Robber baronesses

Nineteenth century robber barons are the ultimate villains in Socialism’s mythology. But I’ve yet to hear a Socialist say a negative word about robber baronesses let alone see one called out by name. With that in mind I’ll call up Hetty Green (1834 - 1916).

Now, don’t misinterpret me here. I admire Hetty and regard her a positive historical figure. She was truly an American original. The Queen of Mean, Leona Helmsley (1920 - 2007) was a bleeding heart compared to Hetty.

Besides, how can you not love a woman who made more money in a man’s world than did J.P. Morgan?:

“Her estate was estimated to be close to $200 million at the time – or an estimated $17 billion in today’s dollars. (J.P. Morgan’s estate at the time of his death three years before was approximately $80 million.)”

Earning power notwithstanding, I would praise Hetty based on this one statement:

“My life,” she said, “is written for me down in Wall Street by people who, I assume, do not care to know one iota of the real Hetty Green. I am in earnest; therefore they picture me as heartless. I go my own way. I take no partner, risk nobody else’s fortune, therefore I am Madame Ishmael, set against every man.”

NOTE: You can be sure that unlike Jon Corzine —— Hetty Green, The Witch of Wall Street, knew where every penny was. Question: How come Democrats are not calling Corzine The Warlock of Wall Street?

This next one is more fun:

“Hetty once told a reporter, ‘My father told me never to give anyone anything, not even a kindness.’.”

Right about now, I am happily visualizing every touchy-feely wimp who reads the above quote planting their flag of outrage on the moral high ground.

If nothing else enshrines Hetty in the hearts of freedom-loving people everywhere try this:

“By that time in her career, she was regularly on the run from the tax collectors, for she also felt no obligation to give any of her money to the government. Her rooms in Hoboken protected her from the New York collectors and vice versa.”

And this:

“She gave nothing away. She just watched her fortune grow and grow at the expense of virtually everything else in her life except her beloved little dog Curtis, whose name she sometimes used on her front door to throw tax agents off her trail.”

You can read about Hetty, warts and all, at the following link. But know this first: Hetty killed no one. She never preached infanticide or euthanasia. She never forced anyone to fund her enterprises with tax dollars. In short: Her only “sin” was making money —— lots of money. What she did with it was nobody’s business but her own.

The Woman Who Loved Money

http://www.newyorksocialdiary.com/node/2460

If you read about Hetty give yourself another treat and read O’Henry’s very humorous, short, short, story where Mrs. Maggie Brown is clearly meant to be Hetty Green:

The Enchanted Profile

http://www.online-literature.com/o_henry/roads-of-destiny/4/

Finally, I hope that my resurrecting Hetty Green will invite comparisons to slimy Democrat witches like Nancy Pelosi, Dianne Feinstein, Hillary Clinton, Maxine Waters, Barbara Boxer and other feminazis who whine about kindness, so long as others pay for it, while enriching themselves on tax dollars without ever contributing a thing to society.

Nancy Pelosi, Down and Dirty
Michele Malkin
Dec 16, 2011

As a rueful Queen Elizabeth once said of a particularly rough year for the royal family, 2011 is "not a year on which" Queen Nancy Pelosi "shall look back with undiluted pleasure." The former House Speaker relinquished her crown -- er, gavel -- in January. It's been an epic downhill ski crash ever since.

Most recently, Pelosi faced questions from liberal "60 Minutes" and conservative investigative author Peter Schweitzer about a 5,000-share Visa stock purchase she made with her husband as the House was considering credit card regulations. She made a "killing" off the highly sought-after initial public offering. The stock holdings more than doubled in a few weeks; the credit card regulations were put on ice somewhere in the back of Pelosi's fridge.

While she makes grand gestures toward banning congressional insider trading, San Fran Nan's financial conflicts of interest are once again on display. This week, Reuters columnist Dan Indiviglio pointed to pending House legislation titled the "New Alternative Transportation to Give Americans Solutions Act of 2011," which is stuffed with natural gas vehicle subsidies: $9 billion worth, to be precise. These very subsidies are championed by Texas billionaire and failed wind farm evangelist T. Boone Pickens. He just happens to be a major stockholder in the company that would benefit from the bill: Clean Energy Fuels.

