Stewart Grills ‘Mad Money’ Cramer

77 comments on this post so far. Add yours!

• 

  Duffer on March 13 at 4:20 p.m.

  I’ve enjoyed his shows since they were started. He’s only on Monday through Thursdays with reruns one week a month. He’s not afraid to make light of any subject or take on any person.

  A conservative could possibly have a problem with the show as he tends to take a middle to left slant on most subjects. Like Letterman, he probably hated to see GW leave office!

• 

  JeanC on March 13 at 4:33 p.m.

  We’ve started watching him regularly, along with Stephen Colbert. We record the show on the DVR and usually watch the show then next day or a couple days later. I am so looking forward to seeing last night’s show.

• 

  Duffer on March 13 at 4:56 p.m.

  JeanC:

  You can watch the uncut version by going here:

  http://www.comedycentral.com/

• 

  zelda on March 13 at 4:58 p.m.

  Every night he’s on. His show Monday was brilliant but it won’t change CNBC one iota. The only indication I’ve seen that CNBC is the least bit humbled since the crash is that Maria Bartiromo’s hair is flatter, she’s wearing more black and less bling. There are only three or four serious reporters on that network and I’d rather listen to David Faber than Cramer.

• 

  Transplanted_Texan on March 13 at 5:33 p.m.

  Often. And as for the unanswered question, “How often do you watch “Mad Money with Jim Cramer?”, the answer is never.

• 

  Transplanted_Texan on March 13 at 5:33 p.m.

  *unasked question

• 

  Transplanted_Texan on March 13 at 5:34 p.m.

  Duffer, I remember back on Election Eve in 2004, he asked the voters to put him out of a job the next day.

• 

  jazzyvandal on March 13 at 5:50 p.m.

  I love the Daily Show. I watch every episode. Speaking of which, I need to watch last night’s episode on the DVR

• 

  sue on March 13 at 5:58 p.m.

  I always watch Jon Stewart, he’s great. I looked forward to last night’s show with Kramer, too. I was surprised to see that weasel try to be humble and somewhat contrite, but always with the disclaimer that he had been lied to. Jon Stewart put up with it for a bit, and then set him straight. Playing fast and loose with money is not a game. even with a show called “fast money.” He can usually cut through the bull in any issue, quicker than anyone I’ve seen. There weren’t the fireworks I was expecting, but of course, Kramer didn’t have a leg to stand on.

• 

  BethB on March 13 at 7:44 p.m.

  Watch it as often as I can. Last night’s show - Kramer was so humble that I wondered if it was a joke.

• 

  HonestGeorge on March 13 at 8:42 p.m.

  Most every night that its on. But if I miss I’m usually able to pick up the best of his shows on Crooks & Liars, Huffington Post or Americablog the next day.

• 

  Transplanted_Texan on March 13 at 9:17 p.m.

  George - you can find the whole thing on dailyshow.com

• 

  cantyoureadthesigns on March 13 at 9:46 p.m.

  I watch the Daily Show most every day, the morning after, on the Comedy Channel website.

  As I said elsewhere, Stewart smacked that lying, conniving, carnival barker Cramer down hard, but not too hard to make Cramer into a sympathetic figure.

  The “entertainment-izing” of financial news is absolutely pathetic.

  Millions of people have lost their nest eggs, partially because this supposed watchdog of the financial industry did nothing but cheer lead for the crooks and shysters, while they KNEW there was massive fraud going on.

  Before appearing on the Daily Show, Cramer made the rounds of the NBC affiliates, Today Show, MS-NBC Morning Joe-idiot, etc, whining and crying about how a “comedian” had no business attacking him or CNBC. Bad move. Stewart cleaned his clock.

• 

  Whippersnapper on March 13 at 10:39 p.m.

  Stewart’s mask slipped down a little to reveal him as just another party hack like Rush. He ambushed Cramer, also a no-talent hack with a schticky show on another network, trying to make him take the blame for the Bush administration and congress’ lack of oversight that led to this mess. He implied that the wall street was sideswiped by rich machiavellian manipulators and it was Cramer’s fault. Most of the world doesn’t even know who Cramer is, much less that his credibility is zilch because his show offers zero inside, and only hindsight, about the way the markets work. Cramer supported Obama, but now must be on the enemies list.
  Stewart used to be funny when there was a sense of fairness in who he skewered. Now he’s just another apologist for the Democrats, excusing their foibles while trying to find scapegoats for the country’s troubles. I used to watch Stewart but now he’s a sweat act.

• 

  Arch_Druid on March 13 at 10:56 p.m.

  Let’s put it bluntly, Whippersnapper, Jon Stewart managed to do more investigative reporting than CNBC did.

  Saw on CBS News quite a little commentary about last night’s smack down between Stewart and Cramer. Also saw on “The News Hour” quite a little informative discussion by news media types about the same smack down. One guy who got kind of defensive in the process.

  If you are going to cover the business world then the people you inform have to be given the honest facts as best as you can provide them. Business Week (PBS) wasn’t “cheerleading” the business world and the mag’s rep went on to say what he was seeing wrong about the financial melt down that would soon be arriving on our door steps. But, it wasn’t Business Week that was targeted. The gal on the show also said that they tried to do honest reporting on business financial shenanigans and were literally attacked by bloggers prepared to perpetuate the fraud. Eventually, it made better since to give up on the reporting. Nor was her reporting targeted. CNBC made all sorts of excuses for the people they interviewed. They sluffed off scams and worse. We know more about CNBC than say Business Week and just how many people turn to that mag to get the real deal? Where as, CNBC is on cable, Dish and DirectV

  I watch Jon Stewart religiously. Cramer, not at all.

