Friday Morning Open Thread

I do not plan to write a separate post on Cramer on the Daily Show last night. Of course Jon Stewart exposed the farce that passes for journalism in our day, as his show has done for years now. This is merely the latest example. I do think Cramer may have done himself some good (while exposing CNBC to merited ridicule) by going in and taking the beating. But the reality is Jim Cramer is not a journalist and in some ways, it was unfair and unfortunate to lay the sins of today's "journalism" upon him. Stewart spent a lot of time arguing as if Cramer really held himself out as journalist. I respectfully disagree with that assessment. Cramer has always acted a fool. I doubt anyone expected him to "break" stories on financial shenanigans or even give objective analysis on financial news.

But NBC and its family of networks do hold themselves out to be journalists. And they are doing no journalism. Let me put it this way, who do you think is a worse "journalist," Jim Cramer or Brian Williams?

This is an Open Thread.

< Presidential Signing Statements And Health Insurance For Gay Partners | Does The President Get To Decide Who Will Be US Attorneys? >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Cramer is a clown (5.00 / 0) (#2)
    by lobary on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 10:22:27 AM EST
    No self-respecting investor should ever heed the advice heard on his CNBC Gong Show, but this clown brought that epic beatdown on himself by criticizing Stewart's legitimate criticism and then making an appearance on the show. I give Stewart credit for pulling no punches, but still... I wish that odious Santelli had been the one to get brutally pantsed.

    Brian Williams is worse (none / 0) (#104)
    by kmblue on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 06:27:01 PM EST
    for two reasons.

    One, more people watch him.

    Two, more people find him credible in spite of the evidence to the contrary.


    Agreed... (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by kdog on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 10:22:52 AM EST
    Cramer was never a journalist...he was an advertiser for Wall St. and nothing more...think Ron Popeil.

    so, you're saying... (5.00 / 2) (#12)
    by Turkana on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 10:33:17 AM EST
    that there's something wrong with ginsu knives???

    Or (5.00 / 3) (#19)
    by jbindc on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 10:39:03 AM EST
    "spray-on hair"?

    Points taken.... (5.00 / 3) (#21)
    by kdog on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 10:41:58 AM EST
    Ron Popeil actually sold something tangible...Cramer sells pipe dreams.

    Surprised by this thread (5.00 / 3) (#73)
    by JohnS on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 12:14:38 PM EST
    What Stewart appears to be alleging is that Cramer, CNBC, and most of the financial press (much like the press in general in the runup to the Iraq war) participated in a financial scam that eclipses Madoff's. That a number of hedge fund managers and brokerage houses may have been gaming the US financial system for their own benefit -- perhaps even helping to bring it down -- while financial journos assisted by either actively participating or by looking the other way.

    Laws may have been broken here. This is a huge story, made even huger that the press is being called out (again, Colbert did it the last time) by a comedian on a cable tv Comedy Network.


    Dude... (5.00 / 1) (#75)
    by kdog on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 12:22:59 PM EST
    as far as I'm concerned our hole financial system is a scam, and the US government serves as a protection racket for that scam.

    If you want honest work in an honest market, grow and sell reefer.


    So, what you're saying is (5.00 / 3) (#78)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 12:36:35 PM EST
    that we were told our financial system was sugar-coated, one hit quit, blue with red hairs dank but really it was just a zip of denney?

    Worse than that... (none / 0) (#79)
    by kdog on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 12:42:09 PM EST
    not even a zip of Denny sarc...it's Wizard Smoke.

    Wizard Smoke. Not even schwag. (none / 0) (#81)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 12:52:11 PM EST
    Hmm (5.00 / 3) (#4)
    by CST on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 10:26:38 AM EST
    Well - Jon Stewart did say that Cramer was in some ways a scapegoat for the entire CNBC programming agenda, and that the problem was much bigger than him.

    I don't know whether he is worse than Brian Williams or not.  I do know we have come to a sad state of affairs when you have to rely on Comedy Central for journalistic integrity.  That's not to say The Daily Show is fair and balanced.  But as Stewart said - they don't pretend to be anything other than what they are, and he has a knack for exposing people who don't otherwise get called out (Macaca anyone?).  In fairness to Cramer, his show is called "mad money" so he is not pretending either.  I think he took the heat more for being on CNBC than for anything else.

