Tuesday, November 3, 2009

Y! Alert: The Full Feed from HuffingtonPost.com

Yahoo! Alerts
My Alerts

The latest from The Full Feed from HuffingtonPost.com

John R. Bohrer: New Jersey: Where The Least Unpopular Man Wins Top
"I feel wonderful," Republican state Senator Joe Pennacchio told PolitickerNJ.com 's Matt Friedman tonight after Chris Christie was declared the governor-elect of New Jersey. "A pro-life, pro-gun conservative in a blue state. How did that happen?" Two words: Jon Corzine. In the end, the Democratic incumbent hit a ceiling in his reelection campaign. His interminable unpopularity and low approval ratings were insurmountable; a fact shrouded by the rise of a third party candidate who siphoned off what was ultimately a very small slice of the vote. Surveying the results, it seems independent Chris Daggett either hurt Corzine (which seems incredibly unlikely) or simply softened the blow of what would have been a double-digit Christie victory. New Jersey Democrats even resorted to pumping Republican households with pro-Daggett robocalls and it did nothing. It just goes to show how resilient Jon Corzine's unpopularity is/was. Want more? Consider these other factors that could not prevent a Corzine loss: Republicans had not won a statewide election in 12 years. In the most recent elections, New Jersey Democrats benefited from late surges at the polls. Corzine outspent Christie by at least a 3-1 margin . The Republican is more unpopular than he is popular, even on election day. Christie's approval ratings are upside down: 48% favorable to 50% unfavorable. So, how did a Republican like Christie win in New Jersey? By being the least unpopular. The simple fact of tonight is that Chris Christie did not beat Jon Corzine; Jon Corzine beat Jon Corzine. He was unpopular for a long time, and just about any Republican who won the nomination was going to have an easy time taking him down. Chris Christie, a major fundraiser for George W. Bush, is the state's 55th governor. Does anyone really think he won this on his own merits?
 
Jeffrey Sachs: A Lobbyist's Failed Defense Top
If the preposterous piece by Mr. Joel Jankowsky in Tuesday's Wall Street Journal had been published in any other newspaper, we'd guess it was a spoof. Mr. Jankowsky, a lobbyist and partner at Akin Gump, bemoans the limits being placed on lobbying activities, even though those limits remain weak and porous. "Talented women and men who registered themselves as lobbyists under the Lobbying Disclosure Act are being excluded from contributing their expertise at a critical time in our nation's history," writes Mr. Jankowsky. Mr. Jankowsky rightly argues that big campaign contributors have far too much influence and access in the Administration, but does so through a contorted logic that completely whitewashes the role of lobbyists in the money-choked politics of Washington. Lobbyists may indeed be talented people of expertise, but they are part of a dysfunctional system that has turned policy over to the highest corporate bidder and that puts our economy and society in jeopardy. Lobbying needs far stronger constraints than the tiny but salutary steps being put into place. Lobbyists for powerful corporations are crawling over every piece of pending legislation- from health care, to banking regulation, to climate change -- keeping a chokehold on deep reforms. Jankowsky says that lobbying is transparent. That's true in the trivial sense that lobbyists register and declare their earnings. Of course it's the activities behind closed doors and off the record that are killing our economy and confidence in the political system. Special interests have already spent $2.5 billion dollars this year on 13,000 lobbyists like Mr. Jankowsky and his colleagues at the firm Akin Gump, with many contributing their expertise to gutting financial oversight of Wall Street, delaying control of greenhouse gas emissions, and preventing real controls on health insurance costs. (All data are drawn from http://www.opensecrets.org .) Akin Gump has lobbied in the past for AIG, the scandalous insurance company that has cost taxpayers more than $100 billion in direct bailouts. Akin Gump is a favorite lobbying firm for big oil, major health-sector companies, and financial firms that helped to lead us to catastrophe. Already in 2009, Akin Gump has collected more than $23 million in lobbying fees. Mr. Jankowsky assures us that lobbying has little to do with "the influence of money on the policy-making process," since lobbyists are "professional advocates" who have not given any money to the President's campaign. He should know that lobbyists and campaign contributors have quite an overlap. Akin Gump employees have already contributed $469,000 in campaign funds in the 2009-10 election cycle, including $62,000 from Mr. Jankowsky himself. A lobbying firm like Akin Gump curries favor and standing through the campaign contributions of the firm's partners. It wins lobbying contracts in view of its political standing. Whether the campaign contributions are a direct pass-thru of the lobbying fees, or are independent of those fees, the result is similar: corporate money finds its way into the campaign coffers via the lobbying firms, and everybody - from the candidate to the lobbyist to the corporate interest - is pleased with the closed circle of money, camaraderie, and favored policy positions. Lobbyists for major corporations win their influence in many other ways as well. Perhaps the most direct is that they are part of the well-heeled revolving door of Washington employment. Mr. Jankowsky himself went from being Legislative Assistant to House Speaker Carl Albert to his current employment at Akin Gump. There are dozens more examples in Akin Gump, which is just one among many major revolving doors in Washington. Indeed, influential lobbying firms have an endless stream of good jobs to offer the members and staff of Congress and the Executive branch after serving in the US Government. American politics is suffocating on corporate money. Corporate lobbyists constitute a major conduit for the purchase of public policies. The wild excesses of lobbying and corporate power have contributed to our deepening crises in finance, health care, transport, the environment, and more. At the least Mr. Jankowsky could spare us the pontificating and stop rubbing our noses in the mess. More on Wall Street Journal
 
