# Just for those who buy the spin that Shrub didn't really know Ken Lay. **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [July 13, 2004, 2:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/just-for-those-who-buy-the-spin-that-shrub-didnt-really-know-ken-lay/254832 "2004-07-13T02:29:19Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Lord\_Ashtar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7ea924/32.png) [@Lord\_Ashtar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lord_Ashtar)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2004, 2:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/just-for-those-who-buy-the-spin-that-shrub-didnt-really-know-ken-lay/254832/21 "2004-07-13T14:19:52Z")
Rereading what I posted last night, I realize that I sounded snarkier than I meant to. I honestly had never heard that Bush was claiming to not know him. Didn’t mean to come off as such a jackass (at least not here anyway). ---
**Author:** ![Early\_Out](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/6f9a4e/32.png) [@Early\_Out](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Early_Out)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2004, 2:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/just-for-those-who-buy-the-spin-that-shrub-didnt-really-know-ken-lay/254832/22 "2004-07-13T14:31:44Z")
> [@Lord Ashtar](#): > > Rereading what I posted last night, I realize that I sounded snarkier than I meant to. I honestly had never heard that Bush was claiming to not know him. Didn’t mean to come off as such a jackass (at least not here anyway). Not to worry. To me, at least, it didn’t come across as snarky at all. It sounded like a perfectly honest, rational question. And, in fact, you were essentially right - Bush never has claimed not to know Ken Lay, as the OP implied. [Memory failing - who was it that Bush recently said he knew only vaguely, from a chance meeting or two, “might have met him sometime?” It was one of his more “essence of weasel” moments, and I can’t remember what the subject was. Damn! Oh, wait - it was Ahmed Chalabi! Priceless.] ---
**Author:** ![leander](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/bcef8e/32.png) [@leander](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/leander)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2004, 2:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/just-for-those-who-buy-the-spin-that-shrub-didnt-really-know-ken-lay/254832/23 "2004-07-13T14:33:19Z")
Here’s how Bush’s favorite cheerleader/defenderextraordinaire is fighting back over at [Fox News](http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,125383,00.html): > [@](#): > > John Kerry has accused the Bush administration of dragging its feet in the investigation of former Enron Chairman Ken Lay, suggesting that Lay’s ties as a friend and contributor to President Bush were to blame. > > But Lay attended a reception at the Georgetown town house shared by Kerry and his wife Teresa — ten months after the Enron scandal became public. Kerry was out of town at the time. > > What’s more, Lay continued to serve with Teresa Heinz-Kerry on a charity board even after he was implicated in the alleged fraud. The Boston Herald reports that the Kerrys owned more than $250,000 in Enron stock before the company’s collapse. Now don’t all you bozos see? The real scandal is with Theresa and Ken, who may or may not be lovers, but are definitely waaaaay closer than W ever was. Now I’m not saying they are lovers, but come on – a charity board! And since they’re not lovers, what’s the deal with all that Enron stock? Please folks, focus on the issue here… (btw, for a laugh, check out Brit Hume’s archive of Special Report. And you thought the President wasn’t getting his dick sucked anymore…) ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2004, 3:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/just-for-those-who-buy-the-spin-that-shrub-didnt-really-know-ken-lay/254832/24 "2004-07-13T15:27:48Z")
> [@](#): > > Who said that Bush and Lay didn’t know each other? > [@Squink](#): > > [The president’s press secretary; July 08, 2004](http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/07/20040708-15.html) Thanks for the cite. Could you bold the part where the press secretary said that Bush and Lay didn’t know each other? Thanks in advance. