Methinks the outrage is just beginning... just as soon as everybody gets back from covering Junior's field trip to Rome. In case you aren't angry enough yet, here's the link to the NPR story that has audio from some of the tapes.

http://www.npr.org/rundowns/segment.php?wfId=1920810

I first heard it on WBAI at 9am which claimed CBS aired the news. What's the fuss about?
Joking on the poor and the hurt is OK in CorpoAm.
isn t it ?

Because the fucking Times doesn't do cutting-edge reporting on the misdeeds of corporate America or the Bush administration? This story broke on 60 Minutes on Sunday night and as far as I know is only now being reported by the Times. It's pretty sad when your grandparents' favorite news show does more cutting-edge investigative reporting than The New York Times, no? The paper's coverage of the Valerie Plame disclosure was equally laughable when the story broke.

because the winner of the national spelling bee is sooo much cuter than Ken Lay. Plus, he's never met the President.

I think of The New York Times as Cliff Poncier from the movie Singles:
" I don’t want to hear a lot of negativity, man. I don't wanna bum out, okay?"

One of the Bush/Cheney '04 staffers who works in Arnie's capitol offices is probably working overtime to get this story quashed.
Either that or the polls show that the average American thinks California = Silicon Valley (or, you know, Los Angeles. OK, the average American thinks CA = SoCal) and that we're really not sympathetic enough to sell copy.

Speaking from New York, I can say that I always have difficulty believing that California actually exists at all.

Because it's a horseshit story? I mean, c'mon, Enron was ripping people off and their people were cavalier about it? Well golly gee, color me shocked. Enron is dead, Lay is in the dock and will ever be the poster child for corporate assholery, we *knew* Enron was manipulating energy prices even before it went in the commode (anyone remember the big Cali energy crisis a few years back? Makes the annual pre-Memorial Day gas hike look like a blue light special). This is news?

No, you're right, it's probably some sort of conspiracy between the White House, various Enron execs, the New York Times, all the other news outlets in the world besides NPR and 60 Minutes (a buck says this story was a Leslie Stahl piece!), and of course, Satan. I wouldn't be surprised to see Ralph Nader's mug in there somewhere.

This administration makes people CRAZY. If someone could prove to me that a Kerry Presidency would bring otherwise rational people back down from the cognitive ledge, I'd vote for him twice.

It's news because it's concrete proof presented in a way the general public will actually understand. Most people hear "manipulating the market" and really don't fully understand (though they know it's supposed to be bad). But when you hear a tape of an Enron exec calling a power station and telling them to shut down, and REPEATING it after the plant manager says that it wouldn't be a good idea, well, to me that's fucking news. And if you think there's no White House conspiracy top cover this shit up, you're willfully blind.

I dunno, the idea of that this old story is suddenly newsworthy again because people are not very bright and now there's "good art" seems patronizing (not that the media is above patronizing the public). I can understand why 60 Minutes aired it, but I still don't understand why it's so important that other media outlets weren't quicker to pick it up, or how that is somehow evidence of a conspiracy.

As for my willfull blindness, I prefer to refer to it as "critical thinking skills." :) Enron is a corpse - why would the White House bother with to cover up the tape transcripts of idiot traders who didn't have the mental wherewithal to remember they were being taped? They've got no reason to. If it was Lay personally? One *could* make the case that Bush would reach out to a friend and loyal supporter (although doing so in any meaningful way, considering the scrutiny this administration operates under, would be foolishness this close to the election season). The idea that they would, or could, directly enlist the help of and influence the content of the New York Times is a little tin-foil-hattie. The Times has no particular love for Bush, and even if one thinks that Bush *could* have influenced them when his popularity was high, that popularity is decreased considerably. Even a lapdog newspaper would assert it's independence now.

Point taken, although this administration's arrogance knows no bounds so I wouldn't put any manner of heavy-handedness past them, no matter the level of scrutiny they might face. And as for cover-ups, I was referring more to the white house's stonewalling on releasing the attendees of their energy commission and not to their somehow managing to keep the tapes out of the headlines. THAT I blame on the papers themselves. Just because Enron is a corpse doesn't change the fact that they bilked the public out of millions and millions of dollars. Until that is rectified in some meaningful way, I damn well want to see every piece of evidence--damning OR absolving them--presented in the headlines. Out of sight out of mind is not acceptable in this case. Because out of sight out of mind will inevitably lead to merely a slap on the wrist for the biggest offenders.