Question the timing? Indeed. As The Washington Examiner's Tim Carney observes: "While Pickens, a longtime oil and gas man, has been lobbying for natural gas subsidies for decades, his cause has become particularly urgent this month. Pickens owns options to buy 15 million shares of Clean Energy Fuels at $10 per share, according to SEC filings. Those options expire Dec. 28. If Congress could pass the NATGAS Act this month, shares of Clean Energy would skyrocket."

Pelosi just happens to be a stockholder in -- you guessed it -- Clean Energy Fuels. The then-Speaker bought between $50,000 and $100,000 of stock in Pickens' CLNE Corp. in May 2007 on the day of the initial public offering. As I reported in a column three years ago, Pelosi's 2007 financial disclosure form listed "assets and 'unearned income' of between $100,001-$250,000 from Clean Energy Fuels Corp. -- Public Common Stock." If the natural gas giveaway passes, Pelosi profits.

Of course, an endless parade of dirty Democratic scandals earlier this year had already completely obliterated what was left of Pelosi's Mop-and-Glo reformer image. She and other liberal feminists rallied around disgraced Twitter freak and former N.Y. Democratic Rep. Anthony Weiner even as evidence mounted that he lied to them. And used taxpayer resources and government buildings while sexting. And recklessly neglected to ensure that his Internet paramours were of legal age.

Pelosi and fellow femme-a-gogue Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Fla., led from behind, calling for Weiner's resignation only after the public tide had shifted. Pelosi showed similar reticence in dealing with basket-case Oregon Democratic Rep. David Wu -- whose sexually aggressive, alcohol-addled erratic outbursts stretched over decades. Despite knowledge of Wu's staff's panic about his infamous 2010 Tigger costume photos and despite months-old pleas for help from an underage victim of Wu's sexual indiscretions, House Democrats sat on their hands. In July, Pelosi finally called for an investigation by the House Ethics Committee.

That's the same panel that slapped Pelosi pal and New York Democratic Rep. Charlie Rangel on the wrist for serial tax-cheating and has yet to move forward with California Democratic Rep. Maxine Waters' ethics trial after charging her last year with three violations related to her crony TARP bailout intervention on behalf of minority-owned OneUnited Bank in Los Angeles.

What a way to close out her annus horribilis. Nancy Pelosi, the proud feminist who boasted she would clean up Washington, is covering up and cashing in. Just like all the other self-dealing good old boys.

Michelle Malkin is the author of "Culture of Corruption: Obama and his Team of Tax Cheats, Crooks & Cronies" (Regnery 2010). Her e-mail address is malkinblog@gmail.com.

http://townhall.com/columnists/michellemalkin/2011/12/16/nancy_pelosi_down_and_dirty/page/full/

 

Good old Hetty.

Wasn't she the one whose son had to have his arm amputated because Hetty spent so much time looking for a FREE medical clinic?

She was so cut throat, she made J. Pierpont shudder with fear.

 

To rendova: Leg not arm.

The story is urban myth with a tiny element of truth to it. The article I linked said this:

"Most dam-ning perhaps was her meanness with her son. Ned had injured a knee in a sledding accident when he was nine years old. Hetty refused to get him medical attention because of the potential cost. The boy grew up lame until, in his teens, the leg became gangrenous and had to be amputated above the knee."

I believe that Charles Slack’s version is more accurate:

"Her son Ned broke his leg as a child, and Hetty tried to have him admitted in a free clinic for the poor. According to Green's biographer Charles Slack, the oft-repeated story is that when she was recognized, she stormed away vowing to treat the wounds herself, which is only half true. He relates that having been found out (and perhaps also after procrastinating about seeking treatment for the boy in the first place), Green paid her bill and thereafter brought him to other doctors (while also trying home remedies). Similarly, Slack relates that it is not true that the leg had to be amputated because of gangrene. Rather, it was amputated after years of unsuccessful treatment. In any case, Ned ended up with a cork prosthesis."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hetty_Green

You have to remember that Hetty Green had great propaganda value to the Socialist movement; so everything said about her was slanted to make her look bad in all things. In time, the half-truths became the absolute truth.