    Some of that video was pretty damning though.

    Sorry, but.... (5.00 / 3) (#59)
    by JohnS on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 11:38:44 AM EST
    Jim Cramer for years had a financial column in NY mag and is one of the founders of theStreet.com, along with Marty Peretz. He is indeed acting as a "journalist" on CNBC. And more, perhaps. Consider the video that Stewart unearthed where Cramer admits to manipulating stocks when he ran his hedge fund. How does that work? This overview is courtesy of TocqueDeville at Daily you know:

    A short seller will borrow stock (say at $10) and then sell it immediately and pocket the money ($10). Then, when the company's stock value plummets ($1), they buy it at its deflated value and pocket the difference ($9). This is perfectly legal. But there's another variety that takes place because of a flaw in the system.

    This is where a short seller sells stock that they haven't actually borrowed yet. There are loopholes that allow shorters to do this legally, but those loopholes have allowed the practice to be abused - which is illegal. Therefore, it is quite easy to fraudulently put on the open market shares of stock that do not, nor ever will, exist. These phantom shares do nothing but crash the value of a stock and therefore make legitimate short transactions highly profitable.

    Part of the process in the above scam (naked short selling) involves gossip, lies, class action suits, even SEC investigations to drive stock prices down into the toilet (after carefully building up shares just before you sell them) so the naked short seller can gain. The same way Judy Miller was used to sell aluminum tubes, you can use financial journalists to conveniently drive down the price of Apple by telling a few influential people in the media that Steve Jobs is on his deathbed, make insuinuations about a targeted firm's accounting practices.

    The question in Cramer's case may be, is he just another holy innocent, some poor schmuck journo who had no idea that certain crooked hedge fund managers may have been  manipulating the market. Did they use him and his influential show? Did they use CNBC?  Was he a willing participant?  By his own admission, he illegally manipulated the market to benefit his hedge fund when he ran it, and while, BTW, he was giving out free advice on theStreet.com. I know, innocent until proven guilty, but this stinks...

    If you think this is no big deal, consider that after Bear Sterns and Lehman Bros collapsed after what amounted to a hedge fund raid on the banks, short selling financial instutions was temporarily banned.


    I don't disagree with a lot of that (5.00 / 0) (#65)
    by CST on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 11:44:16 AM EST
    and I never said "no big deal", or that he is in any way a "holy innocent"

    Just that a show with the title "mad money" is hardly dis-honest advertising and that the problem is much bigger than him.

    I agree the video was very damning and I certainly don't feel bad for the guy.


    Glad you are not writing a separate post (5.00 / 0) (#7)
    by talesoftwokitties on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 10:30:44 AM EST
    These idiotic fake feuds are getting tired.  
    Cramer, Stewart, Coulter, Limbaugh - who gives a fig?  

    Not a fake fued. (5.00 / 1) (#11)
    by DFLer on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 10:32:38 AM EST
    Kramer stepped up. Check it out. The interviews revealed info beyond the idiotic "Rush-fueds"

    I disagree completely (5.00 / 3) (#13)
    by lobary on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 10:33:47 AM EST
    This "fake feud" is not about Cramer v. Stewart, this is about CNBC v. the viewing public.

    Did you not see Santelli's toxic rant blaming mortgage holders who were manipulated by the Masters of the Universe? That is what this is about.


    OK. Agree to disagree (5.00 / 2) (#30)
    by talesoftwokitties on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 10:48:20 AM EST
    I know it's not popular to not be on Jon Stewart's bandwagon.  I used to enjoy his show, but then I got cranky and tired of his schtick.  

    I've actually stopped watching the "news/entertainment" shows on MSNBC and CNBC and CS.  I didn't find them to be helpful or good for my blood pressure.

    Come to think of it, I'm not part of the "viewing public", so I should just kept my mouth shut!  Never mind!  ;-)


    Good for you. (5.00 / 1) (#45)
    by lobary on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 11:10:33 AM EST
    I really need to quit TV. Back when I was a lonely bachelor living alone I didn't even own one. Well, kinda. I had this crappy little black-and-white set that I stored in the bottom of my hall closet. It only came out when there was a big sporting event on that I couldn't miss. I usually went to a neighborhood bar to swig beer while watching my favorite teams fight it out for mediocrity.