Antonia Juhasz: Chevron Gets Fixed Top
On Sunday, Chevron became the first oil company to come under a Yes Men Audience Attack . ( See Video, Photos, and Yes Man Andy Bichlbaum's Blog of event) Chevron was chosen because Chevron is different from other oil companies. It is bigger than all but three (only ExxonMobil, BP and Shell are larger). It is facing the largest potential corporate liability in history ($27 billion) for causing the world's largest oil spill in the Ecuadorian rainforest. It is the only major U.S. Corporation still operating in Burma and, with its partner Total Oil Corp., is the single largest financial contributor to the Burmese government. It is the dominant private oil producer in both Angola and Kazakhstan, with operations in both countries mired in human rights and environmental abuses. It is the only major oil company to be tried in a U.S. court on charges of mass human rights abuse, including summary execution and torture (for its operations in Nigeria). It is the only oil company to hire one of the Bush Administration's "torture memo" lawyers (William J. Haynes). It is the largest and most powerful corporation in California, where it is currently being sued for conspiring to fix gasoline prices. It has led the fight to keep California as the only major oil producing state that does not tax oil when it is pumped from the ground, thereby denying the state an extra $1.5 billion annually. It is the largest industrial polluter in the Bay Area and is among the largest single corporate contributors to climate change on the planet. Chevron is also the focus of one of the world's most unique and well-organized corporate resistance campaigns. That campaign got a jolt of energy when Yes Man Andy Bichlbaum came to San Francisco on Halloween weekend for a special screening of The Yes Men Fix the World . Global Exchange and I teamed up with Andy (the movie's co-writer, director, and producer) and a host of the Bay Areas most creative activists, to lead an entire movie audience out of the theater, into the streets, and in protest of Chevron. We spread the word early, far, and wide: The Yes Men are coming! The Yes Men are coming! They will not only fix the world, they will fix Chevron too! Larry Bogad, a Yes Man co-hort and professor of Guerilla Theater, helped concoct a masterful street theater scenario. A crack team of protest and street theater organizers was compiled, including David Solnit of the Mobilization for Climate Justice and Rae Abileah of Code Pink . Rock The Bike signed on and the word kept spreading. On Sunday, the Roxie Theater in San Francisco's Mission District was filled beyond capacity with an audience that came ready to protest. They laughed, clapped, booed, and cheered along with the film. When the movie ended, Andy answered questions, I talked about Chevron, and Larry laid out the protest scenario. Three Chevron executives, protected from the early ravages of climate change in SurvivaBalls , were dragged up the street by dozens of Chevron minions with nothing but haz-mat suits to protect them. Those unable to afford any protection (i.e. The Dead) followed close behind. Next came resistance: the Chevron street sweepers, actively cleaning up Chevron's messes who were followed by the protesters, ready to change the story. We didn't have a permit, but we took a lane of traffic on 16th street anyway. The police first tried to intervene, then they "joined in," blocking traffic on our way to Market and Castro. As we marched and the music blared, people literally came out of their houses and off of the streets to join in. Passersby eagerly took postcards detailing Chevron's corporate crimes. Once we arrived at the gas station, I welcomed everyone and explained that we were at an independent Chevron (as opposed to corporate) station, whose owner (whom I'd been speaking with regularly) had his own list of grievances with his corporate boss. The particular station was not our target of protest, but rather, the Chevron Corporation itself. Larry and Andy than led the entire crowd in a series of Tableaux Morts. The Chevron executives in their SurvivaBalls drained the lifeblood from the masses. The people began to rebel, forcing the SurvivaBalls into the "turtle" position to fend off the attacks. Ultimately, the separate groups saw their common purpose in resisting Chevron's abuses. The dead rose, the Chevron minions rebelled, and the sweepers and protesters joined together. They all chased the Chevron executives off into the distance, and then danced in the streets, rejoicing in their shared victory! The Chevron Program I direct at Global Exchange seeks to unite Chevron affected communities across the United States and around the world. By uniting these communities, we build strength from each other, and become a movement. By expanding, strengthening, and highlighting this movement, we bring in more allies and create a powerful advocacy base for real policy change. Those changes will reign in Chevron, and by extension, the entire oil industry. And, by raising the voices of those hardest hit by the true cost of oil and exposing how we all ultimately pay the price, we help move the world more rapidly away from oil as an energy resource altogether. More on Gas & Oil
 
