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.

Technology Stocks : INPR - Inprise to Borland (BORL) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Charles Hughes who wrote (1314)	10/7/1998 6:04:00 PM
From: Cube	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 5102

Chaz, You are unbelievable. ROFLMAO!!!!! What really gets me about you Clinton apologists is how much credit you give him for this economy that we have enjoyed since 1994. The real heroes are the average American working stiff and entrepreneur who made the economy what it is. Clinton's first 2 years were concluded with the unprecedented sweep of democrats from both houses of the congress. The republicans wisely stopped any more of Clinton's leftist ideas, and let business do its thing. I will give Clinton credit for understanding that he had to change from a far left liberal to a fiscal conservative after the 1994 congressional sweep. I'm also curious how the republicans forced Clinton to commit 11 felonies as per the Starr referral. I know the republicans are a powerful lot, but maybe you can explain to me how they managed to force Clinton to exploit a 21 year old in the oval office while talking to members of congress and while heads of state like Yasser Arafat were waiting to see him. Cube

To: Charles Hughes who wrote (1314)	10/7/1998 7:01:00 PM
From: Jerry Whlan	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 5102

One word: Republicrats. Vote libertarian.

To: Charles Hughes who wrote (1314)	10/8/1998 7:47:00 AM
From: R. Martenson	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 5102

If the CEO of a company with huge cash flows tanks the company by spending too much should we fire the employees for working too hard or the CEO for spending everything we work for? If a company (country) can't manage money, and has a lowsy business plan, can't produce efficiently, can't compete, and takes all of it's capital and gives it to management should we send it more money to keep the books looking good (IMF). If you give credit to the CEO for successes, does he automatically get a free ride for the failures?