Miami Herald's Leonard Pitts Unschooled on Race and Conservatives

Leonard Pitts, Jr. writes a spin piece in today's Seattle Times (h/t Adam Schmidt on Facebook).  Pitts  argues that African Americans would be insane to support conservatives because conservatives have always been anti-Black. 

Pitts illustrates the historical ignorance that characterizes the American left and its pitiful media. Social conservatives in New England were the leaders of the abolitionist movement.  For example, John Brown's father was associated with Oberlin College, where Charles Finney, leader of the Second Great Awakening, was president. Oberlin, a Calvinist Presbyterian School, was the first college to admit African Americans in 1835.  Wikipedia writes of Charles Finney:

In addition to becoming a popular Christian evangelist, Finney was involved with the abolitionist movement and frequently denounced slavery from the pulpit. In 1835, he moved to Ohio where he became a professor and later president of Oberlin College from 1851 to 1866. Oberlin became active early in the movement to end slavery and was among the first American colleges to co-educate blacks and women with white men.^[8]

<sup>Pitts is also wrong because, later in the 19th century, the Mugwumps, who tended to support laissez faire as well as reforms such as the Pendleton Act, tended not to be anti-Black. They were the post-bellum Republican elitists during the period of carpetbaggers and Reconstruction.  During Reconstruction, the Ku Klux Klan's first victims were African American Republicans.  George Wallace, the leader of 1960s racism, was a Democrat and a supporter of Franklin D. Roosevelt.

As Pitts points out, the worst racists were Democrats. Although Pitts calls them conservatives, the racist Democrats voted for Democrat Franklin D. Roosevelt just as the northerners did. Pitts's argument is circular:  racism is conservative, therefore, conservatives are racists.  But the advocates of limited government were not necessarily more racist than the supporters of big government and big business--the GOP.  On the one hand, it is true that Andrew Jackson, the founder of today's Democratic Party, was a racist and that his Supreme Court Chief Justice Taney was responsible for the Dred Scott decision.  But the New York labor unions were probably more anti-African American than Jackson was.  That The Miami Herald's syndicated columnist Pitts is apparently unfamiliar with the Draft Riots and organized labor's sympathy for the South during the Civil War is an embarrassment to the pathetic legacy of American journalism.</sup> 

Pitts's argument is tautological:  racists are conservative, therefore conservatives never stood up for blacks.  In fact, the first “conservatives” might be said to have been the pro-laissez faire Mugwumps, who favored the gold standard, opposed tariffs, and favored limited government.   The founder of The Nation, EL Godkin, was not overly supportive of African Americans, but he was no racist.  The Republican Party in the late 19^th century was a big government, pro business party, and mostly laissez faire (at least in words).  

At the same time, the Progressives, especially Woodrow Wilson, were frequently overt racists.  Eugenics was a significant facet of Progressivism, and as C. Vann Woodward points out in The Strange Career of Jim Crow, Jim Crow exploded during the Progressive era, not the Gilded Age, which was characterized by policies and leadership that conservatives support today. 

One source of Pitts's confusion (besides being due to an ideologically extremist university and educational system that indoctrinates in left wing groupthink rather than educates, leaving people like Pitts ignorant) is that popular lingo confuses laissez faire with conservatism and social democracy or socialism with liberalism. Thus, the Wikipedia article calls Charles Finney "progressive," but he would be considered a social conservative today. 

On the one hand, the first big government socialist president in American politics was Theodore Roosevelt, and he was not a racist. On the other hand, the first president who was a conservative (defined in opposition to the first "liberal," Roosevelt) was William Howard Taft, and he wasn’t a racist either.  Roosevelt backed Taft before he learned that Taft would not support regulatory solutions to the trust issue—that he would instead support a litigated settlement in the Standard Oil case.  The Taft Supreme Court (Taft was the only president to later become Chief Justice) was  conservative.  Roosevelt ran against Taft in 1912, electing racist-cum-Progressive Woodrow Wilson in Taft’s place.  Wilson began the American socialist project by pushing through the income tax and the Federal Reserve Bank the following year, 1913.  He also implemented Jim Crow in Washington, DC.

