Comments on: Distracting

By: General Smedley D Butler

General Smedley D Butler — Thu, 20 Jul 2006 00:23:45 +0000

It may only be a distraction to us–in electoral politics perception is the only reality.

Release the damn returns Ned and make this a non-issue!

By: jeffreyw

jeffreyw — Wed, 19 Jul 2006 22:15:48 +0000

Grayslady-

It’s a little silly to argue here in the midst of EPUtopia (yes I invented that term!) About what you or I would consider proper strategy for investing for ourselves, let alone for Ned. I just wanted to be sure that those who were weaving threads of apology into a screen for our fave candidate used quality yarns so that it would not quickly unravel. The issue, as you mention, is the extent of direction given to the manager. If the argument is “Haliburton was just a small part of a mutual fund so Ned can’t be accused of war profiteering” and someone shows that the investment was not a mutual fund, then that argument fails. None of us know the details, let’s let those who do know fashion the response.

By: lewisnclark

lewisnclark — Wed, 19 Jul 2006 20:52:13 +0000

It seems to me that among the very first and most prudent items to take care of by anyone who’s considering running for an important political office (especially a high profile race at the national level), is to thoroughly review their financial investments, and get things in order.

I don’t know all the facts but I would guess this would be an individual stock, not a mutual fund. If it is a mutual fund, and the office seekler doesn’t know what stocks are included, he or she better find out for god’s sake! Otherwise you’re potentially handing your opponent a big, fat club to hit you with. And when you’re opponent is getting desperate and appears eager to drags things down to the mud, like Joementum, it’s a doubly unfortunate mistake.

Is this 20/20 hindsight? Sure. But it’s also quite obvious, and Ned has no one but himself to blame here.

By: grayslady

grayslady — Wed, 19 Jul 2006 20:34:08 +0000

jeffreyw@203-
Normally, a money manager would do as you’re suggesting and invest in individual stocks. But, as an investor, you might want to participate in a particular field, such as technology stocks, without carving out particular stocks. In that case, a no-load technology mutual fund might be just the right vehicle. The other issue is whether or not Ned’s money manager has full discretionary authority over investments. If he/she does have full discretion, Ned would probably just be looking at the bottom line of the total portfolio and how much money the portfolio made rather than at the individual investments that created the return. In no way would he have participated in the decision making regarding the individual stocks. Just a thought.

By: lotus

lotus — Wed, 19 Jul 2006 20:14:23 +0000

Niiice, Right Fools. I’d like that too.

By: Right Fools

Right Fools — Wed, 19 Jul 2006 19:49:01 +0000

I think it would be great to make HoJo explain why Lamont owning Halliburton stock is a problem.

He’ll only dig his own grave.

By: jeffreyw

jeffreyw — Wed, 19 Jul 2006 19:38:33 +0000

Just an aside in regards the whole mutual fund thing, money managers don’t put client assets into mutual funds, as a rule. There are fees involved in paying the managers of a fund to do what the client is paying his manager to do. Kind of like subcontracting the job, where both firms take a cut. Neds manager is surely buying individual stocks and bonds and may be involved in other financial plays.

By: Right Fools

Right Fools — Wed, 19 Jul 2006 19:36:59 +0000

Lamont should say, “when I’m elected to the US Senate I will place all my investments into a blind trust. Until then, what stocks I own represent no conflict of interest.”

By: Millineryman

Millineryman — Wed, 19 Jul 2006 19:21:45 +0000

I can’t fault Ned for having stock in Haliburton. For a number of years I worked for a company that did it’s auditing work. Haliburton paid it’s fees, and that money got tossed into the pool of money that paid my salary and benefits. Once I found out that Haliburton was a client, I used that as the reason to focus my life in a different direction.

When you look at the way Joe whored his influence to get campaign donations, it takes on a whole different character. Ned’s investment was private, Joe’s tricks involved public trust.

Joe is such a slimeball. What ever happened to Mr. Personality, Stamford High School class of 1960?

By: mui

mui — Wed, 19 Jul 2006 19:03:39 +0000

Hugh (196). You can’t raise an issue just “once” and leave it for Lieberman to defend. Lieberman is like Houdini when it comes to wiggling out of compromising stuff and he’ll do it so fast and deft noone in the public will take note of the controversy because he’ll be taking a huge swipe at Ned in the meantime. Lieberman is a professional political boxer. Hojo needs to be steadily pounded with compromising information so he can’t do his usual ducks and feints. Like with the war issue.