Wow!

Holy shit this interview is intense, basically Crossfire levels of 'in your face'. I'll give Cramer credit for being brave enough to take it but he really did need to be called out. I get the sense he knows it too.

He just sits there and takes it, has no defense for his and his peers manipulative and misleading actions and hand in the information they provide about economic decisions. Video on The Daily Show website tomorrow (aired tonight) or you can stream a small version that plays just fine here....

http://crooksandliars.com/john-amato/jon-stewart-creams-jim-cramer-daily-sho

[Edited on March 13, 2009 at 2:08 AM. Reason : -]

3/13/2009 2:07:55 AM

This episode (coupled with a recent rereading of "America: The Book") has made me remember what TDS is really about.

The show still has a liberal bias. No doubt about it. But more importantly, their job is to mock the media. And I realize that again.

So I apologize, with some slight qualification, to Comedy Central, Jon Steward, TDS, and the Colbert Report. I've been too harsh. This episode reformed me again.

3/13/2009 2:56:56 AM

It is crazy intense.

Stewart caught him in a lie right off the bat, and Cramer was just like, "Uhhh..." for the rest of the interview.

My favorite point of the interview was that Cramer and some folks like him are really, really smart, and they know so much, and the crap they put on television is so dumb that it's irresponsible.

(I'm not sure I can make the specific leap that CNBC and the media in general were wantonly complicit--in an organized way--in the fraud on Wall Street. But they didn't exactly help matters out much.)

[Edited on March 13, 2009 at 4:41 AM. Reason : ]

3/13/2009 4:31:11 AM

I have been waiting for this interview for a long time...and it delivered

uncut and unsensored here

http://blog.indecisionforever.com/2009/03/13/jon-stewart-and-jim-cramer-the-extended-daily-show-interview/

[Edited on March 13, 2009 at 5:23 AM. Reason : .]

3/13/2009 5:06:00 AM

I don't wanna be too eager about this, but I think this interview is a top TV moment of decade.

People are pissed, and the folks at TDS gave us what we needed.

Awkward as hell while you're watching but after it's like, "Thank God. Finally."

3/13/2009 5:34:27 AM

There were some moments where Cramer obviously wanted to say "that's the network, and that's not the way it should be getting marketed" (for example, when Jon mentioned the show "Fast Money" having a misleading title), but he obviously didn't think it wise to bash his own network either.

He WAS doing poorly, but it seemed like Jon kept switching the issue to make things seem worse. He'd make it personal with clips of Cramer and then after Cramer tried (and kind of failed) to explain himself, Jon would mention that it's not specifically a personal matter and mention something CNBC is doing.



Also, on an unrelated note of curiosity, does anyone happen to remember what Cramer was shouting about when he did his whole "They're IDIOTS!" (or something like that) rant about a year ago (maybe older, maybe a lot older, maybe a little less old)? ...for some reason I can't seem to find any articles or videos of it. Everything on google seems to be getting taken up by the Cramer vs Stewart hype-machine, or something on Cramer's thoughts about the bailout.

3/13/2009 7:19:50 AM

personally, I don't get how people take their advice from shit like this in the first place

I was working at Home Depot corporate after getting my MBA when there was buzz about one of my classmates (who is a huge douchebag who tries to get rich off of stupid ideas and still hasn't had a real pay check in 3 years) getting a call through on air. so I decided to take a listen

turns out, he was calling about home depot's green initiative (which, like everything else at home depot, is half baked and poorly executed)

based on that call alone (because he had been down on home depot before this on the same show), kramer gave it a buy (with one of his shock jock soundclips...seriously, WTF armerica)

this was in early 2007...the year home depot went 52 straight weeks with negative comp sales

3/13/2009 8:15:25 AM

Quote :

"personally, I don't get how people take their advice from shit like this in the first place"

If you want to see some of the dumbest of the dumb, type FAS or FAZ into your google finance search and look at the message board.

