It's time for a lesson

Lamont Slams Walmart But Owns $31k Worth of Stock
by Zen Warrior [Subscribe]
Fri Aug 04, 2006 at 03:47:14 PM PDT

If something seems too good to be true, boys and girls, then that most likely means that is ::::IS:::: too good to be true. Case in point. Ned Lamont. Savior of the CT Demublicans who positions himself as a different sort of millionaire who represents the little people. And compared to Joemomentum, superficially, he is different.

Except when it comes to hypocrisy, which outstanding, conclusive proof abounds that it is not limited to any one political party, dimbulbs included:

Connecticut millionaire businessman Ned Lamont, who sharply criticized the employment practices of Wal-Mart this week in his campaign to unseat Sen. Joe Lieberman in the Democrat primary, owns stock in the company, Senate records reveal.

"This is about waking up Wal-Mart, and this is also about waking up corporate America," Mr. Lamont said Wednesday at a Bridgeport rally against the retail giant, hosted by many of the same liberal bloggers who have boosted the former cable executive far ahead of Mr. Lieberman in the polls.

But Mr. Lamont and his family are part owners of the company, according to financial disclosure records he filed earlier this year with the secretary of the Senate. Mr. Lamont, his wife and a dependent child own as much as $31,000 in Wal-Mart stock.

Mr. Lamont and his wife jointly own two accounts containing as much as $16,000 in Wal-Mart stock. Their Wal-Mart holdings spin off as much as $3,500 in annual dividends. In addition, a trust fund he set up for one of his children contains as much as $15,000 in Wal-Mart stock and spins off as much as $1,000 in dividends.

In his remarks at the anti-Wal-Mart rally this week, Mr. Lamont never mentioned his shareholder status in the company. He did, however, criticize Mr. Lieberman for not doing more during this three terms in the Senate to help the workers he says are so mistreated by Wal-Mart.

That is not to say that Lamont is not a vast improvement over the bush junta's favorite demublican whore, Lieberman. But let's not all suck each other's dick just yet in a congratulatory collective orgasm over ousting Joemomentum from office, shall we.

Complete story found here.

Oh, and BTW, yes, the WT is considered by Left Blogistan as the Moonbat Times, but you can't argue with the ::::REALITY:::: that Lamont owns Walmart stock even as he pretends to admonish the company for its civic and ethical wrongdoings. If Mr. Lamont believes so forcefully in his own bullshit, shouldn't he walk the walk by dumping his Walmart stock instead of spewing superficial platitudes?

First, Lieberman was in trouble for taking money from their PAC, no one asked what his portfolio holds.

Now, I'm sure Zen Warrior is shocked that Lamont would have money in Wal Mart, but a couple of things mitigate this.

First, it isn't a direct investment, but part of a mutual fund, which means a fund manager makes the investments and given Wal Mart's dominance in the market, millions of Americans have similar investments in the company.

Second, if Zen Warrior had hit the calculator button on their keyboard and divided 90 million , the low end estimate of his net worth, by $31,000 you get a fractional number, but let's help the process along. Ten percent of his wealth is 9m. 1 percent is 900000, one tenth of one percent is 90,000. One third of that is 30,000. So we're taking about one thirtieth of one percent of his total net worth.

That is a miniscule amount to keep track of for a very rich man. Of course, Republican operatives helping Lieberman, as the Daily News reported today, are farming stories out to likely sources, in this case, the Moonie Times.

But more importantly, in American corporations, only shareholders can vote and speak at shareholders meetings. People looking to affect change often buy stock in companies they oppose so they can attend those meetings. It is not hypocrisy to demand a company you invest in change it's business practices, it's the opposite, since those changes may cost you money.

You can judge the appropriateness of this or not, but one must learn that if the opposition is screaming about something, falling for their hysterics isn't all that bright.