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![gobear](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/8dc957/32.png) [@gobear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gobear)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2004, 3:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/just-for-those-who-buy-the-spin-that-shrub-didnt-really-know-ken-lay/254832/25 "2004-07-13T15:40:53Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > Thanks for the cite. > > Could you bold the part where the press secretary said that Bush and Lay didn’t know each other? > > Thanks in advance. > > Regards, > Shodan [quote] Q But this particular alleged corporate wrongdoer was a personal friend of the President’s, who the President addressed as “Kenny, boy,” who raised a lot of money for the President in the 2000 election cycle, who offered corporate jets to the President for travel in Texas. He did know him well. Does he – \*\*MR. McCLELLAN: Well, you seem to want to be fairly selective there, because let me point out that he was someone who supported Democrats and Republicans, alike, including the President, as you pointed out. Q Well, is that all the President had to say? MR. McCLELLAN: That’s how I would describe the relationship, and I think it’s an accurate way to describe the relationship. Q Does President Bush consider Ken Lay a personal friend? And did the White House have any communication with the Justice Department leading up to the indictment? MR. McCLELLAN: No.\*\* This is a Justice Department matter, and we expect the Justice Department to do their job when it comes to cracking down on corporate wrongdoing. In terms of the question you asked ---
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2004, 3:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/just-for-those-who-buy-the-spin-that-shrub-didnt-really-know-ken-lay/254832/26 "2004-07-13T15:41:59Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > Could you bold the part where the press secretary said that Bush and Lay didn’t know each other? Do you know what the definition of know is? Not being a lawyer, I took it to mean, in this context, “to be friends with.” I expect most Americans would use the same standard. However, if you wish to get all weasely about it, by all means weasel away! ---
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2004, 3:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/just-for-those-who-buy-the-spin-that-shrub-didnt-really-know-ken-lay/254832/27 "2004-07-13T15:50:27Z")
[Mark 14:66](http://aol.bartleby.com/108/41/14.html#72) ---
**Author:** ![Lamar\_Mundane](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/85f322/32.png) [@Lamar\_Mundane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lamar_Mundane)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2004, 4:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/just-for-those-who-buy-the-spin-that-shrub-didnt-really-know-ken-lay/254832/28 "2004-07-13T16:10:00Z")
> [@](#): > > Q Does President Bush consider Ken Lay a personal friend? And did the White House have any communication with the Justice Department leading up to the indictment? > > MR. McCLELLAN: No. This is a Justice Department matter, and we expect the Justice Department to do their job when it comes to cracking down on corporate wrongdoing. In terms of the question you asked about Mr. Lay, the President has already addressed that, and he described it the way I did, as well. So the “No” at the beginning of the response is an answer to the first question? If I read that quote a million times my mind couldn’t make that connection. McClellan is clearly answering the second question first, then comes back to the first one, and he doesn’t say anything about Bush and Lay not knowing each other. Seriously, there are a million reasons to be upset at the Bush administration, why do you guys try to defend completely baseless assertions like this one? It just makes you look stupid. Fighting ignorance, yeah right. Another fine OP brought to you by **Reeder** , the Jack Chick of the left. ---
**Author:** ![Lord\_Ashtar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7ea924/32.png) [@Lord\_Ashtar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lord_Ashtar)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2004, 4:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/just-for-those-who-buy-the-spin-that-shrub-didnt-really-know-ken-lay/254832/29 "2004-07-13T16:11:22Z")
> [@Squink](#): > > Do you know what the definition of know is? Maybe from here on out each president will dispute the definition of a commonly understood word. Clinton had “is” and now GWB has “know”. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2004, 4:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/just-for-those-who-buy-the-spin-that-shrub-didnt-really-know-ken-lay/254832/30 "2004-07-13T16:15:22Z")