Princeton, of which Wilson had been president, has been well known as the most anti-Semitic of the Ivy League universities.   Here is what Wikipedia says about Taft:

Taft met with and publicly endorsed Booker T. Washington's program for uplifting the black race, advising them to stay out of politics at the time and emphasize education and entrepreneurship. A supporter of free immigration, Taft vetoed a law passed by Congress and supported by labor unions that would have restricted unskilled laborers by imposing a literacy test.^[63]

Moreover, the Southern Democrats, the racists,  repeatedly supported left-wing Democrats. They voted for Woodrow Wilson, Franklin D. Roosevelt, and Adlai Stevenson.  It was not until the 1960s that racism and the Republican Party crossed paths.  By then, both parties had become advocates of Progressivism and supporters of the Roosevelt/Rockefeller agenda. In 1944, the entire Jim Crow South voted for the paragon of American socialism, Franklin D. Roosevelt.  Alabama, for example, the state remembered for Rosa Parks and the Montgomery boycott of the 1950s, voted 81% for FDR.  In 1952 and 1956, the most social democratic candidate between FDR and BHO was Adlai Stevenson.  In 1956, the ONLY states in which Stevenson won were the Jim Crow states:   Missouri, Arkansas, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, South Carolina, and North Carolina.

So Mr. Pitts, you're a doody head.

Gerald P. O'Driscoll, Jr. Advocates Gold Standard

Gerald P. O'Driscoll, Jr., previously of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis and now of the Cato Institute, has an excellent article in today's Wall Street Journal. O'Driscoll writes:

"Mr. Obama needs to stop the next asset bubble from being inflated by imposing a commodity standard on the Fed. A commodity standard (such as a gold standard) imposes discipline on a central bank because it forces it to acquire commodity reserves in order to increase the money supply. Today the government can inflate asset bubbles without paying a cost for it because the currency isn't linked to the price of a commodity."

The Federal Reserve Bank has become a barbaric relic. It is time for Americans to think about adopting a civilized alternative to the Fed's barbarism: a gold standard.

Andy Martin Alleges That Barack Obama Is Really Frank Marshall Davis, Jr.

I just received the following e-mail from Andy Martin. I assume the facts will be revealed in his case, assuming that Hawaii's courts allow the case to proceed.

>The Obama investigation in Hawai'i, Part Three
Obama's Hawai'i Years: The truth finally revealed
Barack Obama is not "Barack Obama"

ANDY MARTIN
Executive Editor
ContrarianCommentary.com

"Factually Correct, Not Politically Correct"

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

"OPERATION ALOHA OBAMA" YIELDS UP THE TRUTH ABOUT BARACK OBAMA
PART THREE: BARACK OBAMA IS NOT BARACK OBAMA
"OBAMA'S FATHER WAS FRANK MARSHALL DAVIS. OBAMA IS REALLY FRANK MARSHALL DAVIS, JR.," SAYS ANDY MARTIN

OBAMA'S 'DREAMS FROM [HIS] FATHER] WAS REALLY A BOOK ABOUT HIS REAL FATHER, FRANK MARSHALL DAVIS

OBAMA WAS THE VICTIM OF A HISTORICAL ANOMALY, AND ROBBED OF HIS BIRTHRIGHT AS THE SCION OF CIVIL RIGHTS ROYALTY
OBAMA'S ORIGINAL "VAULT" BIRTH CERTIFICATE IS EITHER INCOMPLETE OR TAMPERED WITH, WHICH IS WHY IT HAS NEVER SURFACED.

MARTIN SAYS OBAMA SHOULD SUBMIT TO DNA TESTING WITH HIS BROTHERS

WAS OBAMA THE "VICTIM" OF A PRO-LIFE MOTHER?

(HONOLULU, HI)(October 22, 2008) Internet powerhouse Andy Martin told a Honolulu news conference today that after an intense international investigation he is convinced that Barack Obama, Junior, the presidential candidate is really the son of Obama's controversial mentor Frank Marshall Davis.

"Mendacious adults 'switched' Obama at birth. That is why he has refused to allow access to the original or 'vault' birth certificate," Martin told a Honolulu news conference. "We believe the original certificate did not list a father. Barack Obama became the father as a result of an agreement between Ann Dunham, Frank Marshall Davis and Barack Obama, Sr.

"Davis was already married to a White Woman. He did not need a nonmarital child by a second one. Ann probably refused to have what was then called a 'back alley' abortion. Davis may have felt that 'Obama' would face less stigma with an 'African' background than a Negro one. The civil rights revolution, of course, turned that gambit upside down. In discovering and understanding what happened we cannot forget we are dealing with events in 1961, not 2008.

"The irony in all of this is that Obama once stated he did not want his daughters to be 'victimized' with a child. And he is alive because his mother took the contrary view.