A quick sample:

Quote :

" nabb...@gmail.com View profile Translated (View Original) Bitten up big time now what? I started to buy at 70 and now average it down to 55. Holding 4500 shares!!! I am down $15 per share and total loss 67k+ I don’t know what to do here… one side I am thinking it can go back but looking at this crazy move in banking sector I just see hell ahead of me…. I wish I could hold on to 25k shares of FAS which I sold this morning at 4.10 hoping FAZ will take over from here… which it did but wrong side… More options Mar 12, 10:17 pm From: nabb...@gmail.com Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2009 19:17:55 -0700 (PDT) Local: Thurs, Mar 12 2009 10:17 pm Subject: Bitten up big time now what? Reply | Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Report this message | Find messages by this author Bitten up big time now what? I started to buy at 70 and now average it down to 55. Holding 4500 shares!!! I am down $15 per share and total loss 67k+ I don’t know what to do here… one side I am thinking it can go back but looking at this crazy move in banking sector I just see hell ahead of me…. I wish I could hold on to 25k shares of FAS which I sold this morning at 4.10 hoping FAZ will take over from here… which it did but wrong side… "

Followed later by this:

Quote :

" bo5an...@insightbb.com View profile Translated (View Original) More options Mar 12, 10:31 pm From: Bo5an...@insightbb.com Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2009 19:31:42 -0700 (PDT) Local: Thurs, Mar 12 2009 10:31 pm Subject: Re: Bitten up big time now what? Reply | Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Report this message | Find messages by this author While looking at the charts I dont understand what you noticed to drive you to buy at $70.00, maybe the fact that it went up from 66.00 to 70.00 in about 30 minutes and the momentum seemed good but you were still looking at a brick of resistance at 70.00... Well the good thing is that you averaged down but you should have done it when it got down to mid 30's tomorrow and then ride it slowly to 60.00, so it will get to 60.00 sometimes this time next week so be patient. Thats what I would do at least but I am no pro... "

Unreal. These fools have no idea what the fuck they are doing and are using the stock market as a pure gamble play with no safety strategy. I get Jon Stewart being pissed off at Cramer, but people with even a 1/10th of a clue aren't watching him, its the people like I quoted that are watching him, and do you really give a shit if guys like that lose their roll?

3/13/2009 8:51:44 AM

Quote :

"its the people like I quoted that are watching him, and do you really give a shit if guys like that lose their roll"

well, 1) the first part of your sentence isn't exactly true. I've read in multiple places just in the past week (I guess maybe in response to the beginning of TDS vs. CNBC) that CNBC is a staple in all major banks and investment firms. It's on TV 24 hours a day, always in the background. It's probably safe to say that many of these people who live and breath stock-trading, and do it for a living and listen to CNBC all day probably have it on at home too when Cramer is on. So, no, it's not just the ignorant at-home day-traders listening to him.

2) even if "guys like that" lose their money, they're still trading on public exchanges and therefore effecting everyone else on that exchange

3) the larger point is the CNBC and Cramer, by the very nature and design of the network, are part of the 24-hour cable/internet in-your-face media industry who, in the end, cares more about entertainment than dispensing good investment advice and solid financial analysis. However, they market themselves (and they market Cramer) as the end-all be-all of financial news, and therefore people trust them and don't realize they're just being played for advertising. CNBC is nothing but cheerleaders when the market goes up, encouraging "buy, buy, buy", then doomdayers when the market starts tanking. There's nothing forward-looking - they're just reacting to whatever the prevailing wind is.

3/13/2009 9:39:06 AM

Quote :

"well, 1) the first part of your sentence isn't exactly true. I've read in multiple places just in the past week (I guess maybe in response to the beginning of TDS vs. CNBC) that CNBC is a staple in all major banks and investment firms. It's on TV 24 hours a day, always in the background. It's probably safe to say that many of these people who live and breath stock-trading, and do it for a living and listen to CNBC all day probably have it on at home too when Cramer is on. So, no, it's not just the ignorant at-home day-traders listening to him."