Hagit Ofran: Clintons on Settlements: The Power of Words Top
In Hebrew there is a famous verse that says: "The tongue holds the power of life and death." This is a reference to scripture, as God created the world by his speech - "let there be light" and so there was light, etc... Such is the positive power of words. There is a negative side, too. Words can wound. The truth can hurt. And when uttered without the utmost care by a US Secretary of State in Jerusalem on the topic of settlements, they can reverberate throughout the world, sowing anger, doubt, and disappointment about US efforts to promote Israeli-Palestinian peace. Clinton came to Jerusalem and got tripped up by her own words. She applauded Bibi's alleged willingness to take some steps to "restrain settlements." She used the powerful word "unprecedented" over and over. But she forgot to state explicitly that the US was still disappointed in him, that his efforts were not sufficient, and that US policy on settlements had absolutely not changed. Oops. The Palestinians were predictably furious. Obama's credibility lost points in the Arab world. Clinton's efforts to undo the damage with much more careful words - planned, scripted, dotting every policy "i" and crossing ever policy 't" - helped a little, but for the most part the damage was already done. In the public's mind - in the media's mind - she had come to Jerusalem and caved, completely, to Bibi. But Clinton's words hold out some hope, too. Her emphasis on negotiations is a good thing, not only because negotiations are the real goal here - negotiations that can actually resolve the settlements issue - but because this new focus can, hopefully, deny Netanyahu what he wants more than anything right now: more excuses to avoid negotiations. Netanyahu knows the power of words and while he is more than happy if he can control the message 100% - through leaks, public statements, carefully managed quotes to friendly journalists - he fears the words that he might be forced to say if he enters negotiations. Words like "final status borders" and "removal of settlements" and "land for peace." The last thing Bibi wants right now is for final status negotiations to start. So he has been perfectly happy so long as the really hard questions were kept at bay with the ongoing battle over settlements and preconditions. This is what Netanyahu has been doing now for months - making settlements the only issue on the table. He has made Special Envoy Mitchell sweat hard on this, and the public's patience is getting shorter and shorter. In fact, this situation suited all the opponents of negotiations, giving them a lot of room to maneuver and to undermine Obama's peace efforts. It gave Israeli and American Jewish right-wingers time to put pressure on the Congress to "ease the pressure on Israel" on the one hand, and it gave Arab hardliners and rejectionists the chance to pressure Abbas not to agree to anything but a full settlement freeze - not one brick - as a precondition for talks. And we return, again, to the power of words. During this whole period of arguing over settlements, no news has been bad news. All the world has heard about the US-Israel talks on this issue is rumor and spin - words crafted to deliberately deceive or, if not deceive, then to create a very specific narrative on the issue to the benefit of Bibi and Bibi alone. It is a virtual word machine, and it's been run solely by Netanyahu's spin-system. And absent any formal declaration of what was agreed or achieved in those talks, and absent any counter-leaks or active public communications efforts by the US, the world has come to rely on, and generally believe, this spin-system. Enough. We need to get to the negotiations already! That is what's really important here. If we take Clinton's rather careless words in Jerusalem as fact, then we should actually be rather encouraged. She said that Netanyahu had agreed to "no new starts" which she offered as an example of a decision that "is unprecedented in the context of the prior two negotiations." Does this actually mean (gasp) that Netanyahu has agreed to no new construction starts in the settlements? If so, that is a great achievement - one that should rightly open the door for new and serious negotiations, if the Palestinians are interested. However, we are inveterate skeptics. We welcome Clinton's words but we are much more interested in the words the Bibi's spinmeisters will send out into the world - words that will convey what Bibi really decided, what he really means to do. Who knows? Maybe he has agreed to this, or maybe Clinton was trying to use her words to box him into a position he had thus far been trying to avoid. We will watch and see. There are lessons to be drawn from the Clinton visit. Lessons about using words carefully in this conflict. About being keenly aware that a misplaced word or a missing phrase will be analyzed in newsrooms across the globe. That an ill-crafted sentence will be parsed to death. Or perhaps the lesson is that people - the media, the politicians, the analysts - will draw the conclusions they want, regardless of the words. Yes, words have power and should be used with care, but it is hard to avoid the impression - based on the zeal with which the media jumped on the non-story of Clinton's speech in Jerusalem - that a lot of people are more interested in seeing Obama fail than succeed. A lot of people are ready, even eager, for proof that this new American president who had the audacity to aim for Middle East peace from his first day in office, will fall flat on his face. It is like they are salivating at the thought that he has given up and given in, just like every US president before him. Proving the cynics and skeptics right. I believe they are wrong. President Obama has identified Middle East peace as a top US national security interest. He is not going to permit his foreign policy to be derailed by media spin or a few ill-chosen (or missing) words in a statement by Secretary Clinton. Co-authored by Lara Friedman More on Israel
 
Jeff Danziger: Bloomberg Reelected Top
 
Dan Solin: Preferred Stock Is Not Preferred Top
How many times have you heard this: Preferred stock is the best of both worlds: The upside of common stock and the protection of bonds? Not so fast. According to a study by Guohua Li, Ph.D and Edward O'Neal, Ph.D., principals of SLCG, Inc. , this view of preferred stock is "overly simplistic." From July, 2007 to March, 2009, the S&P Preferred Stock Index fell by almost 70%, while common stocks fared relatively better, losing 50%. The bond markets had positive returns. There is nothing "preferred" about those results. When things are rosy, common stock holders are well rewarded. Holders of preferred stock receive far more modest returns. So much for the upside. What about the downside? There is a reason for the much touted higher yield of preferred stocks. They are much riskier than bonds. In a down market, the shares of preferred and common stock have to descend to zero before the bond holders are affected at all. Contrary to traditional wisdom, it appears that holders of preferred stock get the worst of both worlds. Preferred stock is riskier than bonds, but it doesn't have the same upside as common stock. The bad news doesn't stop there. Issuers of preferred stock are primarily financial institutions. Holders of preferred stock typically are not aware their stock is concentrated in this risky and volatile sector. Preferred stock is also costlier to trade because it is significantly less liquid than common stock. If your broker has recommended preferred stock for your portfolio, you need to be aware of these risks. There is a more fundamental issue here. Why are you using a broker? Dan Solin is the author of The Smartest Retirement Book You'll Ever Read. The views set forth in this blog are the opinions of the author alone and may not represent the views of any firm or entity with whom he is affiliated. The data, information, and content on this blog are for information, education, and non-commercial purposes only. Returns from index funds do not represent the performance of any investment advisory firm. The information on this blog does not involve the rendering of personalized investment advice and is limited to the dissemination of opinions on investing. No reader should construe these opinions as an offer of advisory services. Readers who require investment advice should retain the services of a competent investment professional. The information on this blog is not an offer to buy or sell, or a solicitation of any offer to buy or sell any securities or class of securities mentioned herein. Furthermore, the information on this blog should not be construed as an offer of advisory services. Please note that the author does not recommend specific securities nor is he responsible for comments made by persons posting on this blog.
 
