Update: without going into details, I am friends with one of the on-air reporters / pundits at CNBC. As it stands now, Cramer is still planning to go on.
Dude’s got to salvage his credibility. If he can make it through the interview without getting totally embarrassed by Stewart, he should come out of it okay.
Nope. You pretty got it I’d say. I was merely pointing out that Santelli has been calling the banking institutions “losers” for quite some time, too.
Ummm I don’t mean to make you look stupid or anything but:
^ But that’s not aired before every episode as Fiddle would like to see, right?
No, just after. I say this because I’m kicking myself for not mentioning it in post 23. 
I also never heard Jon mention anything about Rick’s stance on the TARP bailout. He just implied that Rick was for it, without ever providing a cite. Sounds like crappy partisan journalism to me, at least Colbert gave Cramer a chance to stand up and rebuke the bullshit he was spewing. Unfortunately Cramer can’t really bring up his shows disclaimer as it might affect ratings, so he had to grab a spoon and dig in. Whatever, Jon and Steven got some undeserved laughs, but Cramer is crying all the way to the bank, he still has a successful and entertaining show.
Repeat after me:
Jon Stewart is NOT a journalist, he’s a comedian that gets paid to make fun of current events.
Jon Stewart is NOT a journalist, he’s a comedian that gets paid to make fun of current events.
Jon Stewart is NOT a journalist, he’s a comedian that gets paid to make fun of current events.
That said, he’s probably a better “journalist” than about 70-80% of television media that portray themselves as such.
That’s probably true. It’s also not really the point of the segment.
What’s partisan about it?
You know, I’m not sure that’s what was achieved in Colbert’s Cramer interview, and in any case he’ll be on TDS tomorrow. Cramer doesn’t have to rebuke anybody else’s bullshit: he needs to explain his own. His response to Stewart appeared to be “he’s just a comedian and has the luxury of nitpicking me.” That’s a dodge, and fails to explain some significant cases where Cramer and his network were absolutely wrong on issues of huge import, and yet continue to present themselves as authoratitive voices and providers of sound advice to investors. That’s what Stewart was taking issue with.
No, of course not. If he admitted he’s basically a carnival barker for the stock market, people might stop taking his advice. So he has to lie about it. Poor Cramer, poor CNBC.
The fact that consumer/investor protection would hurt ratings isn’t even close to a justifiable reason to forgo the disclaimer, IMHO.
“If I had to explain before each show that I’m just a b.s. artist, people wouldn’t watch!” isn’t a good enough reason.
Oh my my my my my my. I just heard that JoeBlow said this on his morning show:
In response to Stewart’s “I like my morning news like I like my coffee, white and bitter”
Do these guys ever learn? Stewart might just let it go, but if he decides to go after Joe Scarborough, the results could be spectacular, and Stewart WILL win. A nice segment about Joe’s dead intern might be in order.
Blind ideologue? Is CNBC a political party or something? I mean, isn’t that just openly admitting they’re conservative, if Joe thinks Stewart’s a liberal hack?
Besides, all I’ve seen since TDS came back from vacation that hasn’t been dumping on CNBC is them dumping on Obama. Stewart really hasn’t spared the Democrats since they took office, other than a few weeks between the election and inauguration celebrating Bush’s departure. Once Obama started to get settled into the White House and provided TDS with material, they jumped on it.
That’s where I have to disagree with you. The assault on Santelli was about his calling everyday Americans, who relied on banks, financial analysts, and other experts in taking out mortgages that, as a result of declining housing prices, have plunged them into massive debt, “losers”.
That many of these CNBC pundits support the bank bailout is a cherry on top of the hypocrisy sundae.
Of course he’s a hack, he criticized Scarborough.
The idea of a former Republican Congressman being less ideological than a TV comedian is amusing, though. Joe Scarborough isn’t a hack? Since when?
But, he thinks the banks are “losers,” too. He’s hardly being hypocritical. I’ve watched CNBC every single day for the past 2.5 years. There are oodles of hypocritical idiots on the channel, but Santelli hasn’t exposed himself as such, IMO. I remember seeing Santelli’s rant live. The uproar it has caused has, honestly, been quite surprising. I didn’t expect it to be such a polarizing issue. I still have a hard time seeing it as a right wing attack. What’s so disagreeable about advocating not overextending oneself financially? 
Turns out people don’t like being called losers. I know, I know, go figure.
It wasn’t a right wing attack. Neither Stewart, nor anyone else that I know of, has characterized it as such. It was Santelli being an asshole, and that’s how it has been characterized.
Aside from the people trying to paint Stewart as being partisan, anyway.
(the scales fall from my eyes) Ohhhhh! He’s THAT Joe Scarborough. Sorry, but a congressman’s dead employees register on my brain better than live political blowhards.
Well, trading floors aren’t known as the most friendly of places. 