    When is "not a separate post" (5.00 / 1) (#18)
    by oculus on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 10:36:00 AM EST
    actually "a separate post"?

    What btd really meant. (5.00 / 1) (#51)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 11:19:38 AM EST
    When BTD says he's not writing one. (none / 0) (#20)
    by talesoftwokitties on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 10:39:04 AM EST
    See the first sentence of his post.

    I don't think he did himself any good (5.00 / 1) (#8)
    by andgarden on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 10:30:45 AM EST
    He was completely exposed for what he is.

    I think he was exposed for what he is (none / 0) (#38)
    by Inspector Gadget on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 10:59:33 AM EST
    by his constant yelling and flailing. Wouldn't have been able to ever take his advice or know what his financial expertise was since I can't hear a word that is screamed at me.

    Did he have a viewing audience? One with money to invest?


    Yes he did (none / 0) (#42)
    by star on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 11:08:49 AM EST
    I made some good money  on listening to him. I dvr his show on a daily basis...he is only human and has made some mistakes over time - similar mistakes a lot of other financial GURUs have made.
    Cramer has a show just as Stewart has one and both SHOULD be free to handle their own whow however they see fit and so long as they have an audience for it.
    Jon stewart's real beef is that Cramer dared to talk against "The one".  This trend is making me real uneasy...
    and before I get bashed in this site.. I am a registerd democrate ..loved hillary..but voted for Obama and having some serious buyers remorse now..

    umm (5.00 / 3) (#48)
    by CST on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 11:17:39 AM EST
    you do know Stewart has called out Obama on various occasions, even likening him to Bush on a number of occasions, like during his inauguration or when talking about Iraq.  He also made fun of the "Obama love" shown by reporters on a number of occasions.  Yes, he is imperfect and clearly preferred Obama at times, but he still calls him out.

    But whatever, bash away.


    wow (none / 0) (#61)
    by CST on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 11:41:00 AM EST
    occasions 3 times in one paragraph.  I apologize for the terrible writing.  Re-reading that comment hurts my brain.  I guess that's why I'm an engineer.

    That 3rd one... (5.00 / 1) (#64)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 11:43:40 AM EST
    ...was hiding from me there for a minute.  Like a game of Where's Waldo.  :)

    It is Friday, CST--don't worry about it!


    Stewart Tried to Make It... (5.00 / 0) (#68)
    by santarita on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 11:47:48 AM EST
    clear that he was not targeting Cramer but CNBC, in general.  A lot of people have made money by following or not following Cramer's advice.

    He was exposed for what he is (none / 0) (#43)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 11:09:39 AM EST
    in the interview clips that Stewart has of him.

    but... but... (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by Turkana on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 10:31:36 AM EST
    keith is a rec list diarist at daily kos!!!1!11!11!1!

    MN closing arguments on at theuptake.org (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by magster on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 10:35:27 AM EST
    Franken lawyer is talking now (dry but compelling).  I hope the judges leniency towards Coleman's slipshod presentation ends today now that both sides have rested.

    And as to Cramer, I feel a little sorry for Cramer and have to consciously temper my sympathy by reminding myself of his complicity in recommending Bear Stearns to his viewers right before it went belly up.

    Yeah (5.00 / 1) (#17)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 10:35:57 AM EST
    I wonder if Stewart would ever lambaste Olbermann for his crap.  Doubt it.  They work for the same "people".

    Whoever thought Kramer was anything but an entertainer was just crazy.  Going after him is foolish.

    Hope someone someday goes after Stewart.  He's an entertainer too but people "rely" on him for news and his bias can be just as fierce and strong and powerfully manipulative as anyone else's.

    Hypocrites, the whole bunch of them.

    Stewart is under no obligation (5.00 / 2) (#23)
    by andgarden on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 10:43:11 AM EST
    to be fair. He doesn't even pretend that he's being fair.

