Cheney the Devil, or How I Spent My Summer With Your Money
This day's entry is dedicated to my spouse who believes Halliburton is Enron with a protective angel. Hmmm, angel may be the wrong word. But she feels that just possibly Halliburton would be the greatest American business scandal since Teapot Dome, if the Republican-dominated Congress could fixate on something other than getting Dubya re-elected.
So, here's my take on the whole stinkin' mess AND I'M NOT EVEN GOING TO GET INTO THE WHOLE IRAQI BOONDOGGLE. Let's just talk about when Dick Cheney was walking around the boardroom enjoying his dictatorship.
It appears that Manchurian Global um, I mean Halliburton, has paid a fine for secretly changing its accounting practices in a way that inflated its 1998 and 1999 profit figures (this from the Washington Post):
Halliburton's former CFO and controller the subject of an SEC investigation--I bet that does not surprise you. But why is Halliburton's former CEO, currently the vice president of the United States, in the clear? Why, you may ask? Why? Because the SEC is allegedly unable to find any evidence that he knew what was going on.
He didn't know?
It's tough being an SEC investigator. the rule of law seems to be extremely tough to . . . prove a case? Dick Cheney — like most CEOs in cases like this — get off the hook because of the absence of a smoking gun? Do they need a memo with his signature saying," Shit, let's screw the stockholders by declaring a huge profit."?
Now this is what drives my sweet, beautiful wife nutty. She writes speeches for upper management, and - this is so silly of her - she thinks they all stay atop of all financial information. She believes they talk about it in board rooms and KNOW what's happening in their company. She thinks that that is their job.
Is she silly? No. Of course Cheney knew about this. Not only did he know, but this over-budget project was almost certainly a subject of considerable interest to him. A CEO would certainly follow that. The cost overruns were probably a subject of numerous status reports. Try telling me and the rest of the witless world that Halliburton's earnings was not a frequent source of conversation in the boardroom and definitely in front of that pompous Cheney. There is nothing that a CEO pays more attention to than his company's quarterly and yearly earnings reports. Or, rather, he damn well better concern himself over them if he is to keep his job.
Have I made my point? Well, let me overemphasize it.
Cheney knew. But as long as underlings are willing to fall on their swords for him, there will never be any proof. And we can all go on pretending that when earnings turned out to be 46% higher than expected, Dick Cheney just scratched his chin and smiled in wonderment. "I'll be damned," I'm sure he said, "things turned out OK after all."
And nobody in his company ever mentioned the subject of surprisingly high corporate earnings in his presence again. Yeah, that's reality for sure!
And Congress thinks gay couples will ruin America. Not the America I live in. It's CEOs like Dick Cheney who seriously threaten our democracy, though of course one way to save us is take him out of the boardroom and put him one step away from the presidency.
A question for you to ponder: would there have been Watergate hearings if Richard Nixon had been lucky enough to have today's current Congress? I don't think so.
Republicans - I hope your circle in hades is appropriately warm.
So, here's my take on the whole stinkin' mess AND I'M NOT EVEN GOING TO GET INTO THE WHOLE IRAQI BOONDOGGLE. Let's just talk about when Dick Cheney was walking around the boardroom enjoying his dictatorship.
It appears that Manchurian Global um, I mean Halliburton, has paid a fine for secretly changing its accounting practices in a way that inflated its 1998 and 1999 profit figures (this from the Washington Post):
Until the second quarter of 1998, Halliburton had dealt with cost overruns on projects by taking a loss for the amount of the overrun unless and until the company that it was working for agreed to pay part or all of the overrun. But confronted with a large overrun on a fixed-fee project to build a gas production plant in the Middle East - the commission did not say in which country - Halliburton changed its policy so that it would record the income it thought the customer would eventually agree to pay.
That change in policy was not disclosed until March 2000, when the company filed its 1999 annual report with the S.E.C. The commission said that pretax profit for all of 1998 was reported at $278.8 million, 46 percent more than the $190.9 million that would have been reported under the old accounting.
Halliburton's former CFO and controller the subject of an SEC investigation--I bet that does not surprise you. But why is Halliburton's former CEO, currently the vice president of the United States, in the clear? Why, you may ask? Why? Because the SEC is allegedly unable to find any evidence that he knew what was going on.
He didn't know?
It's tough being an SEC investigator. the rule of law seems to be extremely tough to . . . prove a case? Dick Cheney — like most CEOs in cases like this — get off the hook because of the absence of a smoking gun? Do they need a memo with his signature saying," Shit, let's screw the stockholders by declaring a huge profit."?
Now this is what drives my sweet, beautiful wife nutty. She writes speeches for upper management, and - this is so silly of her - she thinks they all stay atop of all financial information. She believes they talk about it in board rooms and KNOW what's happening in their company. She thinks that that is their job.
Is she silly? No. Of course Cheney knew about this. Not only did he know, but this over-budget project was almost certainly a subject of considerable interest to him. A CEO would certainly follow that. The cost overruns were probably a subject of numerous status reports. Try telling me and the rest of the witless world that Halliburton's earnings was not a frequent source of conversation in the boardroom and definitely in front of that pompous Cheney. There is nothing that a CEO pays more attention to than his company's quarterly and yearly earnings reports. Or, rather, he damn well better concern himself over them if he is to keep his job.
Have I made my point? Well, let me overemphasize it.
Cheney knew. But as long as underlings are willing to fall on their swords for him, there will never be any proof. And we can all go on pretending that when earnings turned out to be 46% higher than expected, Dick Cheney just scratched his chin and smiled in wonderment. "I'll be damned," I'm sure he said, "things turned out OK after all."
And nobody in his company ever mentioned the subject of surprisingly high corporate earnings in his presence again. Yeah, that's reality for sure!
And Congress thinks gay couples will ruin America. Not the America I live in. It's CEOs like Dick Cheney who seriously threaten our democracy, though of course one way to save us is take him out of the boardroom and put him one step away from the presidency.
A question for you to ponder: would there have been Watergate hearings if Richard Nixon had been lucky enough to have today's current Congress? I don't think so.
Republicans - I hope your circle in hades is appropriately warm.
posted by Robert | 10:35 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home