> [@Squink](#): > > Do you know what the definition of know is? Not being a lawyer, I took it to mean, in this context, “to be friends with.” I expect most Americans would use the same standard. However, if you wish to get all weasely about it, by all means weasel away! Actually, it would be “weaselly” that I dispute your definition of. Your definition seems to be “pointing out that someone did not say what you claim he said”. Since there is nowhere in your quote where the press secretary says that Lay and Bush did not know each other, which you (apparently falsely) alleged that he did say. Here’s the part where you bolded: > [@](#): > > MR. McCLELLAN: Well, you seem to want to be fairly selective there, because let me point out that he was someone who supported Democrats and Republicans, alike, including the President, as you pointed out. So, is this part accurate, or not? Nope, all completely true - Lay did support both Democrats and Republicans, as has been pointed out. Ann Richards even appointed Lay to the Council mentioned earlier. So, not only does this part not state or imply that Bush and Lay did not know each other, it is completely accurate in what it did state. > [@](#): > > Q Well, is that all the President had to say? > > MR. McCLELLAN: That’s how I would describe the relationship, and I think it’s an accurate way to describe the relationship. Same thing. The press secretary neither states nor implies that Bush and Lay did not know each other. Just the opposite, in fact - the secretary describes them as having a “relationship” of some sort. > [@](#): > > Q Does President Bush consider Ken Lay a personal friend? And did the White House have any communication with the Justice Department leading up to the indictment? > > MR. McCLELLAN: No. This is a Justice Department matter, and we expect the Justice Department to do their job when it comes to cracking down on corporate wrongdoing. In terms of the question you asked… Here’s where you probably got confused. The “No” you bolded and made red is the answer to the second question (“did the White House have any communication…”), not the first. The press secretary goes on to explain the “no” by saying why it would have been inappropriate for the White House to involve itself before the indictment. Obviously, it wouldn’t make sense for the press secretary to refer to Bush considering Lay a personal friend as being “a Justice Department matter”. He must therefore be expanding on his answer to the second question, which was “no”. You were mistaken. The quote does not show what you thought it did. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![gobear](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/8dc957/32.png) [@gobear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gobear)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2004, 4:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/just-for-those-who-buy-the-spin-that-shrub-didnt-really-know-ken-lay/254832/31 "2004-07-13T16:24:13Z")
> [@Lamar Mundane](#): > > So the “No” at the beginning of the response is an answer to the first question? If I read that quote a million times my mind couldn’t make that connection. McClellan is clearly answering the second question first, then comes back to the first one, and he doesn’t say anything about Bush and Lay not knowing each other. The “No” is clearly an answer to both questions, taking into account that Lay was characterized as “someone who supported Democrats and Republicans, alike, including the President, as you pointed out.” > [@](#): > > Seriously, there are a million reasons to be upset at the Bush administration, why do you guys try to defend completely baseless assertions like this one? It just makes you look stupid. Fighting ignorance, yeah right. I’m not sure that illustrating that Bush is trying to distance himself from Enron after he took Enron donations and formed a close relationship with its former CEO is making us look stupid. Rather it shows Bush’s venality and lack of principle when he has his spokesman lie for him in attempting to depict Lay as just one contributor out of many. I’d think better of Bush if he had said, “Yes, Ken Lay is a close friend, and although I regret and condemn his actions, I will remain close to his family.” I wish Bush were a wiser, more virtuous man and that he had made better use of his office than he has. ---
**Author:** ![TurdFerguson](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e9a140/32.png) [@TurdFerguson](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TurdFerguson)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2004, 4:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/just-for-those-who-buy-the-spin-that-shrub-didnt-really-know-ken-lay/254832/32 "2004-07-13T16:24:35Z")
> [@Squink](#): > > Q Does President Bush consider Ken Lay a personal friend? And did the White House have any communication with the Justice Department leading up to the indictment? > > MR. McCLELLAN: No. This is a Justice Department matter, and we expect the Justice Department to do their job when it comes to cracking down on corporate wrongdoing. In terms of the question you asked about Mr. Lay, the President has already addressed that, and he described it the way I did, as well. To be fair, what is McClellan responding ‘No’ to, the first or second question? It looks as if he is responding to the White House/Justice Dept. question first, and then addressing W’s relationship with Lay. ---