    Neither did Cramer (none / 0) (#25)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 10:45:14 AM EST
    He did (5.00 / 1) (#29)
    by CST on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 10:48:12 AM EST
    on the Daily Show.

    Not really (none / 0) (#36)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 10:52:00 AM EST
    He didn't contradict (5.00 / 1) (#40)
    by CST on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 11:06:04 AM EST
    When being labeled as such.  He also called himself and CNBC fair game, and claimed he was trying to expose the system.

    I think the SEC would see a difference (5.00 / 1) (#32)
    by andgarden on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 10:49:41 AM EST
    between the two. I also think that Stewart had a very good point about CNBC's transparent behavior as a kind of infomercial for day trading.

    Did you see it? (5.00 / 4) (#24)
    by DFLer on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 10:45:00 AM EST
    Stuart lampooned Kramer. Kramer reacted as if it was an editorial comment, not a comedy sketch. Stuart invited Kramer on for rebuttal, explanation and further questions. It was a very good interview. Stuart is informed, prepared, intelligent and even compassionate.

    Stewart and Cramer (5.00 / 1) (#33)
    by DFLer on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 10:50:27 AM EST
    not Stuart and Kramer. I stand corrected...by myself. Corrected by myself, that is, not standing by myself.

    too much coffee

    back to work


    Jeez did you even watch the interview? (5.00 / 4) (#26)
    by lobary on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 10:45:59 AM EST
    Stewart has been very clear about the overarching point.

    This is about CNBC, not just Jim Cramer.


    I lied (none / 0) (#63)
    by DFLer on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 11:41:35 AM EST
    watching MN versus Michigan State

    Gophers holding their own against 3rd seed. Yay!


    I lied about working, not about the Daily show (none / 0) (#71)
    by DFLer on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 11:52:56 AM EST
    It IS Friday, as was pointed out, and the temp has risen above 15 diggers today. Yay

    MSU is the #1 seed. (none / 0) (#74)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 12:16:56 PM EST
    But, Go you Golden Gophers nonetheless!

    ain't gonna happen...too bad (none / 0) (#85)
    by DFLer on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 01:10:43 PM EST
    How is he a hypocrit? (5.00 / 4) (#27)
    by CST on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 10:46:45 AM EST
    He doesn't pretend to be anything other than a comedy show.  Anyone who relies on him for news alone is kidding themselves and he would be the first one to tell you that, and to admit his bias.  He even said to Jim Cramer they are both snake-oil salesman, only "The Daily Show" is labeled as such.  That makes him not a hypocrit.

    Also - he has gone after Olbermann, likening him to a leftist Hannity and comparing MSNBC to Fox News.


    Must Be (5.00 / 0) (#77)
    by squeaky on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 12:33:19 PM EST
    That he has said nice things about Obama. There is still a war on, didn't you know?

    Has Stewart ever lambasted (none / 0) (#82)
    by hairspray on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 12:55:29 PM EST
    Brian Williams?  that is the real question!

    Why Stewart is a hero to many (5.00 / 5) (#22)
    by lobary on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 10:42:36 AM EST
    "I understand you want to make finance entertaining, but it's not a f***ing game. When I watch that, I can't tell you how angry that makes me, because what it says to me is 'You all know.' You all know what's going on. You can draw a straight line from those shenanigans to the stuff that was being pulled at Bear and at AIG and all this derivative market stuff that was some weird Wall Street side bet."

    Why single out Brian Williams? (5.00 / 2) (#31)
    by santarita on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 10:48:21 AM EST
    Why not just compare NBC News as a whole with CNBC as a whole in terms of journalistic integrity and professionalism?  

    Cramer seems to be more like the Chris Matthews of CNBC.  Bar room chatter as news.  

    Stewart did a service last night.  There are people who do place a lot of faith and hope in Cramer and CNBC.  Stewart and the buzz created by the show may erode that faith and hope.

    Because Brian Williams (none / 0) (#34)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 10:51:28 AM EST
    is the anchor of NBC News and is horrible.

    Next question.


    Next question (none / 0) (#39)
    by lobary on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 11:04:56 AM EST
    Will the Gators win the NIT?

    How 'bout them Okie State Cowboys upsetting Blake Griffin and the Sooners!