"Barack Obama has known this since adulthood, and the shock of this discovery still reverberates in his psyche.

"Ironically, what I have to say today dilutes the 'Muslim' theory that has propagated. Davis was not a Muslim. If Obama had told the truth at some point in his life, instead of living endlessly with the lies that were imposed on him by the adults in his life, we would have avoided a great deal of confusion. I, for one, have deep compassion for Mr. Obama. He is not the first person in history to be caught up in this kind of family fraud.

"The disclosure by the two women in his life that he was not the 'son' of his 'father' also explains why he manifests such extreme ambivalence to both his mother and grandmother. He is angry because he was cheated of his real father.

"Obama was robbed of his birthright of being the son of civil rights royalty, and of a father with whom he was completely simpatico. He could have grown up the son of Frank Marshall Davis, civil rights pioneer and activist, cutting-edge journalist, poet and man of letters. Mr. Davis was an extraordinary man in a dark period of this nation's history, the pre-dawn of the civil rights era.

"Obama has probably suspended his campaign and is flying to Honolulu because he is deathly afraid his grandmother may make a 'dying declaration' and blow the whistle on his family fraud. Dying people often blurt out the truth. The true facts of Obama's parentage also reflect why there has been so much tension and alienation, as well as genuine love, in Obama's relationship with his grandmother.

"There has been a great deal of confusion and misconception about Frank Marshall Davis. A brief history lesson is essential to understanding the bizarre facts of Obama's provenance.

"During the 1920's and 30's many Negros (African-Americans) became 'communists' because the Soviet Union and the Communist Party USA promised to end racial segregation and Jim Crow laws in the United States. The Democratic Party, of course, was the powerful force behind segregation and Jim Crow. So it is a twist of fate that the same party that oppressed Blacks has now nominated one for president.

"Madelyn Dunham is the last surviving person who knows the truth about the switch. That is why as we closed in on Dunham, Obama went ballistic, cancelled his campaign and came to Hawai'i to head us off.

"I actually carry an official, certified pocket-sized birth certificate on me at all times [Andy shows a copy to media]. But this is NOT my 'birth certificate.' The original certificate is held in the City Clerk's vault in Middletown, Connecticut. That is what has come to be known as the 'vault copy.'

"Likewise, the document that Obama has plastered over the Internet is NOT his original birth certificate or even a copy of his original certificate. It is a computer generated facsimile of an official record and nothing more. The original certificate was either handwritten or typewritten, not computer-generated in 1961. No one has ever seen that original certificate except the people that are working so hard to keep it hidden from the American people.

"I am asking Judge Ayabe to impound the value certificate and have the court hold it for safekeeping.

"By the time Barack Obama learned who he was, it was too late to change his identity. He was who he was, so he continued the ruse of being the son of an 'African herder,' which was yet another lie. 'Dreams From My Father' bears no connection to dreams from Barack Obama; there were none. It was Frank Marshall Davis who communicated his dreams to his secret son.

"There is a simple way for Obama to resolve this controversy: he can either admit the truth of these facts and order the immediate release of his vault certificate; or he can submit to a DNA test. We can conduct a Maury Povich-style DNA test to determine filiation between Obama and his brothers, one of whom blogs at BarackObama.com.

"In closing, I can only say that we used the fictional 'Hawai'i Five-O' as our dramatic template for this investigative operation. We could have as easily used the great, real-life Hawai'i detective Chang Apana as our polestar. He was featured in yesterday's newspaper.

"As for Mr. Obama, all I can say is 'Book'em Danno." Case solved. Barack Obama the presidential candidate is the son of Frank Marshall Davis." Martin stated.

"I bear Mr. Obama no ill will and no animus. I have only been a faithful servant of the search for truth, and I believe we finally know the secret truths about who Barack Obama really is: the son of Frank Marshall Davis."