Gerald Sindell: Why the American Genius for Math Vanished Top
Why can't little Tiffany learn to program? What happened to the American genius for math? I've been wondering about this for a long time, but suddenly I saw the cause during the World Series last night. Imagine a computer that runs on chewing tobacco. Shouldn't be that hard -- just picture your basic Major League Baseball manager, leaning on the dugout rail. He looks worried. Then he spits. That one. Now, if you could look inside the heads of the two guys running the contenders in the World Series this week, you'd see a 3D array of numbers flying by. With every pitch, with every attempted steal, with every out, an entire universe of numbers inside the manager's head is re-computed. I had taken a hiatus from baseball for quite a while, but with two California teams in the playoffs my wife and I decided to get into the spirit. Although the Dodgers and the Angels have gone by the wayside, we're completely hooked. And having not watched television coverage of baseball for quite awhile, I suddenly realized why American's math scores have gone in the toilet for the last ten years. Baseball is a game of numbers, of billions of statistics of the most arcane kinds which record everything that's ever happened in professional baseball going back more than 100 years. The statistical history of baseball may be the single greatest resource of meaningful numbers on the planet, including the human genome. And probably a lot more important. When I was a kid, and when Nate Silver (statistics genius) and Michael Lewis ( Moneyball --basically about how understanding the numbers in baseball is more important than wads of cash for name players) were kids, everyone knew the batting averages of every player on the home team. We knew slugging percentages, on base percentages. We understood the implications of having a switch hitter deep in the lineup. We knew that the catcher ran the defense -- that only he knew what pitch he was signaling the pitcher to throw next, and that the catcher knew what the odds were a particular batter was going to pull or flare that pitch. We understood that the catcher's job included subtle shifts of the outfield and infield almost all the time. Raising my kids under the kind tutelage of Vin Scully, the dean of all baseball announcers, they learned that baseball was a deep game of complex strategies. The battle between pitcher and batter was just the simplest surface of what was actually going on. When Scully was calling a game, the video director would follow Scully's cues. So if the real duel was about the shortstop sneaking up behind the runner at second for a pickoff play, the camera would constantly check back at second, because that's where, according to Scully, that particular runner, point two six five percent of the time against lefties, could be picked off. Now, none of my guys has yet won a Nobel for science, but with that kind of rich, hands-on training, they could have easily won it if they had really wanted it. Now to the current absolutely barren "coverage" of the playoffs and World Series. The video direction, and the announcers, cover the pitcher, pitch placement, and almost nothing else. We almost never see where the infield is set, and never where the outfielders are playing. What we do get is lots of shots of players spitting -- the result of a long lens raking through the dugout, magnifying the effect, so half the time us TV viewers can't tell if it's raining or just a vast downpour of spit. And what about that rich field of high definition screen real estate? So much space, so little information. We get a little box that shows the runners on base and the count on the batter, but nowhere do we get the batter's NAME (unbelievable, actually) their average during the season, their average during the playoffs, or any of the dozens of bits and pieces that are running through the manager's mind as he decides what to do next, pitch by pitch, out by out. Baseball strategy really is something of a computer that runs on a chaw of tobacco. But with the current coverage that has dumbed the game down to only its most surface components, all little Tiffany gets to see, is the spit. Meanwhile, her innate genius for numbers is being cruelly starved.
 
Lloyd Chapman: Details of Obama Small Business Conference Remain a Mystery Top
Two weeks after President Barack Obama announced a special conference to discuss increasing the flow of credit to small businesses, no information about the date, time, location or attendees has been made available. The American Small Business League (ASBL) is skeptical about the true purpose of the conference. The ASBL predicts that the actual purpose of the meeting will be to try and change the long standing federal definition of a small business as "independently owned" to include firms owned by wealthy venture capitalists that backed President Obama's campaign. If this conference does take place, I doubt there will be one person in the room like myself who has a documentable track record of fighting for legitimate small businesses. I'm sure there will be sham small business groups that are actually backed by the Fortune 500 corporations that are currently receiving most federal small business contracts. There will also be a significant number of venture capitalists that are trying to highjack federal small business programs. The ASBL is concerned that not only will the conference not help small businesses, but a proposal may even come out of the conference to close the SBA under the guise of bolstering the agency by combining it with the U.S. Department of Commerce. In the past, combining small agencies with the Commerce Department has been a technique used in Washington by previous administrations to quietly close agencies. The Minority Business Development Agency was essentially closed in this way. If President Obama wants to help small businesses he needs to make good on his campaign promise to, "end the diversion of federal small business contracts to corporate giants." http://www.barackobama.com/2008/02/26/the_american_small_business_le.php The best way to do that is for him to pass H.R. 2568, the Fairness and Transparency in Contacting Act of 2009. This bill would redirect over $100 billion a year in current federal infrastructure spending to the middle class firms where nearly all new jobs are created. http://www.asbl.com/documents/hr2568.pdf According to the most recent data released by the Obama Administration billions of dollars in federal small business contracts have been diverted to firms like: Textron, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Raytheon, Northrop Grumman, British Aerospace (BAE), Rolls-Royce and French firm Thales Communications. http://www.asbl.com/documents/20090825TopSmallBusinessContractors2008.pdf In February of 2009, Obama officials awarded a $128 million small business contract to, Fortune 500 firm, Bechtel Bettis Inc. http://www.asbl.com/documents/20090806BechtelSB_DOE.pdf More on Timothy Geithner
 