    Auburn has not beaten (5.00 / 1) (#44)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 11:09:40 AM EST
    the Gators yet.

    They play tonight. If the Gators find a way to win tonight, they get to go to the Big Dance.


    Are we going to live blog this one, BTD? (none / 0) (#80)
    by jeffinalabama on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 12:47:47 PM EST
    Auburn is the hottest team in the SEC for the past 45 days, but the tourney is the tourney.

    I agree, the winner of this one makes the dance.


    Is "The Dance" the new term (none / 0) (#89)
    by oculus on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 02:17:07 PM EST
    for "March Madness" due to criticism of use of "Madness" to describe a basketball tournament?  Should dancers protest?

    Maybe it's just a southern aphorism (none / 0) (#91)
    by jeffinalabama on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 02:33:27 PM EST
    We've always called it the dance, as long as I can remember.

    Maybe it's just an Alabama thing, or an SEC thing.


    Ah. We Big-10ers learn (none / 0) (#93)
    by oculus on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 02:44:40 PM EST
    something new every day.

    Speak for yourself... (none / 0) (#96)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 02:51:02 PM EST
    ...this Big 10'er has been calling it the Big Dance for as long as he can remember (which is probably as long as he's been able to dribble a basketball).

    Is that so? And when did you (none / 0) (#97)
    by oculus on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 02:58:17 PM EST
    find out there are 11 teams in the Big 10?

    Hmmm... (none / 0) (#99)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 03:04:21 PM EST
    ...let's see--1990--nothing really exciting comes to mind to tie that memory to.  Although I do believe I did attend one of our first away games at Happy Valley.  May have been that year.  Or not--those are hazy memories.

    Did you know that there is an "11" on the Big Ten's logo?


    You're kidding me, I hope. (none / 0) (#100)
    by oculus on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 03:10:47 PM EST
    Nope... (5.00 / 1) (#101)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 03:14:40 PM EST
    Have a look at both sides of the "T".  There's a "1" on either side.

    Too funny, never noticed it before. (none / 0) (#102)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 03:16:10 PM EST
    "Dancing with the Gators"? (none / 0) (#94)
    by jbindc on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 02:45:14 PM EST
    That's it. I'm not reading the (none / 0) (#53)
    by oculus on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 11:21:22 AM EST
    biography my daughter gave me for Christmas!

    Bio of Brian Williams? (none / 0) (#55)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 11:22:24 AM EST
    You gotta be kidding me.

    Oops. Anderson Cooper's (none / 0) (#57)
    by oculus on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 11:26:21 AM EST
    "Dispatches from the Edge, a Memoir of War, Distaster, and Survival."  Probably won't read it either.  

    Isn't Anderson independently wealthy? (none / 0) (#58)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 11:34:36 AM EST
    Most likely (none / 0) (#60)
    by Inspector Gadget on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 11:40:07 AM EST
    since his mother certainly is abundantly wealthy.

    Is Cramer a Journalist? (none / 0) (#66)
    by santarita on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 11:44:59 AM EST
    I'm not sure.

    I've never thought of him as a journalist.  His show is more about pushing individual trades as opposed to reporting news.    I've always thought of him as a very funny stock broker.  Of course, I'd never follow his advice.  

    Stewart made it clear that he was attacking CNBC as a whole, where some of the personalities do consider themselves to be journalists.  Or at least they think of themselves that way.  

    CNBC, as a whole, to the extent that it reports on the news, reports on a very thin segment of the news - the news that affects (or may affect) the daily ups and downs of the market.  Heck, they even have a chart that shows intra-day trading.  To the extent that daily market activity is more based on emotion than reason, perhaps CNBC does a half-good job of reporting that.  Where they get into trouble is their reporting (and commentary) on news with longer term impact.  

    Since I may watch Brian Williams about once every other year by mistake, I guess I shouldn't comment on his journalistic prowess.  But comparing the anchor of network news show to a stock broker with a tv show, seems strange.  I was taking your post as more of an indictment of reporting and not anchoring.


