Hold the Fort, Waterboy! November 30, 2000February 17, 2017 Pete Kirby: ‘I was glad to hear that someone else knows the rules of the fort vs. fortay controversy! Two other often mistaken uses of words and phrases are: ‘1. People that say ‘I could CARE less!’ what they mean is that they ‘could not’ care less. They care about the subject so little, that they could not possibly care less. So if they could care less, they care to some degree, correct? People can be so careless! ‘2. Nauseous vs. nauseated. People say that something makes them ‘Nauseous’ when what should be said is that it makes them ‘Nauseated.’ If you are Nauseous, you create nausea in others! ‘Small matters, true! Thanks for letting me sound off. I actually heard someone say once: ‘I could care less, it makes me nauseous.'” Joe M. Barron: ‘I’m afraid if I heard someone pronounce forte as ‘fort,’ my genetically transmitted pronunciation checker would cringe in the same way it does when I hear someone pronounce the ‘l’ in Salmon. Merriam-Webster’s discussion discloses the pronunciation is open to more choice and interpretation than you may have indicated: Main Entry: 1forte Pronunciation: ‘fOrt, ‘fort; 2 is often ‘for-“tA or for-‘tA or ‘for-tE Function: noun Etymology: French fort, from fort, adjective, strong Date: circa 1648 1 : the part of a sword or foil blade that is between the middle and the hilt and that is the strongest part of the blade 2 : one’s strong point Usage: In forte we have a word derived from French that in its “strong point” sense has no entirely satisfactory pronunciation. Usage writers have denigrated ‘for-“tA and ‘for-tE because they reflect the influence of the Italian-derived 2forte. Their recommended pronunciation ‘fort, however, does not exactly reflect French either: the French would write the word le fort and would rhyme it with English for. So you can take your choice, knowing that someone somewhere will dislike whichever variant you choose. All are standard, however. In British English ‘fo-“tA and ‘fot predominate; ‘for-“tA and for-‘tA are probably the most frequent pronunciations in American English. Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate® Dictionary, Tenth Edition, is copyrighted 1994 by Merriam-Webster, Incorporated. ☞ Yeah, yeah – well, I don’t buy it. I think Merriam was a corrupting influence on Webster. Barbara McElroy: “I went to Princeton from Alabama with a deep, deep Southern accent that made my classmates assume I was stupid. I remember using the word ‘forte’ in casual conversation (of course, pronouncing it correctly) and having an upperclassman stare at me in amazement that I got it right. “Fight the good fight … and don’t forget grimace and err while you’re at it. At least 50% of Episcopalian priests can’t pronounce ‘err’ correctly, which is especially distressing in a Rite One service.” And speaking of liquefaction . . . Rulison Evans: “I must comment on your ‘thanking heavens for bottled water.’ If you own stock in a bottled water company that has the nerve to charge $1.00 or more for a pint of H2O, then I suppose you could count your blessings. However, if you are implying that bottled water somehow provides for the health and safety of more than just a handful of Americans, you are mistaken. The vast majority of Americans should ‘thank heavens’ for the safety, abundance and affordability of the public water supply. As a democrat, Gore supporter and all-around intelligent person, you should realize that the federal Clean Water Act and the Safe Drinking Water Act (among others) provide for this uniquely American LUXURY that is unfortunately thought of as a RIGHT by most people. Full Disclosure: I am a Civil Engineer, who deals primarily in the design and construction of water treatment, distribution and storage facilities.” ☞ You are quite right. I was joking, but I can see why that would not have been apparent. And now, on top of all this other valuable info, you actually want me to demystify finance? OK, here goes: Neither a borrower nor a lender be. For decades this seemed to me to be charmingly homespun — but dubious. What harm is there in a mortgage? What folly in buying a bond (which is, in effect, lending)? And, while we’re at it, what did the song mean when it said, “sing praises to His name, he forgets not his own?” Why would He forget His own name? I wondered, aged 7, and too embarrassed to ask – if He could make the heavens and the earth, for crying out loud, and porcupines, surely he could remember His name. But it turns out that “his own” means, loosely, “his own children” – you and me. And it turns out, or at least my guess is, that when Ben Franklin said neither a borrower or a lender be, his point must have been, “If you want to keep a friendship, neither a borrower or a lender be.” Show me a friendship that’s survived a personal loan, and I’ll show you an unusual friendship.
First-Hand Accounts November 29, 2000February 17, 2017 If Katherine Harris does become an ambassador, Ken Ruebush suggests her posting be . . . Chad. Meanwhile, there are a lot of things that are not practical to do to fix the mess in Florida. Foremost: a revote. In the first place, it wouldn’t be fair to Governor Bush, because all those Nader voters, seeing how close it was – or most of them, anyway – would vote for Gore. So that’s out. (Other problems? Well, for one, you’d then have to count the revote, and you know how controversial the counting process is.) It’s probably also not possible to do much about all the confusion in Palm Beach County, or the voter-intimidation in certain predominantly African-American Florida precincts. I heard of one instance today where a woman was asked for three – count ’em, three – forms of photo i.d. before she was allowed to vote. Were you asked for three? I wasn’t. So all the Vice President is asking for is that we count the ballots the machines couldn’t read. It’s true, this is not normally done with undervotes in other states. There were something like 2 million ballots nationwide that weren’t counted. But these are not normally counted because it’s not necessary. Why on earth go to all the trouble of a manual count when someone has won by a wide enough margin that it doesn’t matter? Or in a state with insufficient electoral votes to change the outcome of the election? The precise count in California doesn’t matter! Gore won by a very wide margin. The precise count in New Mexico doesn’t matter! Even if it swung New Mexico into Bush’s camp, it wouldn’t affect the outcome of the election. Where they are necessary, manual counts — slower and more expensive — are done. Anyway, you’re sick of all that. Yes, we should count the ballots the machines couldn’t read. It’s that simple. But there’s tons of stuff we probably can’t correct in Florida, so I do not present the three items that follow to suggest that we can. Only to suggest that some Republican leaders’ seeming disdain for even the possibility that anyone in Florida has reason to be upset is . . . well, insensitive. Perhaps even a bit ungracious or divisive. But you be the judge: Rabbi Richard M. Yellin of Palm Beach County, FL: ‘I came to my voting precinct at the St. Thomas More Church in Boynton Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida, at 6:30 am on Election day 2000. I was fifth in line waiting for the precinct to open. By the time it opened, about 30 people had already lined up, and by the time I exited from the poll at 7:15, 100+ individuals were waiting to enter a very crowded precinct area. I was fully prepared to vote my choices with my own pre-prepared list of candidate selections and referendum choices. I came early because I had to be at my Synagogue by 8 am to speak at a morning religious service. ‘When I entered the precinct I signed the voter register and received the ‘computerized ballot.’ I went to a cubicle on a desk that had a ‘votamatic’ platform which had a ‘butterfly brochure’ fixed on the platform, with pages of the brochure to be turned sequentially so that candidates and referendum questions could be ‘hole punched,’ i.e., voted for. I followed the instructions placing the ballot into the slot so that it could be properly fixed and aligned under the ‘butterfly,’ so that the holes on the ‘butterfly’ lined up over the computerized ‘ballot.’ At that point I started the voting process. I wanted to vote for Gore/Lieberman. I searched for the Gore ‘butterfly hole’ and could not find it!! The arrows to the right of the candidate’s name, pointing to the proper ‘butterfly hole’ did not align properly!! I struggled to find the appropriate place for my vote, and tried to figure out which one it was by looking at the Bush ‘hole’ and the others on the page. By a process of elimination, I chose the hole I thought was for Gore and Lieberman. I took 3-4 minutes to do this. It made me feel rather stupid, so I hid my stupidity, figuring that I voted my choice. I went on to all the other candidates on the next pages of the ‘butterfly’ and the alignments to the proper holes were arranged neatly and to perfection. I took out my ‘ballot from the ‘butterfly’ and placed it in the ballot box upon leaving. ‘As I left, I heard people complaining that it was difficult to vote for President and V.P. I did not have time to consult with these individuals because I had my appointments. As I drove away, I had a gnawing feeling that something was not right, with the blame on me. I had a sample mock ‘butterfly’ that was mailed out before the election, and I looked at it briefly while driving and I saw that it did not look anything like the ‘butterfly’ that was attached to the ‘votamatic.’ At which point I dismissed the experience and went about driving. At 7:45 am, when I came to my synagogue (of which I am the Rabbi), Temple Emeth of Delray Beach, a 2800 member congregation of retired senior citizens, our parking lot was a bee-hive of activity. A voting precinct is housed in our facility’s auditorium, and it had lines waiting to go in to vote. I went into my office to prepare my sermon and at 8:10, I went out of my office, passing the voting precinct waving to many voters whom I knew. I rushed past the auditorium and went into the Chapel and began the service with a sermonette on the subject of voting and religious freedom. I told my prayers that in order to be religious, they had to vote, because political freedom is the guarantor of religious freedom. At exactly 8:20, my speech was interrupted by a synagogue Staff member who said to me in front of the 60 people in the chapel, ‘There is a problem in the precinct.’ My 7:15 emotions began to gnaw at me again. ‘I entered the precinct ahead of the lines and I was told by several people leaving that they had trouble voting their choice for President. In fact one person was crying that she thought she had mistakenly voted for Buchanan. I summoned the supervisor of the precinct housed in our facility and I asked her to get the butterfly ballot from one of the ‘votamatics’ and to look at it together with me. Two or three other people gathered around, and it was the identical ‘butterfly’ that I had used at the Church. I said to the supervisor that the arrows are completely misaligned with the holes and therefore the ballots could not be punched, expressing with certainty the intent of the voter. She agreed, and I asked her to interrupt the voting in the precinct and I told her that the precinct should be closed until an announcement was made to all those voting, that ‘the ‘butterfly brochure’ was problematic, and that people should exercise great care.’ I said to her that the supervisor of elections in Palm Beach and in Florida should be called immediately. She agreed. The phone lines to the election board were busy. She made the announcements, and I went to call all the media outlets in the area — 3 TV stations and the radio station of record. At which point, I felt I did my duty and I went into the synagogue office and began listening to people exiting from the precinct who complained that it was an impossible experience, and how they think they voted for Buchanan by mistake because of the ‘butterfly.’ At that point, I too put 2 and 2 together and I think I may have voted for Buchanan, a vote that would be anathema to my whole political disposition. ‘By 9:15 I had meetings in my office and duties to attend to, and thought that others had been sufficiently apprised of the situation and that it was in hand. Wrong, by mid day all hell broke loose in the media. ‘Addendum: On Friday night November 10, I had planned to speak about Kristallnacht, the Rabin Assassination, and Veterans Day. Instead, before 500 people I asked them to shared their voting experience during election day. Several people got up to speak and told their stories that they had trouble with the ‘butterfly’ in trying to vote for Gore, and they think they voted for Buchanan. (It is important to know that my congregation has well over 100 holocaust survivors, and no one would have knowingly voted for Buchanan. I took a referendum on that!) At which point several people in the congregation began to laugh at those who expressed a problem with the vote! I asked those who were laughing to explain their lamentable public ridicule. They said they voted, and it was a piece of cake. I then asked them to explain why it was easy for them. They said their ‘butterfly’ was lined up correctly and all they had to do was follow the arrows for the candidates and punch the holes. In response, those who had the problem, said publicly that they had a DIFFERENT LOOKING ‘BUTTERFLY’ AND THE ARROWS WERE MISPRINTED. I then took a tabulation. ‘If you thought the votamatic was easy to use, raise your hands.’ 50% raise their hands. Then: ‘If you were troubled by the vote and think you may have voted incorrectly for Gore because of your ‘butterfly,’ raise your hands.’ 30% raised their hands. 20% were unsure. ‘The conclusion of this ‘Town Hall’ sermonic discussion? There were two different versions of the ‘butterfly’ or maybe even a partial misprint of the butterflies used by many voters in various precincts of Palm Beach County. ‘I tried the same experiment on Saturday morning to an even larger crowd, dispensing with the planned sermon, asking people to share their voting experiences. The Saturday morning congregation is made up of different people than the Friday night congregation. To my amazement the same thing virtually the same happened again. People laughed, and slowly they came to the realization that there were 2 different versions to the ‘butterfly.’ The tabulation was the same as the previous night. Conclusion: The real problem is the ‘butterfly’ brochure. There were misprints in the alignment of arrows and holes, and there were bad ‘butterflies’ hovering within and mingling with normal ‘butterflies,’ and the way you could predict who received infected misprinted ‘butterflies,’ was to scan the precincts where Buchanan received greater numbers of votes than expected compared to all the other 50+ counties in Florida. It just so happens that the Buchanan factor surfaced most within Jewish and African-American areas and precincts. As an African-American pastor friend of mine said, ‘there is no one in his congregation who would for a moment think of voting for Pat Buchanan.’ Buchanan subsequently went on air saying he knew that these exaggerated votes, close to 3500 in Palm Beach County, ‘should not have gone to me.’ ‘The real question for these 3500 suspected votes: Why doesn’t the government impound all the ‘butterflies’ and search for the misprinted ones. The media is totally confused by this, and it is no wonder that the former Secretary of State, The Honorable James Baker, could hold up a normal ‘butterfly,’ and unconscionably imply, that elderly, Jewish, African-Americans, and Palm Beach County citizens, were ‘confused’ (implying ‘stupid’). Mr. Baker, in this case, was really ‘holier than thou,’ meaning, of course Bush voters were not confused because their candidate was the first on the list, and you could not mistake punching the Bush ‘butterfly’ hole because it was at the top of the column of holes, i.e., ‘holier than thou.’ Baker held up the proper butterfly — he never knew about the misprinted one!! ‘I do not believe in conspiracies! I am a registered independent voter who learned as a child: ‘It is not who won or lost, but how we played the game.’ In this election, the voting machinery was flawed, not the electorate!’ * Ben Austin: ‘My mother was a precinct clerk in Palm Beach County, Florida, election day of 2000. Mom’s very good friend Leah was a precinct clerk as well. Both of them were incredibly upset during and after election day, before anyone knew the import of these specific voters. And my mother was convinced there were serious irregularities long before they gained national prominence, and she called me to say so. ‘I note this because some Republicans are now asking if there were these irregularities, how come they were not raised until after the election? In fact, my mother and the other precinct clerks raised these issues from the moment that the polls opened in the morning; the problem is that the person they initially called on was Theresa LePore, elections supervisor of Palm Beach County. She was the source of the ballot confusion, and was uninterested in the issue. ‘First, the paper ballot was extremely confusing to these voters. Although both major parties got a chance to review the card layout, it is not clear if any had a chance to put the actual ballot in an actual machine and punch the holes. The card is laid horizontally as you vote, and it is hard to see the holes as you punch them. And my mother, who supervised the precinct she was in (this is a paid position, and she reported directly to Ms. LePore) said the card did not even fit correctly in the ballot machine, so the holes in the card did not line up with the ballot. ‘Anyone who thinks this was minor voter confusion has never dealt with retirees in a West Palm Beach retirement village in Florida, I promise you. ‘My mother, following the rules, said the poll workers had been told not to help people with the cards, as it might bias the voters. My mother witnessed many, many people who voted incorrectly. Some stayed on a second line and had their cards re-done, some punched the second hole (and thus were probably thrown out), and some found out they voted for Buchanan after they had deposited their cards in the ballot box, and there was thus nothing they could do. ‘Mom called me up to complain about this after the election, and she called me up again on Thursday, very upset after reading a story in the New York Times (Nov. 9 2000, p. B6). The Times story states: ‘After numerous complaints were received on Tuesday morning, Ms. LePore issued this directive to the county’s 106 precincts: Attention all poll workers. Please remind all voters coming in that they are to vote only for one (1) presidential candidate and that they are to punch the hole next to the arrow next to the number next to the candidate they wish to vote for.’ ‘Mom never received this directive, and she believes that if anyone knew they could have helped people vote their preference, the outcome would have been very different. Instead, my mother and the others were trying to do the right thing, and they felt that helping explain the ballot to these people would have been helping them to vote for Gore, something she didn’t feel was proper. These women are honest to a fault. ‘Leah did receive the directive, but not until 4pm on election day, and only by accident; someone was coming to visit from the main office and told her about it. In the meantime, my mother and Leah (and most of the precinct clerks) had been desperately trying to call the county office. They had been given a phone number by Ms. LePore and told that the phone line would be staffed throughout the day. They were told to call if there were any problems. Mom tried to call starting at 7:30am, calling straight through when polls closed, but she got a busy signal the entire time. But Mom was at a polling station with only a pay phone, so she had to deposit coins each time, and with long lines waiting for her, she was becoming increasingly frustrated. ‘Leah was precinct chief at the retirement village where they live, and ran a polling station at the clubhouse. Having a more modern facility, Leah tried on the phone as well, and when she couldn’t get through, she called the operator to ask her why the phone was busy. Leah had the presence of mind to get the operator’s number (history is made by people like Leah) when the operator told her the phone was off the hook, meaning nobody was on the line the entire day. Evidently, the supervisor’s office just didn’t want to hear the complaints. ‘Leah then faxed the supervisor’s office with her concerns at noon and again at 2pm. Nobody called Leah back until 5pm, when she heard from Ms. LePore, with the following words ‘don’t bother me.’ ‘So as this news starts to be spun and re-spun, let me tell you a few things I am certain to be true: I can’t argue intent either way, but the supervisor’s office in Palm Beach County is at the very least unable to carry out an election in which these people have their say. ‘These people started trying to fix the problem from the moment polls opened, and were fought along the way. This is not about crying about the election once it is over. ‘It pains me to see the issue being politicized by both sides. Gore has no place having his advisor Daley make statements that after a recount, Gore will emerge victorious; and Bush has no place saying that he is the victor, or setting up a transition team. In fact, the idea that Bush and his brother were together on election night, with Jeb Bush promising to ‘deliver Florida,’ draws a picture at least to me with the semblance of impropriety, especially now that we have seen the results so askew. I hope everyone will pay attention to the facts here, and let the people of South Florida have the same opportunity to vote that the rest of us had. You are free to send this to anyone you wish.’ * Susan Guberman-Garcia: ‘I spent several hours this morning watching the NAACP public hearing on the Florida vote on C-SPAN. Having done so, it is very clear to me that there was a systematic and calculated effort to lessen the Gore vote by denying the franchise to as many African Americans as possible. ‘The hearing was orderly, well run, and transcribed by a court reporter and was presided over by NAACP President (and former Congressional Black Caucus chairman) Kweisi Mfumi. The hearing was much like a Congressional hearing (but without the wordwaste and puffery that usually dominates Congressional hearings), there were several panels of witnesses, 2 to 4 people per panel. The witnesses included voters who were denied the right to vote, NAACP activists who worked the get-out-the-vote effort all day, NAACP phone-standby volunteers who worked the phones fielding election-day complaints, poll workers and news media people. The witnesses were all credible and impressive, their information detailed and often accompanied by notes with names, dates, places. I would not hesitate to call any of these people as witnesses if I were handling a lawsuit on their behalf. Witnesses testified that they (and family members and others in their presence) were denied the right to vote because they ‘were not on the rolls’ even though some of them had their voter registration cards as well as identification showing their names and addresses. This violates Florida law. In many cases, the poll workers who refused them declined to make any effort to validate their status and told them to ‘come back later.’ Some poll workers were sympathetic and attempted to get approval for the voters to go ahead and vote but were denied by ‘headquarters.’ ‘THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT: Two poll workers testified that they had been instructed by ‘headquarters’ that they should apply ‘qualification’ procedures VERY STRICTLY and if there is the slightest doubt, DENY THE REQUEST TO VOTE. They were also told to refrain from giving out any written verification of the refused voters’ requests, including affidavits (this is illegal; the law REQUIRES that any voter whose attempt is challenged be given an affidavit of challenge signed under oath by the poll worker). And in fact, many of the denied voters asked for an affidavit or something in writing to prove they had attempted to vote and ALL such requests were refused. NONE were given the chance to cast a ‘challenge ballot’ (which I gather is similar to the ‘provisional ballot’ that is used in California when there is a dispute as to whether someone is entitled to vote or not). Witnesses testified that they and others who were African American (but not white) voters were asked to provide BOTH photo ID and a current voter registration card and many who could not do so were denied the right to vote even though the law does not require that the voters present both ID and voter registration cards. A newswoman who spent all day at various polling places witnessed the above time and time again. When she tried to intervene, she was threatened with arrest. This newswoman (who happens to be white and a former policewoman) accompanied one black voter to SIX polling places as she was turned away time after time because, despite her having a voter card and ID, she was told ‘this is not your polling place. Finally, she returned to her original polling place and was allowed, finally, to vote. ‘The newswoman testified that at one polling place in Healdsberg County, there were numerous police cars who were stopping African American voters and asking for ID and ‘what are you doing here?’ She saw them stop one elderly man after he left the polls, order him to ‘assume the position’ and question him, as he tried to explain he had just voted (and was wearing a button that said ‘I voted’). When she tried to intervene, she was told to move on or she would be arrested, and when she did so out of fear for her safety, she was followed for several miles by a police car. This newswoman, who is white and a former policewoman, broke town in tears because she was ashamed that she left the scene. The newswoman testified that she was leaked a list of over a thousand absentee voters by an election official. This was a list of absentee voters who were disqualified for being ‘felons’ (their votes were not counted but they were not informed of the rejection of their vote or the opportunity to challenge it the Republican commissioner who leaked the list told the newswoman that the instructions were to NOT notify the rejected absentee voters of their disqualification. The newswoman happened to know one of the people on the list and it is someone she knows has never been convicted of a crime, let alone a felony. ‘Many witnesses testified that people who came in to vote were required to answer a litany of questions even though they were on the rolls and had ID, the questions had to do with whether they had been convicted of a felony since the last time they voted, was their address correct, etc. Only African Americans appeared to be asked these questions. A police lieutenant testified that a box of ballots was sitting in the police station. Someone called in that it had not been picked up. The police department claimed that they had tried to call the election commission on Friday but nobody answered because it was a holiday. As of now (actually, the hearing was Saturday but C-SPAN aired it this morning), the box is still sitting in the police evidence room, sealed with evidence tape. A minister testified that nobody ever came to pick up the box at his church (a polling place for his precinct) and STILL HAS NOT DONE SO!! ‘The president of Haitian Women of Miami testified that she was threatened with arrest for attempting to enter the polling booth to help first time Haitian voters who needed translation assistance, and even though she presented a copy of the statute that permits such assistance inside the booth she was told that she would be arrested if she did not leave and the police were actually called. None of the Creole speakers who asked for Creole ballots (which were printed for the first time this election) were given them and although there were Creole speaking volunteers present to assist those voters, they were denied the right to do so. Handicapped people were able to get into some polling places but the polling booths were not acceptable to them and requests for special ballots or other assistance was denied in African American precincts, according to the witnesses.’ * What a fine mess this is, Ollie.
I-Bonds, X.com, Junk, Spunk and Funk November 28, 2000January 27, 2017 GOOD DEAL David Maymudes: ‘I just happened to notice that the limit for online purchase of the inflation-adjusted Treasury bonds you’ve recommended in the past has been raised to $1000, so it’s now possible to buy the Albert Einstein bond!’ ☞ And remember, you can pay with a credit card and get the frequent flier miles, or with Discover and get a little cash back. Is this a great country or what? Click here. BAD DEAL Frank McClendon: ‘Last spring, I opened an X.com account under the allure of no fees. The ‘allure’ in reality was a marketing gimmick with fine print. As of November 1st, X.com (associated with Great Western Financial and PayPal) reversed the ‘allure’ and started charging account holders with smaller balances a NON-REFUNDABLE (for any reason) $12 per month. After deducting the non-refundable (for any reason) $12 service charge from my account in November, X.com then announced it was shutting down its banking business as of December 1st. Whoa! ‘Today, I spent 40 minutes on the phone with two representatives who said I was unreasonable and irresponsible for wanting my $12 back, that I definitely would not get my $12 back, and who finally hung up on me (twice) after refusing to transfer me to anyone in management. ‘I did learn from the representatives of X.com (in the call center in Omaha) that there were thousands of customers in my predicament and that NONE of them under any circumstances would be getting a refund of the fees deducted from their account. I was told that this was the final decision of the company. Customer Service would not tell me who made this decision, nor would they give me any way to contact senior management at the company.’ JUNK Richard McIntyre: ‘Re: yesterday’s column on Yield — what is your opinion on junk bond funds? Prices are way down, yields are very good, risk is high (?). Being a fund, prices should eventually recover (as with most funds and indexes) — or could they fail to recover to mid-90s levels? Your general thoughts on junk funds please?’ ☞ I think considerable risk remains in junk bonds, as a class. With a fund, you get diversification and professional management; but your return gets weighed down by fees, and the managers may not care as much about your money as you do (and they may be tempted to make the fund attractive by loading it up with high-yielding bad risks). SPUNK Carol: ‘The funniest flight I ever had with Southwest is when the plane was taxi-ing to the terminal. You know the speech they give when they ask you to stay in your seat until the plane comes to a full and complete halt? The attendant asks everyone to stay in their seats, as usual. And he adds over the P.A. system that if we don’t, then he will be forced to subject us to his serenade of lounge lizard music. A few people half rose from their seats a few minutes early. He at first said something like ‘Ah, Ah, Ah,’ kind of in an admonishing tone. They sat back down. Then when somebody really did stand up all the way before we were attached to the exit ramp, he started singing the first few bars of ‘Feelings’–at least I think that’s the name of it. Everybody starting yelling ‘Sit Down, Sit Down.’ to the offender. You never saw anybody sit back down in their seat more quickly!’ FUNK Craig: ‘Now you’re telling us that a Bush family member called the election? George W. actually got on the phone and told his cousin to call the election and everyone would believe it? PLEASE!!! You have to be one of the biggest Gore whores this side of Gloria Allred.’ ☞ Do you really think it’s irrelevant that the closest election in the nation’s history — an election that may be decided by a few thousandths of one percent — was called just a few hours after the polls closed by a close Bush family member who’d been on the phone with both Jeb and W? Do you think he would have been just as likely to have called it for Gore? Paul B: ‘I’m afraid I have lost the respect that I had for you due to your totally hypocritical stand on the election. Just state the obvious truth, you and most other Democrats just want Al Gore to win by any means necessary. This hypocrisy of only being interested in an ‘accurate count’ is really grating. If you wanted an ‘accurate count’ you would not have requested recounts ONLY in the four most heavily Democratic districts with Democrats controlling the election boards.‘ ☞ I’m sure you are aware that Gore went on national TV offering to abide by a manual count of ALL the counties. And I’m sure you also know that the manufacturers of the machines, and all other experts on this stuff, are unanimous that a visual inspection is more accurate than trusting the machines, which simply can’t read thousands of the ballots. Normally, that doesn’t matter. Unless the election is very close, the machines are good enough. But when the election is just thousands of one percent apart, what good is a machine accurate only to, say, a tenth of a percent? You may as well just flip a coin (which, as you know, I have also suggested). I retain all the respect I had for you, Paul. Jonathan Levy: ‘Doesn’t it seem fair that the Republicans should stop contesting the 1992 election before asking the Democrats to stop contesting the 2000 election?’