It's on because traders want to get breaking news the second it happens because a reporter typically beats bloomberg or any written word with the info they need. I'll assure you that traders at those firms are not paying a lick of attention to Cramer. Just go to TBP and find how much hate there is for CNBC and it's rampant cheerleading (even from Barry himself). There is even a guy that has his handle as CNBC Sucks.

Quote :

"3) the larger point is the CNBC and Cramer, by the very nature and design of the network, are part of the 24-hour cable/internet in-your-face media industry who, in the end, cares more about entertainment than dispensing good investment advice and solid financial analysis. However, they market themselves (and they market Cramer) as the end-all be-all of financial news, and therefore people trust them and don't realize they're just being played for advertising. CNBC is nothing but cheerleaders when the market goes up, encouraging "buy, buy, buy", then doomdayers when the market starts tanking. There's nothing forward-looking - they're just reacting to whatever the prevailing wind is."

I really feel for the people that walked into mortgage brokers and got smoked on no doc and liar loans by promises that "everything will be ok and you can refinance in 2 years if it isn't". I don't have too much concern or care for people that eat media hype. Buyer beware has long been a part of capitalist culture. If they haven't learned by now that TV shows are out to make profit, I don't know if they can be helped.

3/13/2009 9:55:17 AM

Well although definitely an indictment of CNBC and it's portrayal of being an informative investment and financial site, I thought he hit pretty hard the whole concept of short selling and manipulating the market....the big series of gains and 'side bet' as he so called it playing with people's investment was really strong and timely. Kudos to him.

3/13/2009 9:55:46 AM

CNBC (and cnbc.com to an ever greater extent) are sources of a wealth of financial/business information. Cramer is even a pretty smart and savvy guy, I think. His show, however, is strictly entertainment (I don't see how anyone could find it entertaining, but whatever). There is a bunch of crap on CNBC, too...you just have to have enough sense to glean the valuable information when they present it.

3/13/2009 10:52:03 AM

Some more abject stupidity at work. I'm taking a look at TWC technicals after so much talk in Tech Talk about switching to U-Verse and how every time in the past few months I was in TWCs office many people were returning boxes. And I see this comment out of the corner of my eye from the message board

Quote :

" RANAJEE From: RANAJEE <rana...@gmail.com> Is it still a good entry point for TWC? Looks pretty tempting. Do you think it will go back to 60s again soon ??? "

This dumb motherfucker is oblivious to the reverse 1:3 split they just did to carve out TWX.

Simply amazing.

3/13/2009 11:25:02 AM

Quote :

"Well although definitely an indictment of CNBC and it's portrayal of being an informative investment and financial site, I thought he hit pretty hard the whole concept of short selling"

Bitching about short-selling is the new "seriousness." I get the gripes about market manipulation, but short-selling has a legitimate place in the market - putting out information that a stock is over-valued. Bitching about that is basically bitching about traders putting information out into the market - in other words, something only the clueless and the disingenuous do.

I thought the lies Stewart caught Cramer in were pretty amusing - but the fact is, I think Cramer put up very little of a defense because he pretty much knew this was an ambush about a minute in, once the first clip started rolling. No way Stewart was going to let Cramer make his case - he was there basically as a punching bag.

Which is fine and all, but then Stewart does his whole, "Oh, but I'm a comedian" thing when held to task on it. Exactly how he handled the whole Crossfire debacle. You know what? If you're going to be all about seriously taking people to task, A) Do it routinely (I can't even count the number of times Stewart was slobbering all over McCain's knob before he actually got the nomination, or his slavish deference to his more liberal guests), and B) Don't go hiding behind this, "Oh, but I'm a comedian" bullshit when someone actually fires back.