    Best Line of the Show... (5.00 / 3) (#35)
    by santarita on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 10:51:47 AM EST
    was when Stewart asked why didn't CNBC say anything as the Wall Street gang was laying waste to their companies using  the hard earned money that people had put in 401ks for their private enrichment.

    I have never watched CNBC (5.00 / 4) (#41)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 11:08:31 AM EST
    I have never seen Jim Cramer's show.  Watching the clips of him during the interview that Stewart has.........talking about deceitfulness and creating activity and short selling with zeal, and the exposing that Stewart provides makes me so effing ticked while at the same time I have tears in my eyes.  I feel so totally betrayed even though we had pulled our money and Jim Cramer was only part of it....part of it though.  They destroyed my nation's prosperity and they destroyed our retirements......the f*cks!  I don't have to be a financial genius to have known years back that we were all being played and played hard, it doesn't make the admission any easier to bear though.

    Six prisoners in Canada... (5.00 / 2) (#49)
    by desertswine on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 11:19:06 AM EST
    used nail clippers to break out of prison.

    "It was something to do and we just kept at it."

    At least they had something to keep them busy. Kind of a hobby I guess.

    I love a good prison break... (none / 0) (#72)
    by kdog on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 11:58:26 AM EST
    Thanks d'wine...and they didn't even need Red to get 'em a rock hammer!  "In prison, a man will do pretty much anything to keep his mind occupied."

    Reminds me of a story my old man told me from his days at Rikers...he's playing cards for push-ups with his prison buddies in the rec room, and two guys with a rep of being a couple maroons start filing away at the bars on the window in the rec room right in plain sight.  The cons playing cards are laughing out loud at the guys...but sure enough they get through the window before any screws notice and escape.

    Of course, being maroons, they're caught within a few days back in their old neighborhoods and sent back to Rikers.


    Have been getting ready for a show (5.00 / 2) (#50)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 11:19:34 AM EST
    but desperately need a momentary break.......that clip wasn't exactly what I had in mind though. Have one dog that I anticipate is going to do very well but I'm not his breeder, just his owner.  I'm also taking two of his puppies though and I am responsible for them being here on planet earth.  The female I'm taking mostly to give myself more exposure to the world of hard knocks.  The male puppy though I picked even as a babe to be a dog that was going to "have something", you can't tell with certainty though with German Shepherds until they are two - particularly the males.  I'm so nervous though, what if the judges say he stinks and what I've learned and applied myself to would fill a thimble?  His name is Tenacious BTD too :)  Anyhow, back to loading, more grooming, making sure everyone's teeth are brilliant clean, all nails the perfect length, paperwork, collars, leads, doggy doodle pickup equipment, crates, food, brushes, blowers, portable chairs, just trying to get it all straight for the road.

    With a name like that (5.00 / 4) (#54)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 11:21:41 AM EST
    how can he lose? Uh, strike that. Here is what the dog should say if he is deprived of his merited victory -

    "You idiots. You do not know what you are doing."

    I expect that the dog can talk right?


    Well he talks back (none / 0) (#56)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 11:22:46 AM EST
    has since he was about 8 weeks old :)

    Speaking for himself only? (5.00 / 1) (#62)
    by sj on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 11:41:27 AM EST
    Toooo much (none / 0) (#70)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 11:51:34 AM EST
    Yup, he was alone, barking back at me when I told them ALL to hush or stop doing that.

    I, for one, will not argue (none / 0) (#84)
    by jeffinalabama on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 01:04:23 PM EST
    with Tenacious BTD. Except about SEC sports. And sometimes other stuff.

    Now if you had one named Darth Armando, or something like that, it would scare the pants off of everyone!


    But didn't you see (none / 0) (#90)
    by oculus on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 02:21:00 PM EST
    BTD's recent admission he is not a "pleasant person"?  Your dog is doomed!

    Indeed. (none / 0) (#92)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 02:36:34 PM EST
    Does your dog play well with others?

    I did not watch the show (none / 0) (#1)
    by jbindc on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 10:21:17 AM EST
    But from what I heard, Cramer sends out very good newsletters and writings, but on his show, he is there to really ENTERTAIN (not unlike the Daily Show, which some people take for actual news).

    Seems like these people would learn like they did with Colber - don't go on these shows unless you want to be humiliated.

