  I think I make it obvious those days I spring the buck and the half-hour to read the WSJ: I talk about it. Some of my posts are mundane, ordinary muckety-muck such as Wednesday's pejorative look at fat people. However, on days like today, I devote my space to something more substantial. For example, today I want to talk about Playboy.
If I were Joe Institutional Investor right now, I would be calling my trader and telling them to get me the hell out of Google. I mean, their lawyers and bankers have tried so hard to keep these guys out of the press so they don't say anything stupid before the IPO, and the founders go out and interview with Playboy! They've potentially breached the quiet period surrounding an IPO, which could set the offering back months. I can just imagine every meeting these guys have with their IPO team: Some stiff banker/lawyer/accountant: "Um, could you, um, please pay attention?
Remember what we were talking about? Thirty-six bil lion? Remember? " Founder guy (bouncing one of those annoying balls against the wall): "Yeah, whatever. Hey, does anyone else want a frappucino? " I'm imagining Zoolander, only with computers instead of being really, really good-looking. I also want to talk about that d*ckhead, Eliot Spitzer. * Never has anyone, in my memory, made as obvious a run for governor off the backs of Journal readers by pandering to those who buy the Post . His lawsuit against Grasso is ludicrous. Ludicrous! At worst, he is a power hungry politician so bent on higher office that he will do absolutely anything to get there - while thinking he's really too powerful to bother to cover it up.
At best, he is guilty of hating the player instead of the game. Tru. *Please excuse my language. Which reminds me, at my interview last week, one of the lawyers said this to me: "Will my language offend you, if I am candid? Such-and-such was so crappy! " Honest. I'm not making this up. 