Disgrasian: Tila Tequila's Alter Ego "Jane" Hijacks Her Twitter Account Top
At what point can we say that Twitter's jumped the shark? When your boss joins? When your mom joins? How about when your alter ego starts Tweeting , as was the case Monday with Tila Tequila? The Twitter account of Tila , who has professed to suffer from Dissociative Identity Disorder (aka Multiple Personality Disorder), was hijacked briefly this week by one of her alters, "Jane." Tila's describes Jane on her MySpace page as "crazy" and someone who "always wants to kill me." (Then again, after the Twitter-jacking, she also called Jane her "Sasa Fierce" [sic] and boasted that she had her alter ego 10 years before Beyonce "came wit that," so, uh, Jane also appears to be a career asset.) And what else did we learn about Jane Monday? She favors ALL CAPS like Tila, can't spell "buffoon," and seems to have something against Pee-wee's Playhouse . Here's a snapshot of what she had to say: Jane was not long for Twitter, however, and left about as quickly as she came : Which was probably for the best, cuz can you imagine if Jane had Tila's Twitter habit-- 21,000+ Tweets and counting? The entire internet would probably blow up into a million, gonzo, fame-whoring pieces. [ Tila Tequila Twitter ] [ Tila Tequila MySpace ] More on Twitter
 
Alan Schram: Buffett Buys a Railroad: What Does It Mean for Investors? Top
Berkshire Hathaway just made its largest acquisition ever, buying Burlington Northern Santa Fe Corporation, a railroad company, for over $35 billion. This is a large bet by the most successful investor of all time that the US economy will improve and prosper. Actions speak louder than words. What does that action mean for investors? For one thing, it reflects Buffett's confidence in the prospects of the economy, prospects upon which a railroad company depends. And Buffett is convinced that economic activity will pick up. In fact, he is confident enough that he is willing to use debt and issue Berkshire shares, two methods he had only used sparingly in the past, in order to close the deal. This should also tell you something about valuations in general, particularly those of large cap stocks, and especially in comparison to other available investment alternatives. In the last nine years, U.S. equities have lost almost half of their purchasing power (adjusted for inflation). Treasury bonds have done much better. Because it is easy to extrapolate the most recent past into the future, so many people are now gloomy about the future prospects of equities. But history shows that past periods where bonds outperformed stocks have been great times to buy stocks. According to Jeremy Siegel from the University of Pennsylvania, in all previous cases of 10-year periods where stock returns have been negative, subsequent 10-year returns were over 10% real, more than double the return of government bonds. So every time stocks have performed poorly for 10 years, they have performed better than average for the next 10 years, and beaten bonds by 2 to 1 on average. In the 20th century, not exactly a calm, worry-free period, stocks in America had a real (inflation adjusted) return of 6.9% a year, versus 1.5% for Treasury bonds. Yet in 1932, investors were melancholy about stocks. The entire world was in depression, capitalism seemed like a failed experiment, unemployment was 25%, and Nazi Germany was advancing. But the S&P rose 34.8% a year over the next five years. And in 1949, U.S. budget deficit as a percent of GDP was much higher than it is today, communism was spreading, and the Soviet Union was threatening a nuclear annihilation. Stocks rose 23.2% a year for the next five years. The past decade was the worst for stocks in 70 years. We just experienced the most severe recession since the Great Depression ended. And I believe our experience in the coming decade will be similar to the historical examples above. If stocks revert to their 20th century mean, they will post high real returns, and significantly outperform bonds. And Warren Buffett is betting that way. Alan Schram is the Managing Partner of Wellcap Partners, a Los Angeles based investment firm. Email at aschram@wellcappartners.com. More on Warren Buffett
 
Le Moyne Shocks Syracuse 82-79 Top
SYRACUSE, N.Y. — Christopher Johnson scored 17 of his 22 points in the second half, including a 3-pointer with 8.3 seconds remaining, and Division II Le Moyne stunned Syracuse 82-79 in an exhibition game Tuesday night. Wes Johnson, who led Syracuse with 34 points, hit a 3 from the left corner to put Syracuse ahead 79-78 with 22 seconds left. Christopher Johnson responded with his sixth 3-pointer of the game, which came from the left side off a broken play. After Wes Johnson missed a 3, Can Ozkaner added a free throw with 1.3 seconds left for Le Moyne. Andy Rautins had 13 points and Rick Jackson finished with 10 points and eight rebounds for the Orange, who led by as many as 10 early in the second half. More on Sports
 
Thomas Menino Wins Boston Mayor Race Top
BOSTON — Boston Mayor Thomas Menino has won an unprecedented fifth consecutive four-year term. With 95 percent of precincts reporting, Menino had 57 percent of the vote to City Council President Michael Flaherty's 43 percent. Flaherty has conceded the election. Menino has already been in office for 16 1/2 years, longer than any in the city's history. History shows it's tough to unseat a Boston mayor. No incumbent has lost the seat in 60 years. The last one was James Michael Curley, who was ousted by John Hynes in 1949 after a term interrupted by a five-month federal prison sentence for mail fraud.
 