If there's one point Cramer actually made before he went on, it was in how much of a routine TDS runs - run a clip devoid of context, make silly sounds and faces, wait for audience applause. Cramer actually nailed Stewart pretty badly on that one.

3/13/2009 11:29:31 AM

^^ i think that belongs in the Stock Market thread....

Quote :

"If there's one point Cramer actually made before he went on, it was in how much of a routine TDS runs - run a clip devoid of context, make silly sounds and faces, wait for audience applause. Cramer actually nailed Stewart pretty badly on that one."

That was Scarborough, not Cramer. Scarborough has the critical analysis skills of an ant. He's the one making fun of Stewart and his audience for Pavlovian responses? Look in the mirror much, Joe? Scarborough has effectively trained himself to immediately and without thinking defend Bush and Co. in any way possible and blame Obama and the Democrats for any and all of the country's problems.

3/13/2009 12:07:40 PM

Quote :

"That was Scarborough, not Cramer."

Touche. Point still stands, though, regardless of the source.

3/13/2009 1:24:22 PM

just watched the uncensored/uncut one - i thought jon handed it to him pretty well but i expected more from the responses on here - he took it pretty well also

3/13/2009 1:42:45 PM

personally, i was turned off by stewarts bloviating

[Edited on March 13, 2009 at 1:46 PM. Reason : just saw the one clip not the "uncut" version]

3/13/2009 1:45:25 PM

I don't think bloviating would be the proper term to describe that exchange OReilley.

3/13/2009 1:53:06 PM

^^^ yeah, well it's strange and jarring how soft-spoken Cramer can be when he's not on Mad Money. I think his interviews when not on his show just further emphasize how much theater he puts into his show and that he's as much actor as he is financial advisor

3/13/2009 2:05:11 PM

Quote :

"If you're going to be all about seriously taking people to task, A) Do it routinely (I can't even count the number of times Stewart was slobbering all over McCain's knob before he actually got the nomination, or his slavish deference to his more liberal guests), and B) Don't go hiding behind this, "Oh, but I'm a comedian" bullshit when someone actually fires back."

Oh give me a fucking break, you sound just like Tucker Carlson. Rushing in to take shots against the left just because you can Dr. Steve? It was like someone sounded a dinner bell and you come a' running.

I don't see Stewart hiding behind the 'I'm a comedian bullshit', he was saying that his show on a Comedy network doesn't carry the same informative responsibility to the mass public as a NEWS network is supposed to. It's pretty sad when he has to bridge the gap time to time to expose some of the bullshit....when people fire back about him not taking the 'opportunity' to take EVERYONE to task, they don't realize the only people he's taking to task beyond his routine are people from news network channels (crossfire/cnn, cramer/cnbc) that completely fail at what they do.

3/13/2009 2:08:28 PM

Quote :

"I don't see Stewart hiding behind the 'I'm a comedian bullshit', he was saying that his show on a Comedy network doesn't carry the same informative responsibility to the mass public as a NEWS network is supposed to."

DrSteve has a point in that around the time of the whole Crossfire/Tucker Carlson incident, Jon Steward did use the "I come on after a show about talking puppets" line to deflect criticism from himself. He would quite regularly make very political, harsh, and insightful views, but when he was called upon to defend them or when someone would say "how can you say things like that, you know people take you seriously", he would just say "hey, i'm on a Fake News show. my opinion doesn't mean anything".

However, that was probably 3 years ago by now. At least since they started covering the 2008 election, I did not hear Jon use that defense any more. He seems to have accepted his role as a major media commentator and does not try to hide behind the "i'm just a comedian" curtain (except when appropriate, like when Scarborough says something ridiculous like "ok Jon, if you're so smart, why don't you tell us where the market will be in 5 years")

3/13/2009 2:22:25 PM

watching the full episode on tds.com

3/13/2009 2:25:22 PM

wowowowow

"i want the Jim Cramer on CNBC to protect me from THAT Jim Cramer"

3/13/2009 2:35:43 PM

"Roll 212"

[video clip]

"Stammer stammer stammer"

"Roll 216"

[video clip]

OWNED

3/13/2009 2:40:47 PM

i'm not sure we need real-time commentary..... we've all seen it.


