Telamon wrote:

In article ,
(Mike Pearson see .sig) wrote:

http://www.snopes.com/politics/kerry/heinz.asp

Depends on how you look at it. She has multimillions of dollars from
that corporation although she does not have a controlling interest in
the multinational company. So the distinction has now merit since she
and John benefit from it.


She is far from "owning" the company as the original poster stated in
the message that he forwarded. (She holds less than 4%, and is not on
the board or otherwise involved in the running of the company.) His
message makes it sound as if she is the actual owner, involved in
day-to-day operations. The Heinz company has been trying to debunk this
stuff, too. They make ketchup and pickles, and are not involved in
politics.

John Kerry benefits from the profits of a multinational corporation
through his wife. So your point is?

The point is that she is a common stockholder (and not even a very big
one), and the relationship that the forwarded (and thoroughly debunked)
message impliues does not, in fact, exist.


--
Mike
NAR #70953 - Sr/HPR Level-1 ~ SeaNAR - The Seattle NAR Section #568
NO Junk Email, please! Real email to: amphoto [at] blarg [dot] net.
WANTED: Experienced Kamikaze Pilot