"Stan de SD" <standesd@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:9liOa.87556$Io.7655066@newsread2.prod.itd.ear thlink.net...
>
> "Roger" <rogerfx@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:0I3Oa.1023$hW4.80431308@newssvr21.news.prodig y.com...
> > "Stan de SD" <standesd@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> > news:hRZNa.84077$Io.7557034@newsread2.prod.itd.ear thlink.net...
> > >
> > > "Roger" <rogerfx@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > > news:N4zNa.246$tr1.28711127@newssvr14.news.prodigy .com...
> > > > Was Enron one of your "highly successful operations that cater to
the
> > > TASTES
> > > > and PREFERENCES of working-class America"?
> > >
> > > No. First of all, it wasn't successful, and secondly, it was an
example
> of
> > > the negligence of the SEC under Clinton's watch.
> >
> > They were fantastically successfull. They made tons and tons of money
> until
> > they got caught.
>
> Enron's bankrupt - hardly a sign of being fantastically successful.

"They were" means that they "were" in the past, not the present. They "were"
fantastically successfull until their sham "was" discovered.

>
> > Are you saying that corporations are not responsible for their own
> actions?
>
> No. How do you come to that conclusion?

You said that Enron was "an example of the negligence of the SEC under
Clinton's watch." That leads me to believe that you think it was the SEC
that was responsible for what Enron did, not Enron.