JULY 7, 2008 --

Thank you Tom Friedman for your column in The New York Times, June 29, "Anxious in America." Good to see you have almost caught up with LPR's observations on the economy.     

I think -- now I may be wrong on this -- that previously you liked the idea of costly gasoline.  Of course unless one is taking something like Klonopin, he might not appreciate the full effects these economic times can have on anxiety.   

Oh yes --  I caught your column courtesy of RealClearPolitics.com.  It's been some time that I could afford $3.50 for your Sunday paper.

I write that you have almost caught up with LPR on our economic ills because I see no reference in your column to predatory free enterprise, as indicated by the 30% interest rates of banks on their credit cards.  This is the mark of Henry F. Potter, not George Bailey (referring to the business models of "It's a Wonderful Life.")  

We are not standing up to the Henry F. Potter self-aggrandizing  model; perhaps our leaders lack the will to do so.  

If Senator Obama stands for the change we need, he will follow the Geoerge Bailey model of cooperative free enterprise that respects the people,  and does not despise them.

The Wall Street Journal, commenting, June 27, on the Supreme Court's ruling upholding the right of individuals to bear arms said it was  "refreshing"  to see the Supreme Court use "first American principles" in affirming "a basic liberty."

Perhaps one day the media will affirm the principle indicated at the start of Federalist 57, mentioned in verse nearby, that this is not the land of the "ambitious sacrifice of the many to the aggrandizement of the few."  

This principle affirms, I believe, the concept of cooperative free enterprise.  

The economy is not, I fear, going to get better until the Wall Street analysts, business writers, and VIPs (Very Influential Pundits) recognize that we have departed the track of the economic model indicated by the Founders, for the older model… the aristocratic model where the few live in splendor and the many in misery.

And so, who is to be the candidate of cooperative free enterprise, Obama or McCain?  Or will they each, in his own way, continue away from the Founding model, backward to the older model: government of, by and for the insiders (and of course for their benefit).   

How much money have the Clintons gotten since 2000 -- more than $100 million? That, I guess, is what being a politician these days is all about. Federalist 57 advised our leaders to stay close to the people.  How close does $100 million place the Clintons to us.  Not very, I think.  

The label "Democrat" has become, I believe, as misleading as "liberal"  I look at the party and I see neo-aristocrats and illiberals.  Is Obama really going to change his party and then the way government operates?    The burden of proof rests heavy on his shoulders.

Is McCain interested in changing the Republican party to an assertive party, unafraid of attack from adversaries and media, willing to stand with the people?

Each glitzy fundraiser the candidates, both of them, attend answers the questions.  The answers are not happy for the  fundamental economic   American principle of cooperative free enterprise aiming for the common good.