Bill Owens Leads Doug Hoffman In NY-23 Race Top
ALBANY, N.Y. — Democrat Bill Owens held a slim lead in a special congressional election in northern New York that grabbed national headlines in its final days as it highlighted divisions within the Republican Party. With about 86 percent of precincts reporting in the heavily Republican 23rd House District, Owens led Tuesday with 49 percent of the vote over surprise contender Doug Hoffman, a member of the state Conservative Party, who had 45 percent. Republican Dierdre Scozzafava, who withdrew from the race Saturday, had still picked up 6 percent of the vote. Scozzafava abruptly quit the race over the weekend and backed Owens after some prominent Republicans accused her of being too liberal for the district because of her support of abortion rights and same-sex marriage. The race started about five weeks ago with three candidates and is ending with two – Hoffman and Owens, who is seeking to exploit a split in Republican loyalties and recapture a seat held for decades by the GOP. Hoffman started at a distant third and was viewed as a spoiler at best, cutting away at Scozzafava and opening the door for Owens. But prominent Republicans, including former vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin and Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, endorsed Hoffman instead of the party-picked Scozzafava. With gubernatorial races in New Jersey and Virginia, this race was not expected to become a referendum on anything, but between the Republican infighting and attempts by Democrats to portray that as a sign they could retain their majority in the 2010 midterms, Tuesday's special election took on unanticipated importance. A Hoffman win could force Republicans in Washington to pay closer attention to their votes and positions on issues, rather than counting on the Republican label to get them elected. "The reality is that the grass roots is not going to walk lockstep on these decisions and so that's a reality (the party is) going to have to deal with," said Tony Fabrizio, a Washington-based Republican pollster and strategist. An Owens win could signal renewed strength among Democrats, or at least reassure them of Republicans' perceived weakness. It's a seat that has been strongly Republican for decades and is one of only three in the state's 29-seat delegation held by the party. Republican John McHugh vacated the seat in September to become Army secretary. "They're in a civil war over the definition of their party," said Paul Blank, a Democratic consultant. "And the extremists have won." No matter the outcome, Republicans will be sorting out their identity as the party tries to strike a balance between growing its ranks and preserving the values that set it apart from the Democratic Party. "I think that the Republican Party is broad enough to handle many different candidates, but the fact is that I'm a commonsense Conservative Republican – I am not a radical," Hoffman said Monday. "The point is that Assemblywoman Scozzafava was not a moderate Republican; she was an ultraliberal Republican." More on Sarah Palin
 
Anthony Sowell: More Bodies Found At Rapist's Ohio Home Top
CLEVELAND — The number of bodies found in and near a rapist's home rose to at least 10 on Tuesday when authorities unearthed four corpses from the backyard and found a skull in a bucket in the basement. Cleveland police stopped searching for victims for the night and planned to continue on Wednesday. They have extended their efforts to boarded-up homes in the neighborhood where residents complained for years of a stench that one even said "smelled like a dead body." Some in the community want an investigation into why it took so long to trace the grisly source. Anthony Sowell, 50, a registered sex offender who lives in the home, was charged Tuesday with five counts of aggravated murder, as well as rape, felonious assault and kidnapping. He was to be arraigned Wednesday, police spokesman Lt. Thomas Stacho said. "It appears that this man had an insatiable appetite that he had to fill," police Chief Michael McGrath said. Police discovered the bodies of six women Thursday and Friday after a woman reported being raped at Sowell's home. All six were black, and five were strangled. Authorities did not provide the genders or races of the bodies found Tuesday. Police do not know whether the skull belongs to an 11th victim, Stacho said. McGrath said the skull was found wrapped in paper bag in a bucket. Fire department crews plan to search in the walls and ceiling of Sowell's home, McGrath said. "I would like to believe there is nothing else there, but we won't know until we search everything," he said. The bodies could have been there anywhere from weeks to months to years, said Powell Caesar, a spokesman for the Cuyahoga County coroner, who is attempted to identify the remains through DNA and dental records. "I can imagine how families feel who have reported a missing person, and anxiety that they are going through," said Cleveland Mayor Frank Jackson. "We want to assure them as soon as we know something they will be the first to know." McGrath said he would not be surprised if some of the victims were never reported missing. "I have to believe at this point all these victims voluntarily went to this residence," he said. Detectives used cadaver dogs and digging equipment to scour the home and backyard Tuesday, looking for evidence to connect Sowell to the bodies, Stacho said. Police turned up nothing in an initial search of a quarter-mile swath of abandoned homes near Sowell's residence, which sits in a crowded inner-city neighborhood of mostly older houses. Investigators plan to scour another quarter-mile area Wednesday, McGrath said. He said Sowell did not have a car and would have had to take a city bus to travel. A crowd of about 100 people milled about and chatted near the home Tuesday evening. A short while later, about 50 people joined hands and put their arms around each other in the middle of the street and prayed aloud. "What kind of man was this?" wondered Regina Woodland, who lives about two blocks away. "He couldn't have been human." One of those in the crowd, Antoinnette Dudley, 29, lives a few houses away. She said she could smell a terrible odor like something was dead all summer. She said she saw Sowell only a few times, mainly drinking beer while he sat on his porch. "I didn't think he was that sick," she said. Sowell is a registered sex offender and is required to check in regularly at the sheriff's office. Officers didn't have the right to enter his house, but they would stop by to make sure he was there. Their most recent visit was Sept. 22, just hours before the woman reported being raped. For the past few years, Sowell's neighbors thought the foul smell enveloping their street corner had been coming from a brick building where workers churned out sausage and head cheese. It got so bad that the owners of Ray's Sausage replaced their sewer line and grease traps. City Councilman Zack Reed, whose mother lives a block from the area, said he called the city health department on more than one occasion. "What happened from there, we don't know," he said. "It was no secret that there was a foul odor. We don't want to point fingers, but clearly something could have been done differently." Reed said he and other community leaders want an investigation into whether police and health inspectors missed signs that could have tipped them off to the bodies. Reed said he can't imagine how police officers and sheriff's deputies could have missed the smell. His office records show that he called the health department in 2007 after a resident told him about an odor that "smelled like a dead body," he said. Investigators said one of the six bodies found last week had been in a shallow grave in the backyard. The rest were inside the house – one in the basement, two in the third-floor living room and two in an upstairs crawl space.
 