I was surprised at those clips Jon showed. i think they were important and relevant, but they seemed like quite an ambush. Not necessarily an unfair ambush, because Cramer should be held accountable for them, but just seems like there is plenty of stuff he has said on CNBC or on Mad Money that Jon could use to make similar points

3/13/2009 2:43:32 PM

Eh?

He was showing those clips to establish that Cramer can be sane and level headed and "know" what is going on. It did serve a double purpose to show that the guy can be nefarious, but the broader point was to prove the he had a clue about how markets worked without clanging gongs and throwing toys around his set.

3/13/2009 2:49:04 PM

that may be true.
But the main thing I took away from those cut-aways (from 2006, i thing?) was that Cramer was actively coaching whoever he was talking to on ways to game the system, by taking advantage of unsustainable trends, or by spreading rumors, etc.

So, while they did show that Cramer can be level-headed and is in-the-know, they also blindsided Cramer with acknowledging at best unethical, at worst illegal activities that he apparently previously thought no one would see (he said in the video something like "good thing this won't be going out on TV")

3/13/2009 2:56:54 PM

^ that's how i saw it too

3/13/2009 3:01:01 PM

i thought him coaching about how to spread false info about apple was pretty terrible (and i had actually read about that fairly recently on some blog).

3/13/2009 3:17:52 PM

Quote :

"So, while they did show that Cramer can be level-headed and is in-the-know, they also blindsided Cramer with acknowledging at best unethical, at worst illegal activities that he apparently previously thought no one would see (he said in the video something like "good thing this won't be going out on TV")"

But those clips made their way around the internet months (year?) ago. I can imagine your average TDS watcher isn't going to be aware of those clips, so yeah, you could say he was blind sided by that. But I think that was just a secondary effect of what Stewart was trying to do.

3/13/2009 3:18:39 PM

Probably the best NEWS SEGMENT on the economic crisis yet.

3/13/2009 3:31:40 PM

What I really took away from the whole thing as the most important point seems to be different than what a lot of your arguments are about.

To me, the point is Cramer, as well as many of the people that appear on CNBC as either anchors or guests are fully aware of how the markets REALLY work. How dark and nefarious it can be, and usually is. But at the same time, advising the average American who does NOT know these things, using conventional wisdom about stocks, instead of what they know as the real thing.

Example: Cramer urges people to buy XYZ with his "BUY BUY BUY" button and Bull flashing across the screen, using arguments like "good fundamentals". Meanwhile, he knows that in all likelihood XYZ is just as likely to go down tomorrow due to some asshole hedge fund manipulating the futures market and shorting the stock. Now every poor idiot who listened to him lost money for something they can't begin to comprehend, and he knows it. Bottom line: He's advising people without proper knowledge of the stock market to risk their money, knowing fully that his advise is based on only a fraction of what might actually move the stock. More bottom line: He knows what he's doing is wrong, or at least, not really positive.

Quote :

"i want the Jim Cramer on CNBC to protect me from THAT Jim Cramer"

I think it actually boils down to that quote. If Cramer really wanted to help the American public, he would be on TV talking about the real shit going down.

[Edited on March 13, 2009 at 4:06 PM. Reason : s]

3/13/2009 4:01:38 PM

the unedited version on the website is MUCH better than the 8 minutes from the 1100 show. if you haven't seen that one you should check it out

3/13/2009 4:39:30 PM

Quote :

" Oh give me a fucking break, you sound just like Tucker Carlson. Rushing in to take shots against the left just because you can Dr. Steve? It was like someone sounded a dinner bell and you come a' running."

