the result is the devolution into Bush World.
David Sirota in his new book, Hostile Takeover, gives this warning from Thomas Jefferson,
"I hope we shall crush in its birth the aristocracy of our monied corporations which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength, and bid defiance to the laws of our country."
Jefferson said this in 1816, almost 200 years ago. Like all aristocracies, corporate behavior has not improved with age. It has steadily declined. The trial is over and Corporate America has won, it is now the government.
Oh, its all been legal, bought and paid for on the open market. Greg Palast facetiously says we have “The Best Democracy Money Can Buy.” Of course it is neither the best nor a democracy. It is Bush World 2006. It is the world of Ken Lay and Jeff Skilling.
The Bush Credo - No Sacrifice Is Too Great For Others To
Make.
Lay
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: In Defense Of Bush and his Poquita Brain.
Posted by: aussidawg
» RE: In Defense Of Ken Lay and Jeff Skilling
Posted by: edgar_michel
Comments are closed-
Posted by: ZPaul on May 25, 2006 2:01 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
(Jan. 10, 2002)
" I got to know Ken Lay when he was the head of the -- what they call the Governor's Business Council in Texas. He was a supporter of Ann Richards in my run in 1994. And she had named him the head of the Governor's Business Council. And I decided to leave him in place, just for the sake of continuity. And that's when I first got to know Ken, and worked with Ken, and he supported my candidacy. "
Who Lay actively supported, according to W, in 1994 seems to not coincide with what´s stated here. Correct me if I´m wrong.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: How Well Do W´s Claims Jive With What Is Stated Here?
Posted by: allen1249
» RE: How Well Do W´s Claims Jive With What Is Stated Here?
Posted by: ZPaul
Comments are closed-
Posted by: VZEQICVA on May 25, 2006 2:33 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: WHERE DOES GOD LIVE ?sickofsleaze
Posted by: ladybug1@carrollsweb.com
» RE: WHERE DOES GOD LIVE ?sickofsleaze
Posted by: aussidawg
» RE: WHERE DOES GOD LIVE ?
Posted by: Abushite
Comments are closed-
Posted by: ladybug1@carrollsweb.com on May 25, 2006 2:36 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: ladybug1@carrollsweb.com on May 25, 2006 2:39 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Elmowilcox on May 25, 2006 2:57 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Campesino on May 25, 2006 5:29 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
These guys have all been prosecuted and sentenced to jail under the watch of the guys you say were totally influenced by them. The facts undercut your argument.
If you could say that Lay et al. were not prosecuted or were pardoned because they gave money to Bush and the Republicans you might have a point. But you can't do you don't
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Lookitme!!!! My name in lights!!!
Posted by: Father Paul
» RE: Lookitme!!!! My name in lights!!!
Posted by: aussidawg
» RE: Lookitme!!!! My name in lights!!!
Posted by: donmac
» Crooks !
Posted by: ShoShenQ
» Why campesino flunked logic 101...
Posted by: Wesley69
» RE: Campesino
Posted by: Doubtom
Comments are closed-
Posted by: fairleft on May 25, 2006 9:11 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Enron scandal, one of many go-go '90s scandals (was Bush President back then?), was most specifically aided by scandalous NONrevisions of accounting laws, that would have kept the big accounting firms out of business consulting. (Accounting firms, to get that business, were fatally tempted to make annual and quarterly reports into a pack of lies.) The revision was strongly recommended by the technocrats and more strongly opposed by the accounting industry... Who's Senatorial heavy lifter was, I believe, Corporate Demo Numero Uno Joseph Lieberman. Of course, B. Clinton didn't do a thing to get the important and right thing done in this little-noticed policy area.
Our country is in deep doo doo on many fronts. But a sure sign on this particular front is that nothing has been done about the scandal of accounting firms selling out their integrity to get those business consulting deals. Still happens, still messes up the books incredibly I'm sure...
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: rsaxto on May 26, 2006 4:09 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: right now
Posted by: dougii
Comments are closed-
Posted by: ladybug1@carrollsweb.com on May 26, 2006 5:01 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: sickofsleaze
Posted by: montims
Comments are closed-
Posted by: concerned Canadian on May 26, 2006 5:02 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Lincoln fan on May 26, 2006 8:42 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There are people who think that the evil could be eliminated by campaign financing and lobbying law reform. It could. But we won't get effective reforms because neither the corporate establishment nor either political party wants them.
There are people who believe that a "good" candidate could eliminate the evil. He/she could. But neither party will back a candidate who will buck the system and risk losing their share of campaign funds.
There are people who believe putting a third party in power could purify our corrupt system. It could. But a third party has almost no chance of winning on a national level. The fear that the "greater evil party" will win makes us vote for the "lesser evil party".
Their are people who belive that winning local elections will gradually affect national politics. It could. But it won't. The corporatocracy is mainly interested in national and international issue and don't fight hard on local issues. Local politicians below the rank of governor are usually unknown outside their locality so they need party backing. Neither party will back a cabdidate who will rock the boat.
We know that the corporations are the enemy and that they are abetted by both parties; it's logical to take control of the leadership of both parties. If the parties won't back candidates who support our issues it's logical to take control of both parties' platforms.
Join the Lincoln Initiative. Make "government of the people, by the people, and for the people" a reality. Click on Do it Now
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Vancouver's Games Will Be the Gayest Olympics Ever
Trial Begins for Activist Who Fought to Protect Federal Lands from Drilling -- Join the Protest
Starbucks' Cop-Out to Gun Nuts: Customers Served Coffee While Strapped