Going for Yield; Counting the Votes November 27, 2000February 17, 2017 See? I told you people would one day care about income again, once the musical chairs stopped and they couldn’t count on 30% gains in the stock market each year. Indeed, with the NASDAQ down from over 5000 to under 3000, Priceline down from 105 to under 3 and Yahoo down from 250 to 40, some folks have even . . . lost a penny or two. The safe way to get yield is with Treasury securities. But if you’re willing to take some appreciable risk, you have lots of alternatives. One real estate investment trust I’ve long owned is B.F. Saul – symbol BFS – with shopping centers in the Washington DC area. It is definitely not one of the best REITs, which is the main reason it sells for just $16 a share when it pays $1.56 dividend. That’s 9.7% on your money. Another hoped-for income-producer I own is Criimi Mae’s Series G Preferred stock. The common stock symbol is CMM. The company is in the mortgage business. The preferred stock trades for under $8 and promises to pay $1.50 a share dividend based on a $10 redemption price if the stock is ever called in. So this would give you about 19% a year, plus more than a 25% bonus if the stock is ever redeemed at $10. A final thought: Ameritrade’s 5.75% bonds maturing August 1, 2004. Currently, they trade at around 56, meaning $560 for each $1,000 bond. You get $57.50 interest from each bond – better than 10% a year – and in less than four years, if the company survives, the bonds will be redeemed at their full $1,000 face value. This works out to a 25% a year compounded return. There is risk in all three of these, which is why the yields are so attractive. You should never risk money you can’t afford to lose. And now a word about the election. I think Al Gore will be our next president, because I think the courts will be predisposed to counting the ballots. The Bush lead in Florida is currently 537 votes. But that’s without counting Palm Beach’s painstaking manual recount, and without counting 10,000 or so ballots in Dade County. When these ballots are counted, the Vice President will likely have carried Florida by a slim margin, just as with the national vote. No one is asking for endless recounts – just one careful count. Those 10,000 or so ballots in Dade County have not been counted once or twice or three times – they simply have not been counted at all. The machine couldn’t read them. A machine count is fine when a race isn’t too close. But when two candidates are separated by less than a tenth of one percent, what sense does it make to rely on a machine that is only 99%? It’s like measuring the width of a human hair with a yardstick. The frame for this story all along should have been, ‘Closest Presidential Race in History – Outcome Not Likely to Be Known for Weeks.’ That was the unbiased truth. Nor was it terribly troubling. Instead, the call was made by the Fox network at 2:16am on election night, and the other networks quickly fell into line. What a lot of people still don’t know is that the guy who made the call at Fox – Rupert Murdoch’s right-leaning network — was a Bush family member, who’d been on the phone to the Bush boys all night. The Bush family in effect declared themselves winners. And the other networks, perhaps panicked at being beaten, all followed suit within 4 minutes. Clearly, at 2:16am Wednesday morning the race remained too close to call. But to much of America, Bush had won. The TV had said so. (Read the full story here.) And from then on, the Bush folks managed to cast any efforts actually to count the ballots as just so much bad sportsmanship. But I think the courts will say the ballots should be counted, and that we will find that slightly more Floridians voted for the Vice President than for the Governor. And that’s even without adjusting for all folks who seem to have voted for Buchanan by mistake, or who double-punched confusing ballots, or who were intimidated into not voting. (And, yes, it was rotten that the networks, earlier in the evening, had called Florida for Gore before the polls in the Panhandle had closed – this really was a colossal error. But the early call wasn’t made an hour in advance of the polls closing, just 10 minutes. It’s hard to imagine that most voters in the Panhandle hadn’t already voted. Or that, where they were already at the polling place, they didn’t stay to vote anyway – if only because there were other items on the ballot besides Bush v Gore.) I wouldn’t bet my life on the outcome. And as I’ve repeatedly said, we should all rally round George W. Bush and wish him well if he wins. But it’s looking a lot better for Al Gore than the Bush folks would have you believe. Not only did Gore win more votes for President than anyone in the history of the country except Ronald Reagan, he likely also won the vote in Florida as well.
The Fifty-First State November 24, 2000January 27, 2017 Last week, Great Britain’s revocation of our independence made the Internet rounds. (We were being re-annexed in light of ‘[our] failure to elect a President of the USA and thus to govern [ourselves].’) Our very own John Bakke, faithful reader, has a counter-proposal (edited slightly, to avoid an international incident). Counter-proposal to subjects of the English monarchy We, the people of the United States of America, in order to form a more amusing union, hereby extend an offer to the people of that quaint little island known as England (or Great Britain, or whatever) to become our 51st state. Given your reluctance to embrace full European unity, along with the challenges of competing economically on your own, this would seem to be an ideal step forward for you. There are numerous benefits. 1. Your government may remain mostly intact. Each of our states has its own administration, and if you want to continue under a Parliamentary system and call your governor a ‘Prime Minister’ . . . well, we think that would be very cute and would encourage you to do so. Your laws would need to jibe with our Constitution, but we expect that you would enjoy having actual rights under the law, for a change. 2. You can keep the royals. Of course, the Windsor family would have no actual legal standing, but let’s face it, they don’t count for all that much now. Their value as a tourist attraction is unquestioned, though, and we expect Disney will greatly enhance their appeal once it assumes administration of the various palaces and castles. You should feel free to bow or curtsey or do headstands or turn cartwheels or whatever nonsense you think they’ll find amusing when you meet, but as citizens and not subjects you need no longer feel obliged. 3. A clean break from Europe. Admit it: you’re dying for this. Yes, it’s a shame you can’t manage it on your own, but get over it. However, as America’s trading gateway to the continent, your economy would soon be booming. 4. Minimal cultural impact. For those of you worried that your streets will be filled with American fast-food franchises, your cinemas filled with mindless American movies, we would suggest that you take a look around. It’s already happened, and it ain’t going away. As for language, you should preserve your charming accents and even spell or pronounce words however you like. We’re not sticklers for that sort of thing. 5. Superpower status. The Empire isn’t coming back, so this might be the next best thing. Over here, we’d be happy to see you take over the American involvement in NATO. Over there, you would probably enjoy having the French and Germans bluster and whine about your clumsy leadership in the alliance, but falling into line like little puppies when you finally get around to deciding what should be done. It’s really good fun, once you get the hang of it. 6. Your own stamp! Sadly, the pound must go. You can migrate to the dollar gradually, but look on the bright side: at least it isn’t the Euro, whose paper notes feature drawings of imaginary places because there would never be agreement about which country’s cities or leaders should be on which denominations. We’ll even put an English historical figure on a new note or coin (Churchill is the only one we know, but you can take your pick). We can’t allow any royalty on our currency, alas, but there’s no reason we can’t put the Queen and family onto postage stamps. If you’re reluctant to go for full statehood, we might be able to work out something like the deal we give other island dependencies, such as Puerto Rico or Samoa. But we think you’ll enjoy having your own representatives in Congress, fighting to have useless Federal projects established in the State of England to boost your local economy. And we know you’ll love participating every four years in the world’s most important election. You don’t even need any particular voting equipment — any outdated system you already have will suffice. Just fax in your vote totals whenever you can agree on them.
