Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Roger's 1998 Short Picks -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: virgil vancleave who wrote (12870)	8/16/1998 11:58:00 PM
From: Joey Two-Cents	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 18691

Sometimes I get the feeling the Slickster couldn't care less about being President and was pushed up to the top by his ambitious ruthless wife who he's getting even with. She's a pathetic, paranoid, power hungry hypocrite who may be as pathelogical as her husband. She's as pathetic as Mary Jo Buttafuco was, when Mary Jo was deffending Joey. Funny how everybody made fun of Mary Jo but no one dares to call Billary a fool for staying with the Slickster even though he has some 22 year sitting on his face while Billary and Chelsea are copping some Z's in the upstairs bedrooms 50 feet away. Pathetic, very pathetic. As for DELL, some analyst in Worth picked it to go to $ 40. At 50-60 x's earnings I think its a good short. That and AMZN. China market is down 6%, and Japan 2.5%. Tommorrow doesn't look like its going to be a fun day to be long.

To: virgil vancleave who wrote (12870)	8/17/1998 11:23:00 AM
From: Dr. Seuss	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 18691

Virgil, <<<funny thing is, most of us could care less if he porked her. she is probably pretty good in the sack anyway.>>> I don't know Virgil, she's kind of a chub. <<<the big question for clinton is a matter of integrity. lieing as the president is a bad thing. not very good for the public image.>>> I agree 100%. However, I think that the real crime here is that Star has spent near $50M of our money under the guise of investigating whitewater to prove the pres got a little nickie on the side. Really, did we need to prove that he lied about this? Or is it's Stars way (and his puppetiers) to take a chink at the pres because they couldn't nail him on the Whitewater BS? Pretty expensive way to cover ones ass at the taxpayers expense. I'm not defending Clinton, just trying to point out the evil of two lessors. Don't we have more important things to spend our time and money on? Dr.S.