Good lord you have turned into a hyper-partisan asshole since this election. I'm not even going to dignify the rest of your remarks with a response - you literally have turned into someone who given the slightest criticism of his side will rush out shouting and name-calling. It's getting fucking ridiculous already.

Come back when you actually have a real point to make.

(I mean, Jesus Christ, where do you even come up with that from what I wrote?)

[Edited on March 13, 2009 at 4:52 PM. Reason : Fail.]

3/13/2009 4:50:56 PM

Quote :

"I think it actually boils down to that quote. If Cramer really wanted to help the American public, he would be on TV talking about the real shit going down."

And I think that's where Stewart really had a point. Stewart does have Cramer pretty much dead-to-rights on the whole hypocrisy issue, and the fact that Cramer makes no real attempt to acquit himself on the matter, but instead tried to babble about how, "I've been telling Congress to crack down on shorting and market manipulation" sound like even more disingenuous bullshit. The part where he rips into Cramer for being a doe-eyed idealist re: CEOs coming onto his show and lying to him was pretty spectacular as well.

Here's the thing - Stewart had some obvious biases in his soliloquies toward Cramer - the idea that somehow making money through financial instruments - investments - is not a legitimate way of making money compared to "making stuff." Which, were Cramer not massively disingenuous and actually inclined to defend his own profession, would have warranted a response. Instead we get Cramer's own blubbering about how he's leading the way rallying against such abuses as the ones he was promoting and whining about how his close personal CEO friends have hoodwinked him on his show, and despite the clear ambush format of the interview, makes me come away with very little sympathy for Cramer.

[Edited on March 13, 2009 at 5:00 PM. Reason : .]

3/13/2009 4:59:30 PM

I didn't care for the interview. I've always loved Stewart's interviews, because he can usually call the guest out while still cracking jokes and everyone leaves smiling, including me. This was just a raping. I didn't laugh once(well, the earlier jokes were great), and worse, I was feeling sorry for Cramer. His poor voice goes up in pitch when he gets upset.

3/13/2009 4:59:54 PM

^watch the unedited version on the website. the edited version that aired portrays the interview as much more uncomfortable than it actually was.

[Edited on March 13, 2009 at 5:09 PM. Reason : .]

3/13/2009 5:07:45 PM

^^ well, like he said (at least in the long version) "this is not a fucking game".
This particular issue seems to have gotten him more visibly upset than most other issues he has guests on the show for.

3/13/2009 5:16:10 PM

AppleInsider has transcribed some of his The Street video
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/09/03/13/jon_stewart_exposes_apple_stock_manipulation.html

Quote :

"In the clip filmed for The Street, Cramer notes that this practice of "fomenting the market" is "actually blatantly illegal, but when you have six days and your company may be in doubt because you are down, I think it is really important to foment." Cramer specifically cited the example of stirring up rumors that Apple's iPhone would be rejected by both AT&T and Verizon Wireless, and that it wouldn't be ready to demonstrate in time for Macworld in 2007. Apple's stock performance leading up to the 2007 unveiling of the iPhone made it a prime candidate for foment and manipulation, as media figures spewing misinformation could easily cause temporary, panic-induced drops that manipulators could then use to profit dramatically from. Other companies, including Microsoft, had seen so little change in their stock price since the 2000 bubble popped that they simply couldn't be manipulated as easily. Fomenting the market against Apple, however, "is very easy, because the people who write about Apple want that story. And you can claim that it is credible because you spoke to someone at Apple, because Apple isn’t in [a position to comment on unannounced products]. It is an ideal short." Along with Apple, Cramer also cited RIM as a company that was easy to beat down with false information. "It might cost me $15 to $20 million to knock RIM down," he said, " but it would be fabulous because it would beleaguer all the moron longs [investing in RIM’s success]." "Who cares about the fundamentals?" Cramer said, "Research in Motion just blew out the quarter. But look what people can do. That’s a fabulous thing. The great thing about the market is that it has nothing to do with the actual stocks." "It’s important to get people talking about it as if something is wrong with RIM. Then you would call the [Wall Street] Journal and talk to the bozo reporter on Research in Motion and you would feed that Palm has got a killer it is going to give. These are the things that you must do on a day like today. And if you are not doing it, maybe you shouldn’t be in the game." Cramer added, "I think it’s important for people to realize that the way that the market really works is to have that nexus of: hit the brokerage houses with a series of orders that can push it down, then leak it to the press, and then get it on CNBC; that’s also very important. And then you’ll have a vicious cycle down. It’s a pretty good game. It can be played for a percent or two.""