James Franco Doing '30 Rock' Top
Ready for the latest twist in the incredibly wild and unpredictable career of one James Franco? Sources confirm to me exclusively that the Spider-Man/Milk actor will follow up his upcoming arc on General Hospital with a guest appearance on 30 Rock. More on 30 Rock
 
Bill Thompson Loses To Michael Bloomberg In Tight Mayoral Race Top
NEW YORK — Billionaire Michael Bloomberg won a third term as New York mayor Tuesday in a closer-than-expected race against a Democratic challenger who stoked voter resentment over the way Bloomberg changed term-limits law so he could stay in office. With 99 percent of precincts reporting, Bloomberg, the richest man in New York and founder of the financial information company Bloomberg LP, defeated William Thompson Jr. 51 percent to 46 percent. In the days leading up to the election, polls showed Bloomberg with as much as an 18-point lead, an edge so big that critics accused the mayor of overkill in his strategy of bombarding the city with campaign ads. His margin of victory was far smaller than the nearly 20-point blowout he pulled off in 2005. When all the bills are paid, Bloomberg will probably have spent more than $100 million on his campaign, the most expensive self-financed campaign in U.S. history. Thompson, the city's comptroller, relied on donations and matching funds for his mayoral bid, and was on track to have spent about a tenth of Bloomberg's staggering total. "This campaign was about defying conventional wisdom ... this campaign was about standing strong, standing tall and never backing down in the face of a formidable challenge," Thompson said after conceding defeat. Thompson ran up huge margins in black and Hispanic neighborhoods, winning by a 3-to-1 margin in some districts. He beat Bloomberg handily in predominantly black neighborhoods like Bedford-Stuyvesant in Brooklyn and Jamaica in Queens. He won Harlem and East Harlem easily, along with other heavily Hispanic districts in upper Manhattan and the Bronx. By contrast, Bloomberg won easily on Staten Island, which has a much larger white population. He also fared better in Manhattan, particularly on the Upper East Side, where he lives. The tiny margin could weaken his power and make his third term more difficult at City Hall, where Democrats poised to sweep into citywide offices indicated they would not shy away from disagreeing with the mayor. "You'll see a lot of strong voices as checks and balances," said Democrat Bill de Blasio, who won the job of City Hall ombudsman Tuesday. "It will be a very different experience than what he experienced the last eight years." Bloomberg is just the fourth mayor to win a third term, after Fiorello La Guardia, Robert Wagner and Ed Koch. Bloomberg was a Republican but left the party in 2007 to explore a presidential bid, a dream he eventually abandoned. For his third mayoral run, he ran again on the GOP and Independence Party lines. While Bloomberg was often described as having every advantage in the race, including his estimated $17.5 billion fortune and consistently high approval ratings, his campaign did have to overcome some obstacles. The mayor, who has close ties to Wall Street and development, was running for re-election at a time when finance and real estate were falling apart and those relationships were not necessarily seen as positives. There are also the numbers – New York City leans heavily to the left, with Democrats outnumbering Republicans by a ratio of 5-to-1. Democrats were also energized by their party's White House win in 2008. And New Yorkers were angry that Bloomberg reversed his long-held support for term limits last year and persuaded the City Council, in a matter of weeks, to extend the law so he could run for a third term. Thompson sought to stoke that resentment, but it was not enough. He did not make a strong, separate case for why he should be elected. Many Thompson supporters said Tuesday that term limits was the single reason why they voted for him. Jason Gerald supported Bloomberg in 2005 but voted for the Democrat this year. "I didn't like the way he overturned term limits," said Gerald, a retired police officer. "He thinks he's the only person who can lead this city." When Bloomberg announced last year his intention to change the law and run again, he said it was because the city needed his financial expertise to get through the economic meltdown. He never revived that argument during the race, though, which grew increasingly negative as Election Day drew near and polls showed most voters still did not know much about Thompson. The Bloomberg campaign saw its opportunity – it defined Thompson through negative ads and attacks before the Democrat could do it himself. He will likely have spent more than $50 million on advertising alone, and millions more on his huge army of staffers, some of them the top strategists and consultants plucked from presidential-level campaigns. The mayor was able to target each voter with unique messages using a database managed by Ken Strasma, who was President Barack Obama's national targeting director in 2008. The data was crucial not only in shaping the campaign's messages, but also for Election Day operations as the campaign tracked voter turnout in every election district. For example, campaign officials noticed lower turnout in some areas of the Bronx and Queens than the data had predicted, so the campaign changed its operations on the ground. Field workers were rerouted to different areas in Queens to knock on doors and get voters to the polls, and former Mayor Ed Koch was summoned to record a last-minute robocall that began calling Bronx voters around 5 p.m. More on Michael Bloomberg
 
Josh Duhamel: Stripper's Claims Of "Lots Of Sex" Are "Ridiculous" Top
Josh Duhamel and wife Fergie are denying another round of allegations from an Atlanta stripper that she had a one-night stand with the actor. "This is not the first nor will it be the last time that a stripper was paid a large amount of money to sell a false story about a celebrity," says Duhamel's rep. "This story is absolutely ridiculous."
 