Thanksgiving November 22, 2000February 17, 2017 Thank heavens for little girls (for little girls, as Maurice Chevalier sang, ‘get beeger everyday’). Thank heavens for The West Wing (NBC, tonight, at nine). Thank heavens for our low unemployment, low inflation, and national security; safer streets, cleaner air, and bottled water. Thank heavens for family and friends and the kindness of strangers. Thank heavens for aspirin, penicillin and Prozac; Ben Franklin, Thomas Jefferson and Albert Einstein; Katherine Hepburn, Bette Middler and Tom Hanks. Thank heavens for generosity, humor and optimism; open minds, open doors, open hearts. Thank heavens George W. Bush signed a law requiring that dimpled ballots be included in a manual recount. Happy Thanksgiving!
Three Things You Should Know November 21, 2000February 17, 2017 1. See MEN OF HONOR with Robert De Niro and Cuba Gooding, Jr. I love that it’s based on a true story. 2. American is my favorite airline. But for cities American doesn’t serve, or when I’m feeling particularly cheap, it’s Southwest. If you’ve never flown Southwest, click here. Or call 800-I-FLY-SWA. (It is the most amazing thing: humans answer — generally on the first ring.) You need not book months in advance to get great fares — or stay over a Saturday or fly roundtrip. There are no $75 penalties for changing your plans. The flight attendants make you laugh. (‘Place your seatbacks in their upright and most uncomfortable position,’ they are fond of announcing.) Yes, the planes are heavily laden with noisy families and vacationers; yes, you will need to bring your own lunch; yes, seating is first-come-first-served; and, yes, you may have to travel a good distance to find an airport Southwest serves. New Yorkers have to go 45 minutes beyond Kennedy to Islip; Washingtonians need to get to Baltimore; Miamians, to Ft. Lauderdale; Angelinos, to Burbank. But check it out. It can save you big bucks. (There’s no First Class to be upgraded to on Southwest. One friend who strongly prefers First Class surprised me by saying he didn’t mind this. ‘You?’ I asked, incredulous. ‘Well,’ he said, ‘I don’t mind not being in First Class as long as no one else is.’ ) Hint: never plan to buy or fix your ticket at the airport. The lines are horrendous. But with a ‘ticketless’ ticket, you go straight to the gate, get a boarding pass (in either the first 30 to board and choose seats, the second 30, the third 30, or the fourth 30 – so come early), and off you go. Some of you already knew this; some never fly; a few would never fly coach. But the rest of you may easily have saved $500 a year. 3. ‘Forte’ is only pronounced ‘for-TAY’ if you’re talking about a loud piano instruction. If your forte is annoying people by correcting their English, then you pronounce it FORT. Look it up.
More MONEY! November 20, 2000February 17, 2017 Today’s column will again touch on money — yea, verily, specific stocks! — even if it takes me a minute to get there. Paul Jakubowski: ‘What goes around comes around. My trusty MYM came up this morning with the following quote: ‘Voters decide nothing; people who count votes decide everything. – Stalin.” ☞ I guess this highlights the need for ‘standards’ in counting the votes. How about we agree to count the vote if: (1) at least two corners of the chad are detached; or (2) light is visible through the hole; or (3) an indentation on the chad from the stylus or other object is present and indicates a clearly ascertainable intent of the voter to vote; or (4) the chad reflects by other means a clearly ascertainable intent of the voter to vote. Why these standards? Because they come directly, verbatim, from the 1997 Texas statute signed by Governor Bush. That statute also provides that if different people request different kinds of recounts – e.g., one wants a manual recount and another wants an electronic recount – the method chosen should follow a little hierarchy to decide which to use: ‘A manual recount shall be conducted in preference to an electronic recount and an electronic recount using a corrected program shall be conducted in preference to an electronic recount using the same program as the original count.’ Dana Dlott: ‘Trying to get your mind off the election . . . About 1 1/2 years ago I sent you this message: Can you explain something to me? There are lots of very well run corporations everywhere in the world. Basically all of them have CEOs who work for a tiny fraction of the compensation packages many American CEOs get. Why don’t our US corporations replace their costly CEOs with foreign CEOs who will do the same job at a fraction the price? ‘Now it looks like it is happening. The big news in the NYTimes yesterday was Daimler replacing Chrysler’s CEO with a German. After all, there must be a cheaper guy who can lose $512 million in a single quarter. Hope everybody else catches on . . .’ ☞ I hope so, too. The same boards of directors that expect a tough bargaining stance to be taken with labor often look forward to delighting their CEO. Partly this is because the directors and the CEO are frequently friends. Partly it is because the directors are frequently CEOs or ex-CEOs themselves – members of the club. Partly it is because the last thing a board wants to do is search for a new CEO. Of course, it would be shortsighted to save a few dollars on the leader’s salary . . . lose him or her . . . and see the enterprise falter. So there is a balance here. But things have swung awfully far in favor of the CEO. Many boards, I think, could do better by their shareholders. And speaking of shareholders, you guys have got me feeling incredibly guilty for writing about the election when I should be putting my shoulder to the task of making you some money. As I think I’ve made plain over the past 1200 columns (this is #1201), I have no clue how to make you money. If I did, I would charge more. I tend to think – as I suggested Friday – almost everyone does best who goes the simple route: periodic investing in a couple of index funds. Still — as intrigued by the game as anyone else (and eager to control my own tax consequences) — I do invest in individual stocks. In fact, when I’m feeling really self-destructive, I even short stocks. (I am almost always right about my shorts, but lose a lot of money anyway, because I’m right too soon. As famed retired short-seller Robert Wilson has said, ‘You need to decide whether you want to be right or you want to make money.’) When I’m out to ruin you as well as myself, I even once in a while share my ideas. On March 14, I ran a column entitled Five Stocks You Should Consider. It began by knocking Dell as seemingly overpriced at 51 (eight months later it is a lot more reasonable, if still not cheap, at half the price) . . . and then suggested five stocks to buy, that have since appreciated about 38%. This is particularly strong performance given how the rest of the market has fared, and far better than I could ever have done on my own. As I explained in that column, these five weren’t my ideas, they came from a guy who is really smart and who, equally important, really does his homework. I am, truth to tell, too lazy to do my homework. I wouldn’t buy these stocks here, now that they’re 38% more expensive, but I wouldn’t rush to sell them, either. My friend tends to buy for