3/13/2009 5:24:45 PM

Quote :

"Good lord you have turned into a hyper-partisan asshole since this election. "

That's a laugh coming from you man....how are you any different? (sans the snazzy italics emphasis and gratuitous displays of manufactured wit and parts of speech to try to belittle the poster you are responding to)

3/13/2009 6:39:07 PM

*yawn*

Quote :

"Come back when you actually have a real point to make."

3/13/2009 6:43:42 PM

just watched the regular show and saw the introduction: "Brawl Street: Get Ready to Buy Low! And Sell Die"
http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=220534&title=intro-brawl-street-get-ready-to

once again, its satire at its best and shows that TDS is pretty much the only cable show that has a real perspective on what all these manufactured "media wars" are about

3/13/2009 6:59:24 PM

i didnt laugh once and felt bad for cramer

i occasionally watch him but am not dumb enough to let what his says influence investment strategies.

people who dont take him for entertainment purposes shouldnt watch him

3/13/2009 7:01:27 PM

Quote :

"i didnt laugh once and felt bad for cramer"

Why would you laugh, it wasn't funny? Stewart seemed genuinely mad, there wasn't any routine in there.

3/13/2009 7:23:32 PM

I mean, i did kinda feel bad for him, but it was very fleeting. The high pitched rambling and repetition was kinda enjoyable to watch. He looked like he wanted to jump out of his skin and slither away. The uncensored version was great too. I loved the strategically place f-bombs. John Stewart showed some real nuts, but how can you blame him. He has to constantly be funny on a weekly basis. Shits bound to get old.

Anyway A+
would watch again

3/13/2009 7:33:45 PM

poor choice of words

guess what i'm trying to say is that i was turned off by the way in which stewart tried to pin cramer into a corner. Yeah he may have some hypocritical viewpoints in his show, but it is mostly for entertainment purposes.

i would have much preferred stewart to have pinned down all of the financial commentators in general instead of making cramer the scapegoat.

i know of no one who ever bases a decision of listening to cramer. i think he is just getting thrown under the bus because of his unpredictable personality that he portrays on his show.

just imo

3/13/2009 7:35:44 PM

Quote :

"i would have much preferred stewart to have pinned down all of the financial commentators in general instead of making cramer the scapegoat."

are you serious?

did you even watch the video or pay attention at all???

3/13/2009 7:43:28 PM

yeah i'm serious

he calls out cnbc while taking shots at cramer.

cnbc is not the only network that pulls this shit everyday. cramer is just the most noted because of his personality. i give cramer credit for even going on the show knowing that he was gonna get nailed the the cnbc cross

3/13/2009 7:49:28 PM

I guess what he is saying jwb is that maybe John shouldn't have been so merciless with the dude. He gave him no outlet and was pretty much on his goat from the very beginning to the end. Cramer was repeatedly trying to agree with him and pass the blame to a wider spectrum. Maybe he was being a bit reckless in how he was trying to validate himself, but really John attacked him full force. And that is where the imaturity lies on Stewarts part. Theres only so much embarrasing you can do before you start looking like an asshole yourself.

[Edited on March 13, 2009 at 7:51 PM. Reason : ^^]

3/13/2009 7:50:40 PM