**Author:** ![Lamar\_Mundane](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/85f322/32.png) [@Lamar\_Mundane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lamar_Mundane)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2004, 4:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/just-for-those-who-buy-the-spin-that-shrub-didnt-really-know-ken-lay/254832/33 "2004-07-13T16:38:50Z")
> [@gobear](#): > > The “No” is clearly an answer to both questions, taking into account that Lay was characterized as “someone who supported Democrats and Republicans, alike, including the President, as you pointed out.” > I’m not sure that illustrating that Bush is trying to distance himself from Enron after he took Enron donations and formed a close relationship with its former CEO is making us look stupid. Rather it shows Bush’s venality and lack of principle when he has his spokesman lie for him in attempting to depict Lay as just one contributor out of many. I’d think better of Bush if he had said, “Yes, Ken Lay is a close friend, and although I regret and condemn his actions, I will remain close to his family.” > > I wish Bush were a wiser, more virtuous man and that he had made better use of his office than he has. Me, too. Note: I am responding to the last sentence first. There is no way that McClellan is saying “No, Bush doesn’t consider Ken Lay a close personal friend”. No way. The rest of your post is dissembling. Yes, Bush is distancing himself from Lay. That in no way equates with what Reeder and others have claimed here. Either fight ignorance or promote it. Make your choice. ---
**Author:** ![JohnBckWLD](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/d6d6ee/32.png) [@JohnBckWLD](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JohnBckWLD)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2004, 4:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/just-for-those-who-buy-the-spin-that-shrub-didnt-really-know-ken-lay/254832/34 "2004-07-13T16:40:15Z")
Even when you take away the false assertion that Ken Lay stayed in the Lincoln Bedroom during the Clinton Administration & his connections to Teresa Heinz Kerry, you still have a CEO who played both sides of the political fence: [GOP Talking Points](http://talking_points.tripod.com/enron/id9.html) =\> Kenneth Lay was one of 25 business executives on Clinton’s Council on Sustainable Development. He advised Clinton on energy issues. (Source: Washington Post, Jan. 13, 2002; PageA01, “Enron Also Courted Democrats: Chairman Pushed Firm’s Agenda With Clinton White House”) =\> 1994/1995 Clinton Administration “makes a sale” for Enron. Enron and the administration work together to win Enron the contract for a power plant in India. Clinton uses resources from the CIA to assess risk and analyze the strategy of Enron’s British competitor. The administration is instrumental in procuring $400 million in financing from the Export-Import Bank of the United States and the Overseas Private Investment Corporation. =\> October 1995. Bill Clinton recruits Ken Lay to act as a point man for Clinton in drumming up support for Fast Track legislation. Lay just happens to be an old friend of Mack McClarty. =\> August 1997 Clinton hosts Ken Lay at White House to discuss upcoming meeting in Kyoto, Japan concerning greenhouse gas. =\> September 1997 Clinton helps Enron get a 3 billion dollar power-plant project in India. They’re all whores ---
**Author:** ![gobear](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/8dc957/32.png) [@gobear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gobear)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2004, 4:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/just-for-those-who-buy-the-spin-that-shrub-didnt-really-know-ken-lay/254832/35 "2004-07-13T16:41:17Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > Actually, it would be “weaselly” that I dispute your definition of. > > Your definition seems to be “pointing out that someone did not say what you claim he said”. Since there is nowhere in your quote where the press secretary says that Lay and Bush did not know each other, which you (apparently falsely) alleged that he did say. > > Here’s the part where you bolded: > So, is this part accurate, or not? Nope, all completely true - Lay did support both Democrats and Republicans, as has been pointed out. Ann Richards even appointed Lay to the Council mentioned earlier. So, not only does this part not state or imply that Bush and Lay did not know each other, it is completely accurate in what it did state. Please, **Shodan** , you know perfectly well that when Lay is described as supporting both Democrats and Republicans, his outlays to the GOP far outweighed his contributions the the Dems. Moreover, merely being technically accurate can be the cleverest method of lying. Example: “Is **Shodan** gay?” “Well, he does spend a lot of time conversing with **Gobear** and he posts a lot on gay issues.” Note that I’m being totally accurate–you do spend time talking to me and you do post on gay issues. Note I didn’t mention that you oppose gay issues, merely that you discuss them. So despite my accuracy, I suggested a highly inaccurate picture of your sexual orientation. That’s called “lying by omission” and that is precisely the technique being employed by Bush’s spokesman. ---
**Author:** ![Revtim](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/revtim/32/1042_2.png) [@Revtim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revtim)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2004, 8:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/just-for-those-who-buy-the-spin-that-shrub-didnt-really-know-ken-lay/254832/36 "2004-07-13T20:15:04Z")
> [@niblet\_head](#): > > Not really. It’s kind of like insurance that who ever wins will be beholden to some degree. Lots of industries/companies that you would think would typically only donate to Republican campaigns (and vice versa) donate to both. However, their preferred party will generally get a whole lot more than the other. Ah, that makes some sense, thanks. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2004, 2:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/just-for-those-who-buy-the-spin-that-shrub-didnt-really-know-ken-lay/254832/37 "2004-07-14T14:26:04Z")
> [@gobear](#): > > Please, **Shodan** , you know perfectly well that when Lay is described as supporting both Democrats and Republicans, his outlays to the GOP far outweighed his contributions the the Dems. Moreover, merely being technically accurate can be the cleverest method of lying. > > Example: “Is **Shodan** gay?” “Well, he does spend a lot of time conversing with **Gobear** and he posts a lot on gay issues.” Note that I’m being totally accurate–you do spend time talking to me and you do post on gay issues. Note I didn’t mention that you oppose gay issues, merely that you discuss them. So despite my accuracy, I suggested a highly inaccurate picture of your sexual orientation. That’s called “lying by omission” and that is precisely the technique being employed by Bush’s spokesman. Oh, horseshit. What we are talking about is more like this - > [@](#): > > Q - Is **Shodan** bisexual? > > **Shodan** ’s Press Secretary - No, he is married and has never had sexual contact with a male, nor any desire to do so. > > Q - Is **Shodan** gay? And does he fellate spaniels? > > **Shodan** ’s Press Secretary - No. He doesn’t even own a spaniel. > > **Reeder** and **80% of the SDMB** - **Shodan** lied about being gay! :rolleyes: Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Apos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/838e76/32.png) [@Apos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Apos)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2004, 4:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/just-for-those-who-buy-the-spin-that-shrub-didnt-really-know-ken-lay/254832/38 "2004-07-14T16:34:41Z")
Lol. [http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week\_2004\_07\_11.php#003159](http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_07_11.php#003159) Apparently, unless this is some sort of joke, Bush and Lay recently hired the same lawyer to represent themselves in the Plame case and the Enron case respectively. Small world. Someone in the PR department fell asleep at the wheel. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2004, 3:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/just-for-those-who-buy-the-spin-that-shrub-didnt-really-know-ken-lay/254832/39 "2004-07-15T15:33:25Z")
I think the worst aspect of all of this is the effort Bush has made to distance himself from Lay. Nobody is seriously accusing Bush of being Lay’s accomplice in any criminal act; they’re just saying the two men were friends and Lay was one of Bush’s biggest financial supporters. So Bush would risk nothing by telling the truth; it’s not like the Romans are going to arrest him and crucify him next to Ken. What we saw here is that Bush is the kind of person who’ll abandon a friend just because it looks bad. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2004, 4:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/just-for-those-who-buy-the-spin-that-shrub-didnt-really-know-ken-lay/254832/40 "2004-07-15T16:21:39Z")
Are you shitting me? You mean Scott McClellan made a statement about the Bush/Lay relationship that might be a bit confusing? That does it-- I’m voting for Kerry!!! [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/just-for-those-who-buy-the-spin-that-shrub-didnt-really-know-ken-lay/254832.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/just-for-those-who-buy-the-spin-that-shrub-didnt-really-know-ken-lay/254832.md?page=3)