the long-term. He looks for stocks that, over time, will rise even more than 38%. On August 22, again feeling guilty for writing too much about cooking or guns or some other damn fool thing, I screwed up my courage and suggested another little batch of stocks. If I were you [I wrote in response to a reader’s question], I would consider a steady program of periodic investments in a couple of index funds. Or, if you have a taste for it, the acquisition of a portfolio of your own, geared toward long-term, tax-deferred capital gains. Being one to go from the sublime to the ridiculous, I might include some Microsoft (MSFT), some McKesson (MCK), some Canada Southern Petroleum (CSPLF), some Criimi Mae (CMM), a little Calton (CN), and — from the ridiculous to the preposterous — 100 shares of Borealis (BOREF). And just wait five years and see where they are. If they’re much lower, you’ll hate me, but have the satisfaction of knowing that I lost even more than you did. If they’re much higher, you will have long since forgotten who suggested them. (Do not “pay up” for these stocks. They are currently selling for around $71, $25, $6.50, $1.56, $4.50 and $3.50, respectively.) This little group was more of my own cobbling together, which may explain why it is down a bit since I held forth. Then again, we’re only a few months into that five years. MSFT, as many of you know, dipped as low as $48, but has come back to $69. Obviously, it would have been a lot smarter to wait and buy it at $48 than to pay $71. MCK is up from $25 to $31. So on those two, as a pair, you’d be a little bit ahead. Not surprisingly, perhaps, those two were the only ‘adult’ stocks in my basket – the kind of stocks a bank trust department might be willing to hold on your behalf. CSPLF, down from $6.50 to under $4, owns a lot of natural gas in Canada, and one giant lawsuit. If it ever won that lawsuit, I’d be able to retire from writing this column. Even without winning the lawsuit, this is the kind of stock I like. No one has ever heard of it, people are doubtless selling in disgust for a tax loss – and who knows? One day, natural gas could be worth something. CMM is down from $1.56 to $1.12 or so – but not really, because it also just issued 6 shares of a preferred stock for each 100 of the common that you owned, so if you do all the math, it’s more or less where it was. It seems to be emerging from bankruptcy. My hope is that I might triple my money over the next few years in CSPLF and CMM. (Of course, I am keenly aware that I may lose it, also.) CN is down from $4.50 to $3.50. This is the stock on which we originally made several times our money, culminating in a column I entitled The Lunatics Take Over – Yippee! But then the dot-com fever it had improbably got caught up in broke, and before you knew it the lunatics were gone and it was back to being unwanted at any price. I don’t mind paying $3.50 a share for $7 a share in cash (and no debt). I know bad management could squander all the cash and leave us with nothing. But management owns so much of the stock, I’m willing to gamble that it won’t. BOREF, meanwhile, has become ever more weird. It seems to be trading about where it was before, but in tiny amounts in obscure places — not every brokerage firm or quote service will be able even to furnish you with a quote. But talk about investor relations! You can find out all sorts of things about what the company claims at www.borealis.com. This is a stock that is surely going to zero, as I have written before. But I have bought vast quantities of it over the last year or two, because what is life without a dream? And now can I say one last thing about politics? Our economy may give us cause to worry – it’s been a long time since our last recession — as may the expanding hole in the ozone layer. But our Constitution? All that’s going to work out fine. And if it’s Bush who wins, even though I hope it’s not, we will all rally round and wish him well.
MONEY! November 17, 2000January 27, 2017 Gene Daly: ‘Please recommend a few FINANCIAL sites. You know the kind, ones that talk about market bottoms, value stocks, growth stocks, good mutual funds, stuff like that.’ ☞ No one knows where the market bottom is, and if you buy mutual funds, buy low-expense index funds. Over time, you’ll beat almost all the others (and no one knows in advance the few you won’t beat). Oh, OK. By popular demand, today’s column will be at least a little bit about money. But you know, the best thing you can do most of the time is . . . nothing. The more you trade, the more you rack up transaction costs and expose yourself to taxes. So in a way, my trying to distract you with all this political stuff is a great financial service. What most people need is a simple, automatic discipline whereby they add to their holdings each week or month, via their 401(1) at work . . . and perhaps their automatic mutual fund investment . . . or the automatic electronic transfer they make each month from their checking account to their brokerage account. That kind of thing. Plus the wisdom to delight in the little cost savings they devise. (Some of you will recall my ode to the T-shirt as just one example.) If markets are headed down, just say to yourself, ‘Hot dog! I am scooping up assets at even better prices! I am a lucky fella.’ If markets are headed up, you say to yourself, ‘Hot dog! I am getting richer by the minute! I am a lucky fella.’ (Fella, I have decided, is a gender neutral word. It has the male connotation from ‘fellow,’ with the Latin female suffix.) Monday, I will take a look back at some of the (very-cautiously-couched) recommendations I’ve made in this column, claiming full credit for all the money I made you on some of them, and disclaiming any responsibility for the rest. But for now . . . well, I’m sorry . . . I’d rather listen to you. J Colson: ‘The inference that Bush will fail because Adams did 175 years ago is too much. I didn’t subscribe to hear graceless innuendos. Remove me from your list.’ ☞ The point of Tuesday’s column – at least as I read it — was not to predict that W., if he wins, will fail. Frankly, I think either man will have a tough time. And as Joyce Chaplin reminds us: ‘After losing reelection, John Quincy Adams had an illustrious post-presidential career, especially as a critic of slavery in the big argument leading up to the Civil War.’ GWB could do worse than be compared to JQA. Hank Gillette: ‘One thing we’ve gotten from this election, win or lose, is that the Republicans now agree that if you think your rights are being abridged by state law the proper action is to seek redress in Federal Court.’ Julia F: ‘Am I asking myself, as a Nader voter, ‘What Have I Done?’ Absolutely not. I’ve got a stack of health care bills that my HMO refuses to pay (Nader’s plan, if you don’t know, has an assurance of universal health care pronto) . . .’ ☞ How wonderful of Nader to assure that for us. But what does ‘pronto’ mean – that in 20 years, when a Green party candidate somehow wins the White House, she can fight a very tough battle with Congress, as the Clinton administration did, and maybe, conceivably, 25 years from now, you’ll have it? How is that ‘pronto?’ Wouldn’t Gore likely make more progress toward this goal than Bush? And toward a true patient’s bill of rights? ‘ . . .I’m concerned about the ozone hole in Chile (Nader’s plan ended public subsidies & tax breaks for industries that harm the environment); and I am mad about corporations subsidizing campaigns (you probably understand by now that Nader doesn’t accept those contributions) . . .’ ☞ I wonder how many corporate contributions he had to turn away. Of the four leading contenders for the Presidency, Gore, Bush, Bradley and McCain, all but one strongly supported the McCain-Feingold bill that would have made a good start at campaign finance reform. The one who opposes it? The one Nader may wind up having elected. ‘ . . . Most of all, I’m confounded by the fact that this is still a two-party country. I’m proud that I voted for Nader. I voted for progress. I stand behind my vote 100%. And the election isn’t over yet.’ ☞ I bolded that final comment because it hints at the possibility you care who wins. If so — why? Is it because you think that one candidate is more likely to fight for the things you cite? Look at it this way. If the election came down to one vote and it were yours, would you prefer to see it go to Bush, because you voted for Nader? You are saying yes, but — at the risk of being presumptuous — I wonder whether you really feel that way. Robert Doucette: ‘Your thought on a coin toss is not so far fetched. CNN reports that in case of a tie in New Mexico, the law provides that the winner IS determined by a coin toss or a game of cards.’ [CNN reports: ‘New Mexico statute requires that in case of a tie, ‘the determination as to which of the candidates shall be declared to have been nominated or elected shall be decided by lot.’ In practice, the usual method for this rare event has been to play one hand of five-card poker. This was last done in December 1999, in a local judge’s race. Republican Jim Blanq and Democrat Lena Milligan played one hand of poker in a courthouse with dozens of people watching, and Blanq won.] ☞ One advantage of a coin toss is that it would mute somewhat the perception of illegitimacy the winner might otherwise suffer. There are many theories about the fairness of machine counts versus manual counts. (On this point, I side with Governor Bush, who signed a 1997 Texas statute mandating that, when recounts are requested, ‘a manual recount shall be conducted in preference to an electronic recount.’) But whatever your views of chads and dimples, everybody knows that a coin toss is fair. Jimmy Dolklyn: ‘If you laid all the journalists who called the Florida election early end-to-end across the Atlantic ocean, it would be a damned good start.’ And just how did it happen that Bush was briefly declared the winner? Which, after all, laid the foundation for the notion that the election is ‘his,’ and that all this foolishness about counting the votes is just sour grapes. The call was made by Fox at 2:16am, and the other networks quickly fell into line. The guy who made the call at Fox was a member of the Bush family, who’d been on the phone to the Bush boys all night. So one might say it was the Bushes who managed this PR coup, framing the terms of all that followed. Read the full story here.
The View from Abroad – II November 16, 2000February 17, 2017 What a crazy notion – count all the votes in Florida . . . very carefully . . . since the margin currently separating the two candidates is a mere five thousandths of 1% and machines don’t count every vote. Sure sounds wacky to me. (If all the voters in Florida were laid end to end, they would stretch from New York’s Times Square south to Miami, west to Los Angeles and then back East to around Chicago. The margin currently separating the two candidates wouldn’t even get you to Penn Station, 8 blocks away.) Or, as I’ve suggested, since the entire election was essentially a tie: flip a coin, and the loser has to be President for the next four years. Meanwhile, making the rounds of the U.K. – and now the U.S.: To the citizens of the United States of America, In light of your failure to elect a President of the USA and thus to govern yourselves, we hereby give notice of the revocation of your independence, effective today. Her Sovereign Majesty Queen Elizabeth II will resume monarchical duties over all states, commonwealths and other territories. Except Utah, which she does not fancy. Your new Prime Minister (The Rt. Hon. Tony Blair MP, for the 97.85% of you who have until now been unaware that there is a world outside your borders) will appoint a minister for America without the need for further elections. Congress and the Senate will be disbanded. A questionnaire will be circulated next year to determine whether any of you noticed. To aid in the transition to a British Crown Dependency, the following rules are introduced with immediate effect: 1. You should look up “revocation” in the Oxford English Dictionary. Then look up “aluminium”. Check the pronunciation guide. You will be amazed at just how wrongly you have been pronouncing it. Generally, you should raise your vocabulary to acceptable levels. Look up “vocabulary”. Using the same twenty seven words interspersed with filler noises such as “like” and “you know” is an unacceptable and inefficient form of communication. Look up “interspersed”. Also “Oh really?” is not the only way of showing interest when in conversation. 2. There is no such thing as “US English”. We will let Microsoft know on your behalf. 3. You should learn to distinguish the English and Australian accents. It really isn’t that hard. 4. Hollywood will be required occasionally to cast English actors as the good guys. 5. You should relearn your original national anthem, “God Save The Queen”, but only after fully carrying out task 1. We would not want you to get confused and give up half way through. 6. You should stop playing American “football”. There is only one kind of football. What you refer to as American “football” is not a very good game. The 2.15% of you who are aware that there is a world outside your borders may have noticed that no one else plays “American” football. You will no longer be allowed to play it, and should instead play proper football. Initially, it would be best if you played with the girls. It is a difficult game. Those of you brave enough will, in time, be allowed to play rugby (which is similar to American “football”, but does not involve stopping for a rest every twenty seconds or wearing full kevlar body armour like nancies). We are hoping to get together at least a US rugby sevens side by 2005. 7. You should declare war on Quebec and France, using nuclear weapons if they give you any trouble. The 97.85% of you who were not aware that there is a world outside your borders should count yourselves lucky. 8. July 4th is no longer a public holiday. November 8th will be a new national holiday, but only in England. It will be called “Indecisive Day”. 9. All American cars are hereby banned. They are crap and it is for your own good. When we show you German cars, you will understand what we mean. 10. Please tell us who killed JFK. It’s been driving us crazy. For those of you who get this column by Q-Page, my apologies for any choppy waters of late. Kinks are being ironed out, I am assured. (If you think I’m underpaid for writing this column, you should meet my long-suffering, yet always accommodating, webmaster.)