----------------------------------------------
Readers of Obama: The Man Behind The Mask, say the book is still the only gold standard and practical handbook on Barack Obama's unfitness for the presidency. Buy it.
Book orders: http://OrangeStatePress.com. Immediate shipment from Amazon.com or signed copies from the publisher are available.
---------------------------------------------
FULL DISCLOSURE: I recently decided to oppose Barack Obama's election and became Executive Director of The Stop Obama Coalition, http://StopObamaCoalition.com. By default, I became the national leader of the anti-Obama movement. I am not acting as either a Democrat or Republican. I have had no contact whatsoever with the McCain Campaign. I am not a member of any political organization. The views expressed are entirely independent. I am acting as an American citizen who sincerely believes Obama is not the man we need in the Oval Office. We are going to run a very dynamic and aggressive campaign against Obama. I will continue to write my news and opinion columns for ContrarianCommentary.com. /s/ Andy Martin
----------------------------------------------
URGENT APPEAL: The Committee of One Million to Defeat Barack Obama is raising money to fight Barack Obama. http://CommitteeofOneMilliontoDefeatBarackObama.com. Please give generously up to the maximum of $100. Our ability to fight and defeat Barack Obama is directly dependent on the generosity of every American."
The Committee of One Million to Defeat Barack Obama limits itself to $100 maximum contributions; there are no bundlers, fat cats or illegal contributions. Obama is opposed to everything America stands for," says Executive Director Andy Martin. "But while Obama has raised more than a third of a BILLION dollars, his opponents have raised virtually nothing. We can't just sit back and expect John McCain to do the job all alone. Americans can either contribute now, or pay later. If we do not succeed, Obama will."
E-mail: contact@CommitteeofOneMilliontoDefeatBarackObama.com
---------------------------------------------
Andy Martin is a legendary Chicago muckraker, author, Internet columnist, radio talk show host, broadcaster and media critic. He is currently based in New York selling his new book, Obama: The Man Behind The Mask. Andy is the Executive Editor and publisher of www.ContrarianCommentary.com. © Copyright by Andy Martin 2008. Martin comments on regional, national and world events with over forty years of experience. He holds a Juris Doctor degree from the University of Illinois College of Law.

His columns are also posted at ContrarianCommentary.blogspot.com; contrariancommentary.wordpress.com. Andy is the author of Obama: The Man Behind The Mask, published in July 2008, see http://www.OrangeStatePress.com.

MEDIA CONTACT: (866) 706-2639 or cell (917) 664-9329
E-MAIL: AndyMart20@aol.com [NOTE: We frequently correct typographical errors and additions/subtractions on our blogs, where you can find the latest edition of this release.]

Forward email

This email was sent to mlangbert@hvc.rr.com by contact@contrariancommentary.com.
Update Profile/Email Address | Instant removal with SafeUnsubscribe™ | Privacy Policy. Email Marketing by ContrarianCommentary.com | P. O. Box 1851 | New York | NY | 10150

Open Letter to Herbert M. Allison, Jr., Chairman of TIAA-CREF, Re Threat of Future Stagflation to Account Holders' Funds

PO Box 130
West Shokan, NY 12494
May 19, 2008

Herbert M. Allison, Jr.
TIAA-CREF
730 Third Avenue
New York, NY 10017-3206

Dear Mr. Allison:

I hold a TIAA-CREF account through my employment at the City University of New York and have done so since 1991

TIAA-CREF should implement a commodity index fund and a foreign-currency denominated interest bearing fund. Doing so would fulfill your responsibility to be prudent to your account holders. I say this despite current short-term overheating in the commodities markets.

The 1970s were a period of significant challenge to TIAA-CREF because the stock market declined while inflation accelerated. This caused pensioners to receive reduced payments at the very time that inflation posed high costs. TIAA-CREF has a fiduciary duty to take action to anticipate the realistic risk that Federal Reserve Bank policy will again cause stagflation. Conversely, it is imprudent to pretend that stock and interest bearing investments provide all of the diversification that investors need when the Federal Reserve Bank has expanded the money supply by eight percent annually for the past two and one half decades.

To be prudent, you ought to diligently consider the risk of stagflation and take action. Both the stock market and interest bearing dollar denominated accounts are ultra-risky in a stagflationary period, yet those are the only alternatives TIAA-CREF currently has on offer. By failing to diversify into alternative currencies you are shooting craps with shareholders’ accounts. Inflation-indexed bonds are a crap shoot as well because interest rates may skyrocket at the very time that inflation goes up.

Sincerely,


Mitchell Langbert, Ph.D.

Cc: Chronicle of Higher Education

Profit Sharing Circa 1868

Leter to Railroad Executive Charles Francis Adams, Jr.* written in New York, February 8, 1868, almost 140 years ago to the day:

"I am very much obliged for your note and for the pamphlet on "Railroad Legislation" by which it was accompanied...

