While I don't live in California, I've observed, with interest, Carly Fiorina's campaign to win the GOP nomination for the Senate seat being elected next November.
Before Fiorina can take on the vulnerable Democrat, Barbara Boxer, she has to defeat a couple of competing Republicans.
With such a ferocious primary, and, no doubt, general election underway, I'm surprised there hasn't been more mention by Fiorina's competitors of her corporate background.
Specifically, her proximity to a sales forecasting scandal at Lucent, and, of course, he mismanagement of HP while serving as CEO.
The HP situation is the more well-known. Fiorina was viewed as having bungled the Compaq acquisition, and done some damage with her reorganizations of the firm and heavy-handed approach at the legendary but weakly-performing technology icon.
Back in the late 1990s, after Lucent's spinoff from ATT, this scandal erupted regarding overly-ambitious sales forecasts. Nina Aversano became a whistle-blower and subsequently embroiled in a lawsuit with Lucent for breach of contract.
Guess who was head of the sales force at the time? Carly Fiorina.
I've always marveled at how Fiorina escaped being touched by the scandal which became rather sensational. I recently spoke with an old ATT colleague who was aware of the situation, and my suspicions were echoed. Mind you, I do not have proof that Fiorina was involved. But what I've learned is sufficient to convince me, personally, that she probably was, or, as head of sales, certainly aware.
Thus, it's hard for me to believe that some political opponent wouldn't be pursuing their own sources to unearth the truth about that two decade-old accounting scandal.
It may seem forgettable now, but, at the time, the newly-launched Lucent was depending upon information such as sales forecasts to drive its ever-increasing share price. A price which unexpectedly plummeted soon thereafter.
Perhaps memories of such distant corporate scandals have so faded that nobody will bother. But, to me, between that incident and Fiorina's HP experience, I would have a hard time understanding why I was voting for her for a Senate seat.
Tuesday, December 8, 2009
Monday, December 7, 2009
Max Baucus' Brand of Ethics
Have you heard the latest news concerning the ethics of Senate Democrats?
Montana Democratic Senator Max Baucus, the driving force behind the Senate's health care bill, hid his romantic relationship with a woman whom he nominated for US attorney in Montana last year.
Baucus, who was separated, but not divorced, had taken up with Melodee Hanes. He subsequently urged her appointment as a US attorney in his home state, without, of course, making clear his personal interest in the matter.
As is now typical with these things, Baucus' office came clean over the weekend, the better to hide the ethical lapse amidst holiday-related stories.
What do these Senators, of either party, think it looks like when they play such obvious favorites in handing out politically plum jobs? Have they so totally lost perspective that they simply believe they can reward friends, donors and lovers with government jobs?
Evidently Max Baucus thinks so.
Do you want a health care bill designed by someone so ethically challenged? Would you now believe anything this guy says about anything, when he hid his behavior in the Melodee Hanes matter for so long?
Montana Democratic Senator Max Baucus, the driving force behind the Senate's health care bill, hid his romantic relationship with a woman whom he nominated for US attorney in Montana last year.
Baucus, who was separated, but not divorced, had taken up with Melodee Hanes. He subsequently urged her appointment as a US attorney in his home state, without, of course, making clear his personal interest in the matter.
As is now typical with these things, Baucus' office came clean over the weekend, the better to hide the ethical lapse amidst holiday-related stories.
What do these Senators, of either party, think it looks like when they play such obvious favorites in handing out politically plum jobs? Have they so totally lost perspective that they simply believe they can reward friends, donors and lovers with government jobs?
Evidently Max Baucus thinks so.
Do you want a health care bill designed by someone so ethically challenged? Would you now believe anything this guy says about anything, when he hid his behavior in the Melodee Hanes matter for so long?
Friday, December 4, 2009
White House "Job Summit" Lies
I had to laugh when I heard the sound bites from Wonderboy's vaunted, pointless "jobs summit" yesterday at the White House.
The Anointed One only made a token 15 minute appearance, then hurried off to something else. Probably another speech, or reviewing the one he gave in Allentown this morning.
But the sound bite I kept hearing this morning on CNBC was this statement from Wonderboy's right-hand thug, Valerie Jarrett,
"If anyone has ideas on how to create jobs, I want to hear them."
Actually, it's a lie.
We know this because many business people and Republican Congressmen have called for two specific job-creating steps which Wonderboy refuses to acknowledge:
1. Rather than pass a $787B pork-laden "stimulus" bill, simply declare a personal income tax holiday for 2009.
2. Send legislation to Capitol Hill authorizing either permanent or very long term (10 years) reductions in payroll taxes for workers hired this year and kept for some minimum period.