    Just because TDS is a comedy show (5.00 / 6) (#5)
    by lobary on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 10:27:17 AM EST
    does not mean it can't be taken seriously. Stewart's interview was fantastic. He asked the kinds of questions NEVER voiced on the major networks.

    True (5.00 / 2) (#16)
    by jbindc on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 10:35:43 AM EST
    But many people (especially the under 35 crowd) rely on it for their ONLY news source, when it is first and foremost, a comedy show.

    So? (5.00 / 0) (#28)
    by lobary on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 10:48:03 AM EST
    This comedy show is often meatier in fifteen minutes than an an entire day's worth of CNN.

    Often, but not always (5.00 / 4) (#37)
    by Inspector Gadget on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 10:54:38 AM EST
    As long as people are savvy enough to know when the comedy has no meat, it's fine. Personally, I don't think anyone should rely on just one source for their world news.

    I agree (1.00 / 3) (#47)
    by star on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 11:16:38 AM EST
    I feel Cramer should not have given Stooges like Stewart the time of the day. I doubt if even 1 person has stood to gain anything from listening to Stewart..while Cramer has offered sound advice which helped people 'MAKE MONEY' espescially in collage campuses .. 'Mad money' made financial erporting entertaining and drew more audience..also Cramer's charitable Trust is worth mentioning.. I would like to know how much Stewart has really DONE for the poor and suffering in comparison..

    I don't hate Cramer or love John Stewart (5.00 / 2) (#76)
    by tigercourse on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 12:27:15 PM EST
    but come on. Cramer screwed up on the market royally (almost as much as my own financial "advisor"). And financial reporting shouldn't be "entertaining (I always found Cramer's style impossible to listen to), it should be informative and accurate.

    See the show (none / 0) (#6)
    by DFLer on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 10:30:26 AM EST

    It's in three parts, so I've linked to the vid list page.

    It was something else, I tell ya. I agree with BTD's comments re the whole deal.

    Part of the video (none / 0) (#9)
    by lobary on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 10:30:51 AM EST

    Watch it if you haven't seen it.

    Neithers worth a click, view, (none / 0) (#14)
    by SOS on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 10:34:28 AM EST
    or unique hit. But I'll do it anyway.

    It's far easier (none / 0) (#46)
    by bocajeff on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 11:16:26 AM EST
    Being a critic than being a creator. Having said that, all is fair in love and war and Cramer is taking the punches.

    Two rich, white, Jewish liberals (yes, Cramer is somewhat of a leftist on social issues) discussing the issues of the day...

    Hmm (5.00 / 8) (#52)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 11:19:51 AM EST
    the two of them being Jewish is relevant how?

    Hey kdog (none / 0) (#83)
    by jbindc on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 12:56:18 PM EST
    I saw that... (none / 0) (#86)
    by kdog on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 01:19:38 PM EST
    if things stay on their current course the only people left on Forbes' list will be drug kingpins:)  

    I'd be happy for him if not for the violent brurtal way they go about distributing their product...the nature of prohibition I guess.

    He should cut a check to the US treasury in gratitude...our government makes it all possible for him.


    Stewart VS Cramer (none / 0) (#88)
    by Bluesage on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 02:16:41 PM EST
    I guess I just don't understand the point of talking about a has been and a never has been.
    There are far too many uninformed and poorly informed people and neither of these guys does anything to remedy that situation. I don't know much about CNBC but MSNBC is pretty much just a sick joke played on the gullible and ignorant daily.  

    whatever you say (5.00 / 0) (#103)
    by DFLer on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 06:15:41 PM EST
    but Jon Stewart of the Comedy channel, no connection to MSNBC or CNBC, is quite well informed, imo

    Isn't this lovely.... (none / 0) (#95)
    by kdog on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 02:50:42 PM EST
    FBI tells 2 out 3 people requesting info under the Freedom of Information Act that they can't find the documents they want.  Link

    Why have a FOI Act?  Or better yet, why have an FBI that forgets who they work for?  Disband...along with the CIA, they are beyond repair through reform.

    Breaking (none / 0) (#98)
    by jbindc on Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 03:00:20 PM EST