"The plan of paying railroad employees in funds out of profits has been tried on the Orleans railroad in France. I am not quite sure about the particular line, but certainly it is one of the French ones, and I am informed with great success. I think cooperation, or some modification of it, will yet be resorted to in all employments and occupations, in which zeal is of high importance, and cannot be secured by constant inspection. On railroads, the effect of dependence of the servants for part of their wages, on net receipts, would undoubtedly diminish waste, promote vigilance and politeness to passangers. I think the employer's art--the art that is of getting the most out of men, of bringing their faculties most effectively into play in industry, is still in the rudest condition in all civilized countries. Fixed wages is one degree better than slavery, which only appeals to one motive of action, and that a low one."

--Edwin Lawrence Godkin, founder and editor of the Nation and editor of the New York Evening Post
William K. Armstrong, editor, The Gilded Age Letters of E.L. Godkin,, pp. 119-20
Albany, NY 1974: SUNY Press

Question: How much has management improved since 1868?



*"Adams was...the great-grandson of both United States President John Adams and United States Secretary of the Navy Benjamin Williams Crowninshield, and the grandson of president John Quincy Adams...After graduating from Harvard University in 1856, Adams served on the Union side in the American Civil War...He received the brevet rank of brigadier-general in the Regular Army in 1865...Adams was president of the Union Pacific Railroad from 1884 to 1890, having previously become widely known as an authority on the management of railways. Among his writings are Railroads, Their Origin and Problems (1878)."

Investment Chief at Carlyle Group Foresees Market Declines

A former student has forwarded to me a memorandum from William E. Conway, Jr., a founding partner and managing director of the Carlyle Group and chairman of Carlyle's investment committee, to all Carlyle investment professionals worldwide.

Some excerpts of Mr. Conway's memorandum follow:

>"As you all know (I hope), the fabulous profits that we have been able to generate for our limited partners are not solely a function of our investment genius, but have resulted in large part from a great market and the availability of enormous amounts of cheap debt. This cheap debt has been available for almost all maturities, most industries, infrastructure, real estate, and at all levels of the capital structure. Frankly, there is so much liquidity in the world financial system, that lenders (even “our” lenders) are making very risky credit decisions. This debt has enabled us to do transactions that were previously unimaginable (e.g., Hertz, Kinder Morgan, Nielsen, Freescale), and has resulted in (generally) higher exit multiples than entry multiples.

>"I EXPECT THAT THIS EXCESS LIQUIDITY, LEADING TO HUGE AMOUNTS OF
RELATIVELY CHEAP FINANCING, WILL CONTINUE FOR AT LEAST THE NEXT 12-24
MONTHS. FRANKLY, I SEE NO CATALYST THAT WILL LEAD TO A QUICK, LARGE OR DRAMATIC CHANGE IN THE GLOBAL LIQUIDITY. HOWEVER, I HOPE THAT YOU
HAVE NOTICED THE ROUGHLY 40-50 BASIS POINT MOVE UPWARD IN THE YIELD
CURVE OVER THE LAST 45 DAYS. THIS IS A BIG MOVE IN A SHORT PERIOD OF TIME AND IS PROBABLY A RESULT OF MARKET RECOGNITION THAT THE FED WILL NOT BE REDUCING RATES ANYTIME SOON.

>"I know that this liquidity environment cannot go on forever. I know that the longer it lasts the more money our investors (and we) will make. I know that the longer it lasts, the greater the pressures will be on all of us to take advantage of this liquidity. And I know that the longer it lasts, the worse it will be when it ends. And of course when it ends the buying opportunity will be a once in a lifetime chance. But, I do not know when it will end.


>"If you thought the liquidity were going to end tomorrow, you wouldn’t do any deals today. But, of course, you don’t think that it is going to end tomorrow. Most of us think, and act, like tomorrow will be just like today and yesterday and the day before that. And probably it will be.

>"As an aside, what is causing this global liquidity? There can be no doubt that the liquidity is global. Look at the US, Europe, China, Russia, the oil producing countries. Is the liquidity due to a shortage of investment opportunities? Is it due to U.S. financial policies (e.g., the trade deficit)? Is it due to the rise of China and India with their giant pools of skilled labor? Is it due to energy prices? The forward progress of technology?

>"And, as a further aside, what might cause this liquidity to end? A terrorist attack? $100 per barrel oil? Trade protectionism? The absorption of excess skilled labor into the global economy? The U.S. elections? Russian energy policies? A multibillion dollar bankruptcy? A tightening by the Bank of Japan or the U.S. Federal Reserve? The passage of time? I wish I knew.