These two steps would accomplish the very important task of allowing individuals, as employees and employers, to choose how to save, spend or invest their own money. Rather than have politicians construct massive spending programs to curry favor with voters or donors, using borrowed money, let individuals make their own economic choices.
This would increase individual economic freedom and liberty.
Thus, why Wonderboy and Jarrett aren't interested,
What the First Assistant Thus should have said was,
"If anyone out there has ideas which fit our far left, socialistic views on how to create jobs, I want to hear them. But I don't want to hear any ideas that promote individual control of ones own economic destiny."
The Anointed One only made a token 15 minute appearance, then hurried off to something else. Probably another speech, or reviewing the one he gave in Allentown this morning.
But the sound bite I kept hearing this morning on CNBC was this statement from Wonderboy's right-hand thug, Valerie Jarrett,
"If anyone has ideas on how to create jobs, I want to hear them."
Actually, it's a lie.
We know this because many business people and Republican Congressmen have called for two specific job-creating steps which Wonderboy refuses to acknowledge:
1. Rather than pass a $787B pork-laden "stimulus" bill, simply declare a personal income tax holiday for 2009.
2. Send legislation to Capitol Hill authorizing either permanent or very long term (10 years) reductions in payroll taxes for workers hired this year and kept for some minimum period.
These two steps would accomplish the very important task of allowing individuals, as employees and employers, to choose how to save, spend or invest their own money. Rather than have politicians construct massive spending programs to curry favor with voters or donors, using borrowed money, let individuals make their own economic choices.
This would increase individual economic freedom and liberty.
Thus, why Wonderboy and Jarrett aren't interested,
What the First Assistant Thus should have said was,
"If anyone out there has ideas which fit our far left, socialistic views on how to create jobs, I want to hear them. But I don't want to hear any ideas that promote individual control of ones own economic destiny."
Thursday, December 3, 2009
Phil Jones Goes Down Over Global Warming Lies
As I described in this recent post, the hacking of East Anglia Climate Center's server resulted in publication of emails that revealed lies, distortions and other dishonest behavior by scientists claiming that global warming is real and poses a great threat to mankind.
Now, the Center's head, Phil Jones, has stepped down amidst the furor. His colleague, American scientist Michael Mann, is being investigated by his university for wrongdoing connected to the emails and various articles he has written, and possible data manipulation or suppression.
Of course, America's liberal media has missed this story. Al Gore is also nowhere in sight as the scientists and science behind Warm Boy Al's current money machine is revealed to be a fraud.
California liberal Democratic Senator Barbara Boxer, chair of the Energy Committee, also seems to be absent as the climate research fraud becomes more clear.
Fortunately, the story is getting plenty of attention elsewhere around the globe. Other countries take much more seriously spending trillions of dollars for carbon emission controls when the science behind the prescriptions is now being called into serious question as the fabrication of a few self-anointed climate zealots.
Score one for common sense and freedom of information.
Now, the Center's head, Phil Jones, has stepped down amidst the furor. His colleague, American scientist Michael Mann, is being investigated by his university for wrongdoing connected to the emails and various articles he has written, and possible data manipulation or suppression.
Of course, America's liberal media has missed this story. Al Gore is also nowhere in sight as the scientists and science behind Warm Boy Al's current money machine is revealed to be a fraud.
California liberal Democratic Senator Barbara Boxer, chair of the Energy Committee, also seems to be absent as the climate research fraud becomes more clear.
Fortunately, the story is getting plenty of attention elsewhere around the globe. Other countries take much more seriously spending trillions of dollars for carbon emission controls when the science behind the prescriptions is now being called into serious question as the fabrication of a few self-anointed climate zealots.
Score one for common sense and freedom of information.
Wednesday, December 2, 2009
Wonderboy Desecrates West Point
I would imagine that George Washington, U.S. Grant and Dwight D. Eisenhower are all spinning in their graves at the thought of Wonderboy desecrating West Point by using- and I mean using- the Army's service college to deliver a speech about the result of his dithering over Afghanistan.
At this point, it really doesn't matter what he says. Early releases of his speech indicate that he will focus more on promising a quick withdrawal of the forces he is sending than on their dispatch, or what they will do.
The three men I mentioned earlier, two West Point graduates who became President, and the first President of the Republic, who designated the site as so important, would certainly have disapproved of our First Rookie's inability to trust his commanders, make a prompt decision, and show real commitment to the war in Afghanistan.
I would not have wanted to be in uniform serving our country, at West Point, to watch this travesty. It's a disgrace to our country's armed services and the men and women currently enrolled at West Point that Wonderboy used the post as yet another prop in his never-ending teleplay that is his administration.