Conversely, early Socialist leaders are remembered as saints who never told a lie. But if you measure the good, or the harm, done by Hetty Green against the good, or the harm, done by any leading Socialist of her day, I think you’ll find that Hetty did more good and less harm. She was certainly the better American.

 

I’ll wager that if Socialists ever admitted that Nancy Pelosi is a robber baroness they would still vote for her. It matters not that Hetty never stole from taxpayers, while Pelosi & Family do right well at the public trough. I know that Pelosi is in no danger of going to jail, but how about her family?:

“According to her personal financial disclosure form for 2010, Pelosi's husband, Paul, had holdings in more than a half-dozen companies tied to Hambrecht's investment banking firm WR Hambrecht + Co.”

Is every member of the Pelosi clan immune from prosecution? At the very least, federal prosecutors should be looking into the possibility of wrongdoing by Pelosi’s family and associates who took the money Nancy sent their way.

Pelosi’s Expert Was Also Business Partner
Former Speaker Brought Family Friend to the Hill
By Paul Singer
Roll Call Staff
Dec. 19, 2011, Midnight

In May 2010, then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi took to a podium in the Capitol to introduce a half-dozen economic experts she had convened for a meeting on how to jump-start the economy. The group had met for several hours with top Democratic leaders, and Pelosi invited them to speak publicly on their perspectives on economic growth.

What Pelosi did not mention is that one of the men in the group was her son's boss and a partner with her husband in more than a half-dozen investments, including one that generated more than $100,000 in income for the Speaker's family last year.

It was the fourth time since 2007 that Pelosi had invited San Francisco investment banker William Hambrecht to be part of an economic policy forum on the Hill and the third time she appeared at a podium with him to speak to reporters. At none of those events did the then-Speaker reveal her financial ties to Hambrecht, and House rules did not require her to do so.

At a time when the connection between a Member of Congress' personal finances and public role has been spotlighted by the proposed STOCK Act — which would prohibit lawmakers from trading on legislative knowledge — the case of Pelosi and her family's investment adviser is a reminder of how few rules exist to govern these relationships.

According to her personal financial disclosure form for 2010, Pelosi's husband, Paul, had holdings in more than a half-dozen companies tied to Hambrecht's investment banking firm WR Hambrecht + Co.

The best-known Hambrecht/Pelosi partnership is the struggling United Football League.

An October 2009 Washington Post story reported that Paul Pelosi had purchased a team in Hambrecht's nascent league for $12 million. The article was published four days before Hambrecht participated in another of Pelosi's economic forums. After that four-hour meeting, Pelosi introduced Hambrecht and several other "leading economists" at a news conference, saying, "They're going to tell you some of their forecasts that they told us about — some of the options that we may have in investments, in tax policy, in budgetary overview, on how we create jobs in the most fiscally sound way," according to a CQ transcript.

Again, Pelosi did not mention her family's investments with Hambrecht.

According to Pelosi's disclosure form, most of the Hambrecht-linked investments produced losses or very little income last year except for one — an investment worth $5 million to $25 million in an investment firm called Matthews International Capital Management. The firm, partly owned by Hambrecht, specializes in Asian investments and earned Paul Pelosi somewhere from $100,000 to $1 million in income last year. Paul Pelosi also maintained a brokerage account with Hambrecht's firm last year worth $500,000 to $1 million.

The Pelosis' son, Paul Pelosi Jr., worked at Hambrecht's company as an investment banker from July 2009 to September 2011, but a source familiar with his employment said, "He did not work on any investments that his family had through the company."

The two families have been friends for many years, and the Hambrechts have donated more than $2 million to Democratic campaigns and causes, according to Federal Election Commission records.

Hambrecht did not respond to requests for comment on this article.

Pelosi's invitation of her family's business partner to participate in occasional economic forums on the Hill does not appear to violate any laws or House rules, and it would not violate the STOCK Act, a bill currently being considered by Congress that would apply to Members and staff.