>"A consequence of the enormous liquidity will be lower IRR’s on many of our investments. Perhaps our limited partners will be very satisfied with lower IRR’s, because even at reduced levels, these returns should still far exceed their investment alternatives.

>"SO WHAT DO I WANT YOU TO DO?

>"First of all, I have asked myself what I would do if the excess liquidity ended tomorrow. Certainly I would want as much flexibility as possible –– are our covenants loose enough? Have we hedged against a sharp upward move in rates? Can we draw down on our revolving credit loan facilities? Would we be glad we recapped the company when we did or would we reject the resulting financial straightjacket? While each situation is unique, you ought to be thinking about financial flexibility.

>"Secondly, the global liquidity has led to a significant reduction in risk premia –– most investors in most asset classes are not being paid for the risk being taken. OUR STRATEGY SHOULD EVOLVE TO TAKE LOWER RISK DEALS AND EARN LOWER RETURNS, RATHER THAN HIGHER RISK DEALS AT ONLY SMALL INCREMENTALLY HIGHER RETURNS. Even though it is capitalized, let me repeat –– lower IRR’s with lower risk, NOT lower IRR’s at the same risk. A short run consequence of this strategy is that investors in private equity measure only return (“Are you in the top quartile?”) and not risk. On a related point, for modeling
purposes, we should generally look at shrinking exit multiples (vs. entry multiples). Another related point is that we should look for as much of the return as possible to come from debt paydown, rather than exit value.

>"Thirdly, we should redouble our focus on deals with downside protection –– asset coverage, multiple and early exit paths, strategic partners, the aforementioned debt paydown, government protection, consumer needs (coffee and a donut?), controllable capital expenditures, defensible market positions, etc.

>"Finally, use our firmwide resources to do better deals and to help out when everything doesn’t go as planned. Examples of these resources are One Carlyle, the global network, industry specialists, senior advisors, bank relationships, real estate, and high yield expertise.

>"Last year, I asked you to be humble, ethical and optimistic. This year I am asking you to be careful as well."

Howard Katz has been making similar points without Mr. Conway's kid gloves for quite some time.

Mr. Conway is disingenuous. The liquidity in the world economy is due to the policies of the Fed and other central banks. Where else would the liquidity come from? All previous central bank monetary expansions have led to inflation. It will be a big surprise if this one leads elsewhere.

Interest rates are important to Carlyle, a private equity firm, not just because of the rate that they pay when they borrow. A more important reason is the valuation of the assets that they purchase and resell. Low interest rates increase the present value of earnings, raising stock market valuations. If Carlyle can increase net after-tax earnings by rearranging a firm's financing, low interest rates magnify the future value of the increase in net income, resulting in a large profit for them. Should interest rates rise, financial adjustments (e.g., substituting debt for equity) will not have as big an impact on the net present value of earnings, reducing the returns to their fund.

As Howard Katz has argued, it is a tragedy that wealthy special interests such as the Carlyle Group have been able to extract large financial rents due to Fed policy that will play themselves out in the larger economy as an inflationary tax on all Americans.

What Mr. Conway does not mention in his memo is:

1. The low interest rates and resultant international liquidity are a direct result of Fed policy

2. The same low interest rates, liquidity and Fed policy will result in inflation

3. Hence, Carlyle group has benefited at the expense of all those who will pay higher prices in the future.

As Frank Zappa and The Mothers of Invention put it in "Absolutely Free":

"Don't try to do no thinkin'
Just go on with your drinkin'
Just have your fun you old sun of a gun
And drive home in your Lincoln"

What can the small investor do? (1) Keep holdings in stocks and bonds to a minimum; (2) commodity and gold investments should be at least a portion or your portfolio.

My stock broker responds:

"I think there are some good points in this message-The Hedge fund industry will have its day of reckoning when the carry trade ends - I am very skeptical of investments that do not offer liquidity like hedge funds. I have clients who think they are invested in treasuries and making 15% a year in currrency hedge funds they were sold at the the country club - they think they are conservative - I have spent hours trying to convince them no more then 10% of weath in these illiquid investments. The Hedge fund investors will be the ones to get hit when the rates move to fight inflation. There only one problem no one knows the exact date. Remember if you miss the 5 biggest up days in the market in a year it can be most of the return for that year. Everyone has opinions - just turn on CNBC but like the letter says many events can change the course instantly. If history repeats itself and earnings drive stocks in the long run this market has some legs-with some hicups along the way."

corruption