Too bad the service men and women being sent to Afghanistan are not in a theatrical production, like the president's speech, but are risking their lives. They deserve so much more in a commander in chief than they are getting from Obama.
At this point, it really doesn't matter what he says. Early releases of his speech indicate that he will focus more on promising a quick withdrawal of the forces he is sending than on their dispatch, or what they will do.
The three men I mentioned earlier, two West Point graduates who became President, and the first President of the Republic, who designated the site as so important, would certainly have disapproved of our First Rookie's inability to trust his commanders, make a prompt decision, and show real commitment to the war in Afghanistan.
I would not have wanted to be in uniform serving our country, at West Point, to watch this travesty. It's a disgrace to our country's armed services and the men and women currently enrolled at West Point that Wonderboy used the post as yet another prop in his never-ending teleplay that is his administration.
Too bad the service men and women being sent to Afghanistan are not in a theatrical production, like the president's speech, but are risking their lives. They deserve so much more in a commander in chief than they are getting from Obama.
Tuesday, December 1, 2009
Wonderboy As Commander In Chief
Our naive and inexperienced Commander In Chief has once again proven himself to be Hamlet reborn.
This week, his administration carefully leaked that Wonderboy, after months of staged "thinking" about his Afghanistan army commander's recommendation/request for 40,000 more troops, is cutting it back to 35,000.
You really can tell that our First Rookie has absolutely no sense of what the application of real military force is all about.
While not all combatants, Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Carter and both Bushes all were at least in the military. Reagan deferred to his generals and admirals. Clinton tried to forget we had a military.
Thus, for the last 60 years, almost every American president has had some understanding that men and women die when a US president commits troops. Thus, because we are a democracy and, especially now, with a volunteer military, the commitment has to be well-reasoned, defensible, and calculated to not needless expend lives.
Instead, Wonderboy is playing political chess with American military personnels' lives.
He's worried about just accepting McChrystal's recommendation, for fear of rubber-stamping the dreaded, hated military's decisions. He won't cut and run, for fear of being justly criticized for "losing" Afghanistan. Especially after declaring it a necessary war during his pre-election campaign.
Thus, his solution to cavalierly cut some arbitrary number of to-be-deployed troops. Looks shrewd, to Wonderboy and his handlers, on paper.
Of course, to that crew, army personnel dispatched to Afghanistan are only so many flags on a map. Not real soldiers. The possibility that sending too few endangers the rest is so far from being understood by this president and his staff that it disgusts the average American.
Nowhere among Wonderboy's senior staff and handlers are any trustworthy, reputable advisers with military backgrounds.
This administration has no grasp of the nature and use of military power. Other than using military bases for photo opportunities, it can't figure out what to do with real global situations requiring the skilled application of American military power.
At least the coming sacrifices of American lives due to Wonderboy's incompetence may help usher him out of office that much sooner.
This week, his administration carefully leaked that Wonderboy, after months of staged "thinking" about his Afghanistan army commander's recommendation/request for 40,000 more troops, is cutting it back to 35,000.
You really can tell that our First Rookie has absolutely no sense of what the application of real military force is all about.
While not all combatants, Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Carter and both Bushes all were at least in the military. Reagan deferred to his generals and admirals. Clinton tried to forget we had a military.
Thus, for the last 60 years, almost every American president has had some understanding that men and women die when a US president commits troops. Thus, because we are a democracy and, especially now, with a volunteer military, the commitment has to be well-reasoned, defensible, and calculated to not needless expend lives.
Instead, Wonderboy is playing political chess with American military personnels' lives.
He's worried about just accepting McChrystal's recommendation, for fear of rubber-stamping the dreaded, hated military's decisions. He won't cut and run, for fear of being justly criticized for "losing" Afghanistan. Especially after declaring it a necessary war during his pre-election campaign.
Thus, his solution to cavalierly cut some arbitrary number of to-be-deployed troops. Looks shrewd, to Wonderboy and his handlers, on paper.
Of course, to that crew, army personnel dispatched to Afghanistan are only so many flags on a map. Not real soldiers. The possibility that sending too few endangers the rest is so far from being understood by this president and his staff that it disgusts the average American.
Nowhere among Wonderboy's senior staff and handlers are any trustworthy, reputable advisers with military backgrounds.
This administration has no grasp of the nature and use of military power. Other than using military bases for photo opportunities, it can't figure out what to do with real global situations requiring the skilled application of American military power.
At least the coming sacrifices of American lives due to Wonderboy's incompetence may help usher him out of office that much sooner.