In August 2009, the Office of Congressional Ethics recommended that the House Ethics Committee investigate Rep. Sam Graves (R-Mo.) for inviting a friend who was invested in biofuels projects with the Congressman's wife to testify on renewable fuels issues before the Small Business Committee.

The OCE concluded "there is substantial reason to believe that an appearance of conflict of interest was created" when Graves invited his friend to testify. But the Ethics Committee dismissed the case on the grounds that "No relevant House Rule or other standard of conduct prohibits creation of an appearance of conflict of interest when selecting witnesses for a committee hearing."

Pelosi never called Hambrecht as a witness at a hearing, nor did she name him to any official task force.

Pelosi spokesman Drew Hammill said, "Bill Hambrecht has been an intellectual resource on both sides of the Capitol. In these meetings, Hambrecht has spoken about the need, in light of the financial crisis, to help keep homeowners in their homes, help small businesses grow and hire, and help small banks gain access to credit — all macroeconomic goals to grow and stabilize our economy and strengthen our competitiveness."

Hammill added, "Mr. Hambrecht never discussed topics relating to any joint investments or sole investments of his in these meetings."

Pelosi has advanced at least one bill that would have been beneficial to an investment her husband has with Hambrecht, but that doesn't appear to violate House rules either.

In May 2007, Hambrecht's firm managed an initial public offering of stock in a company called Clean Energy Fuels Corp., which provides liquid natural gas fueling stations for fleet vehicles. On the first day the stock was sold, Paul Pelosi invested $50,000 to $100,000 in the company, an investment that does not appear to have produced any profit for the family so far.

The company said in its 2010 annual report, "We were disappointed in 2010 when the Nat Gas act, which was structured to help promote natural gas vehicle deployment in the United States, failed to move through Congress. ... The Legislation would be good since it would accelerate the deployment of vehicles, but our business is not dependent on it and we continue to move forward without it."

The NAT GAS (New Alternative Transportation to Give Americans Solutions) Act would provide a series of tax breaks for natural-gas vehicles and require the Energy Department to create new programs to support natural-gas vehicle research and development. The bill is listed on Pelosi's Democratic leader website as part of the party's "Make It in America" agenda, but her office said she does not support the bill.

Hammill said, "Leader Pelosi opposes the larger NAT GAS legislation in its current form because she doesn't believe we need to subsidize natural gas at this level given that it is so plentiful. The legislation is a very large subsidy of up to $9 billion."

In May, Pelosi led other House Democrats in unveiling two energy bills, including one proposed by Rep. David Cicilline (D-R.I.) that incorporated some of the provisions of the NAT GAS Act but was less generous to the natural-gas vehicle industry.

Hammill explained, "In our Make It in America initiative, we included a much smaller portion of the NAT GAS Act — only costing $1.4 billion — to make investments so that we have a tax credit for heavy natural-gas vehicles and heavy hybrid vehicles."

Pelosi's endorsement of the bill, and even a vote in favor of it, would not violate House rules either because the House bars Members from voting only on matters in which they have "a direct personal or pecuniary interest." The Ethics Committee has interpreted that prohibition to apply only when a Member would be the sole beneficiary of a Congressional action, not when the Member would profit as part of a group of beneficiaries. In this case, Pelosi is supporting legislation that would boost all natural-gas vehicle companies, and all investors in those companies, not just her family's investment.

Hammill said Pelosi's support of natural-gas vehicles has nothing to do with her husband's investments.

"This investment was made in 2007, and we reject the idea that Leader Pelosi would act in the Congress upon an investment," Hammill said. "Leader Pelosi has long said that our energy independence is critical to our national security and economic security. ... Obviously, natural gas burns cleaner than other fossil fuels and will be part of our energy mix for the foreseeable future."

The STOCK Act, intended to prevent insider trading by Members of Congress and staff, would apply to stock trades made on the basis of nonpublic information Members have about legislation that would affect the stock price but would not apply to Members advancing legislation that benefits stock they already own.

http://www.rollcall.com/issues/57_7...T=rollcall:e11704:80043017a:&st=email&pos=eam