MSNBC Viewers Donate Over $50,000 To Afghan Orphanage Top
MSNBC Nightly News viewers have raised more than $50,000 for an orphanage in Afghanistan, the program reported Tuesday. Last Friday, Nightly News aired the story of a remarkable orphanage in Kabul that is caring for 150 children who have lost their parents due to decades of war, bombing and the Taliban. After airing the broadcast, MSNBC viewers responded in droves to support the nonprofit, to the point that the orphanage administrators were afraid their servers would crash from e-mail donations. In addition to thousands of dollars in one-time donations, viewers promised long-term sponsorships to 130 of the children at the orphanage: Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News , World News , and News about the Economy The orphanage is sponsored by the Afghan Child Education and Care Organization, which operates nine orphanages and cares for 350 Afghan refugee children across Pakistan and Afghanistan. Visit their site to learn more about the organization or to sponsor a child at one of their orphanages. More on Afghanistan
 
Maine Gay Marriage Vote: Too Close To Call Top
PORTLAND, Maine — Gay marriage was put to a vote in Maine on Tuesday in a closely watched referendum that gay-rights activists across the country hoped would prove for the first time that their cause can prevail at the ballot box. Voters had to decide whether to repeal or affirm a state law that would allow gay couples to wed. The law was passed by the Legislature in May but never took effect because of a petition drive by conservatives. Early returns showed a close contest, as forecast. With 229 of 608 precincts reporting, each side had 50 percent. A vote to uphold the law would mark the first time that the electorate in any state endorsed gay marriage. That could energize activists nationwide and blunt conservative claims that same-sex marriage is being foisted on states by judges or lawmakers over the will of the public. However, repeal – in New England, the region of the country most supportive of gay couples – would be another heartbreaking defeat for the marriage-equality movement, following the vote against gay marriage in California a year ago. It would also mark the first time voters had torpedoed a gay-marriage law enacted by a legislature. When Californians rejected same-sex marriage, it was in response to a court ruling, not legislation. Maine's secretary of state, Matthew Dunlap, said turnout seemed higher than expected for an off-year election and voter interest appeared intense. Even before Tuesday, more than 100,000 people – out of about 1 million registered voters – had voted by absentee ballot or early voting. Five other states have legalized gay marriage – Iowa, Massachusetts, Vermont, New Hampshire and Connecticut – but all did so through legislation or court rulings, not by popular vote. In contrast, constitutional amendments banning gay marriage have been approved in all 30 states where they have been on the ballot. "If we don't win, then Maine will have its place in infamy because no state has ever voted for homosexual marriage," said Chuck Schott of Portland, who stood near a polling place in Maine's biggest city with a pro-repeal campaign sign. Another Portland resident, Sarah Holman said she was "very torn" but decided – despite her conservative upbringing – to vote in favor of letting gays marry. "They love and they have the right to love. And we can't tell somebody how to love," said Holman, 26. Hundreds of gay-marriage supporters gathered in a Portland hotel ballroom in the evening to await the results. On display was a three-tiered wedding cake topped with two grooms on one side, two brides on the other, and the words "We All Do." In addition to reaching out to young people who flocked to the polls for President Barack Obama a year ago, gay-marriage defenders tried to appeal to Maine voters' independent streak – a Yankee spirit of fairness and live-and-let-live. The other side based many of its campaign ads on claims – disputed by state officials – that the new law would mean "homosexual marriage" would be taught in public schools. Both sides in Maine drew volunteers and contributions from out of state, but the money edge went to the campaign in defense of gay marriage, Protect Maine Equality. It raised $4 million, compared with $2.5 million for Stand for Marriage Maine. Elsewhere on Tuesday, voters in Washington state decided whether to uphold or overturn a recently expanded domestic partnership law that entitles same-sex couples to the same state-granted rights as heterosexual married couples. And in Kalamazoo, Mich., voters approved a measure that bars discrimination based on sexual orientation. Among other ballot items across the country: _ Maine voters defeated a measure that would have limited state and local government spending by holding it to the rate of inflation plus population growth. A similar measure was on the ballot in Washington state. _ Another measure in Maine, headed for approval, would allow dispensaries to supply marijuana to patients for medicinal purposes. It is a follow-up to a 1999 measure that legalized medical marijuana but did not set up a distribution system. _ In Ohio, partial results were too close to call on a measure that would allow casinos in four major cities: Cleveland, Columbus, Cincinnati and Toledo. ___ David Crary reported from New York.
 
'09 Exit Polls: Voters Approve Of Obama, Wary Of Economy Top
Vast economic discontent marked the mood of Tuesday's off-year voters, portending potential trouble for incumbents generally and Democrats in particular in 2010. Still the gubernatorial elections in Virginia and New Jersey looked less like a referendum on Barack Obama than a reflection of their own candidates and issues.
 
Mary J. Blige At World Series: Singer Will Perform National Anthem At Game 6 Top
LOS ANGELES — Mary J. Blige is going back to the Bronx. Major League Baseball says the Bronx-born singer will perform the national anthem at Yankee Stadium before Game Six of the World Series on Wednesday. Blige is the latest superstar to sing "The Star-Spangled Banner" during the championship matchup between the New York Yankees and Philadelphia Phillies. John Legend and Alanis Morissette have also lent their voices to the traditional pre-game performance. Blige, 38, has won six Grammy awards since her 1992 debut, "What's the 411?" More on World Series
 

CREATE MORE ALERTS:

Auctions - Find out when new auctions are posted

Horoscopes - Receive your daily horoscope

Music - Get the newest Album Releases, Playlists and more

News - Only the news you want, delivered!

Stocks - Stay connected to the market with price quotes and more

Weather - Get today's weather conditions




You received this email because you subscribed to Yahoo! Alerts. Use this link to unsubscribe from this alert. To change your communications preferences for other Yahoo! business lines, please visit your Marketing Preferences. To learn more about Yahoo!'s use of personal information, including the use of web beacons in HTML-based email, please read our Privacy Policy. Yahoo! is located at 701 First Avenue, Sunnyvale, CA 94089.
Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)