Monday, November 30, 2009
Thomas Frank Gets It Wrong Again
The Wall Street Journal's token liberal columnist, Thomas Frank, managed to write yet another misinformed piece in an edition of the paper last weekend.
In a pre-Thanksgiving piece, he held forth on how thankful he is that last year's and this year's financial mess have muzzled those who argue for free markets. In his view, what befell the US economy and financial sector in the past year is a complete failure of free market ideology.
How wrong he is.
For many years, there has been an undercurrent of concern regarding the financial audits required of listed companies. Instead of actually assuring anyone of much of value, SEC-mandated audits lulled investors into ignorance, resulting in the Enron and WorldCom scandals.
Similarly, FDIC insurance for bank deposits caused retail customers to pay less attention to the actual health of their banks. It may seem like pocket change to pay off consumer deposits when insured banks go broke, but that money has to come from somewhere. The FDIC's outflows in recent years have exceeded their inflows from bank insurance levies.
Result? Society at large pays for the risks which indifferent consumers take with their money.
How about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac? Their GSE status caused everyone, including the Chinese government, to blithely assume that their bonds were as sound as Treasuries. Thus, nobody really paid any attention to the trash which Congressional leaders demanded the agencies to create out of mortgage loans to increasingly poorer, riskier home buyers. Low-doc, no-doc and option ARM mortgages became components of pass through bonds backed by the US government. Ratings agencies went along for the ride and income. Oh, they are protected, too. Special exemptions in US law allow them both an oligopoly and protection from lawsuits for their opinions and ratings.
It was mortgages cranked out by the private financial sector, passed through the GSEs and turned, like rancid sausage, into something different-looking, which polluted financial markets and ultimately led to severe equity losses on the book of several of the largest US commercial and investment banks.
Nowhere in all of this were so-called "free markets" operating. No, it was all coddled and wrapped in a big green blanket of US government guarantees, insurance and regulation.
These alleged safeguards are precisely why nobody bothered to conduct any serious due diligence of their own.
When mediocre civil servants couldn't even do their regulation and oversight jobs effectively, the whole mess exploded.
Thus, Frank got it completely backwards.
Last year's penultimate financial service sector problems stemmed from too much legislation, regulation and insurance by the federal government which supplanted investors' sound judgements and critical appraisals of risks. Risks of institutional failures, instrument quality and repayment failures.
We don't have too much free market capitalism which needs more regulation and supervision.
We have too little of the former, and far too much of the ineffectual latter.
In a pre-Thanksgiving piece, he held forth on how thankful he is that last year's and this year's financial mess have muzzled those who argue for free markets. In his view, what befell the US economy and financial sector in the past year is a complete failure of free market ideology.
How wrong he is.
For many years, there has been an undercurrent of concern regarding the financial audits required of listed companies. Instead of actually assuring anyone of much of value, SEC-mandated audits lulled investors into ignorance, resulting in the Enron and WorldCom scandals.
Similarly, FDIC insurance for bank deposits caused retail customers to pay less attention to the actual health of their banks. It may seem like pocket change to pay off consumer deposits when insured banks go broke, but that money has to come from somewhere. The FDIC's outflows in recent years have exceeded their inflows from bank insurance levies.
Result? Society at large pays for the risks which indifferent consumers take with their money.
How about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac? Their GSE status caused everyone, including the Chinese government, to blithely assume that their bonds were as sound as Treasuries. Thus, nobody really paid any attention to the trash which Congressional leaders demanded the agencies to create out of mortgage loans to increasingly poorer, riskier home buyers. Low-doc, no-doc and option ARM mortgages became components of pass through bonds backed by the US government. Ratings agencies went along for the ride and income. Oh, they are protected, too. Special exemptions in US law allow them both an oligopoly and protection from lawsuits for their opinions and ratings.
It was mortgages cranked out by the private financial sector, passed through the GSEs and turned, like rancid sausage, into something different-looking, which polluted financial markets and ultimately led to severe equity losses on the book of several of the largest US commercial and investment banks.
Nowhere in all of this were so-called "free markets" operating. No, it was all coddled and wrapped in a big green blanket of US government guarantees, insurance and regulation.
These alleged safeguards are precisely why nobody bothered to conduct any serious due diligence of their own.
When mediocre civil servants couldn't even do their regulation and oversight jobs effectively, the whole mess exploded.
Thus, Frank got it completely backwards.
Last year's penultimate financial service sector problems stemmed from too much legislation, regulation and insurance by the federal government which supplanted investors' sound judgements and critical appraisals of risks. Risks of institutional failures, instrument quality and repayment failures.
We don't have too much free market capitalism which needs more regulation and supervision.
We have too little of the former, and far too much of the ineffectual latter.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