• 

  cantyoureadthesigns on March 13 at 11:18 p.m.

  “Now he’s just another apologist for the Democrats, excusing their foibles while trying to find scapegoats for the country’s troubles. I used to watch Stewart but now he’s a sweat act.”
  -Whippersnapper

  Obviously you don’t watch the Daily Show anymore, and are ignorant of what is happening there, because Stewart has skewered Obama, or his decisions/appointments quite a few times since the election.

  Talk to us again when you’re actually informed as to the issues at hand.

• 

  Whippersnapper on March 13 at 11:26 p.m.

  I don’t watch Cramer either. He’s a goofball who uses radio sound effects to punctuate his blather. So why does Stewart attack him for not telling the world about the coming meltdown? Did Bloomberg? Did CNN? Did Barney Frank? Did Chris Dodd? Did George Bush? Franklin Raines? Did the Wall Street Journal? Did the New York Times? How come it’s Cramer’s fault? That aspect makes me think this interview was about having an anti-Bush group orgasm by castigating some scapegoat on live TV rather than finding out the truth.
  Stewart says Cramer didn’t do investigative journalism. WTF? Has he seen Cramer’s show? Does it look like investigative journalism to you?
  Stewart says that bankers raped Wall Street and walked away with full pockets. Yeah, some did. But is anyone mentioning idiots who took out oversized loans with nothing down and no hope to pay or the guys that wrote the loans? Or Fannie and Freddie’s role in pushing for more and more lenient loan policies until any idiot (lots of those!) could get a home loan? Or congressional oversight and SEC officials that held regulators and investigators at bay while this went on?
  Stewart says that no one told us this was going to happen. BS. I’ve been hearing from commentators and financial advice talk show hosts that interest-only loans were extremely bad for consumers and the economy. First it was the bursting housing bubble, then banking weaknesses were revealed, then the loss of trillions in people’s savings. There was always risk, but no one wanted to question the good returns we got on paper.
  GWB and his cronies were turned out, too late unfortunately, but the bankers that leveraged their banks into unsustainability and the congress people who turned a blind eye to it are STILL THERE. And we have to listen to them lecture us on how to get out of this situation.
  Finally, those of us with 401K money in the market gladly took the 10-15 percent annual earnings like we were entitled to it. Turns out that it was never real, just part of the bubble and the schemes of Madoff and others to defraud people desperate for earnings.
  You’re right. We should blame Cramer.

• 

  Rosalind on March 13 at 11:30 p.m.

  Whippersnapper must not have paid attention to what Stewart actually said on the show.

  Get the facts straight before writing such a long rant. Just an idea.

• 

  Whippersnapper on March 13 at 11:37 p.m.

  CYRTS: I have watched Stewart a lot, and he does spread around the skewering during the first segment of the show, but when the interview comes on, he reverts to apologizing for the current adminstration, saying that critics are unfair (waaaahhh!), they should give Obama room to get his plans going (waaaaah!), we should all pull together (translation: pay your taxes and shut up) and get behind the president.
  FACT: Twenty-two months into Obama’s administration, his new national debt will equal George Bush’s debt from eight years and two wars. By the end of eight years, should he get re-elected, it will double the entire national debt.
  Spending will never stimulate the economy, in fact, the opposite is true. Cutting hard and keeping taxes low gives entrepreneurs the incentive to move ahead, hire employees and enjoy their profits.
  Obama promised a lot of people a lot of money and he’s coming through for them. Hang on to your wallets because the current federal government is loading up the biggest credit card in the world.

• 

  JIMMYMAC on March 13 at 11:38 p.m.

  If Jon Stewart thinks Cramer is a point man for GWB or any GOPers he is sadly mistaken and should delve deeper into Cramer personal political views and his past political affiliations and stances.

• 

  Whippersnapper on March 13 at 11:39 p.m.

  I watched the interview later and Stewart hammered away on CNBC like they invented credit default swaps and liar loans, spouting garbage about financial reporters being asleep at the wheel. He claims to be a comedian, then comes slashing with his self-righteous sword like some party-approved Sam Donaldson. What a load of crap.

• 

  cantyoureadthesigns on March 13 at 11:45 p.m.

  Let’s see, Whippersnapper, you were WRONG and ignorant about Stewart doing nothing but cheerleading for Obama and Democratic party, and you’re WRONG about Stewart blaming Cramer only. Stewart SAID to Cramer, it wasn’t about him, but about CNBC and other, in general, bad financial reporting.

  Cramer caught a giant break from Stewart.

• 

  Whippersnapper on March 13 at 11:46 p.m.

  Jimmymac, don’t harsh the Demos mellow, dude. If they can build a straw man out of Cramer, then they can do the Lord-of-the-flies dance around his quivering corpse and feel good about. They have been shuddering with delight for weeks because are hoping they can annoint Rush Limbaugh as the face of the GOP because then they tear him down for being a buffoon. He is a buffoon. Cramer, too.

• 

  Whippersnapper on March 13 at 11:53 p.m.

  CYRTS: I watched the interview. Cramer is a stuttering idiot and Stewart rarely let him finish a sentence. That’s a huge break? I cringe when Cramer opens his mouth because something stupid is going to come out. Having an argument with Cramer is like debating the special ed. kid on the bus.
  You want Stewart to be your righteous mouthpiece, when actually all this stuff about poor financial reporting has nothing to do with what happened to the financial markets. It’s this culture of feel good politics to find someone to blame for decades of risky management, poor oversight from regulators and protective politicians.
  You want it so bad that you believe it’s true: there is someone to blame for this mess and if we can just find him, we can have justice. Keep dreaming.

• 

  cantyoureadthesigns on March 13 at 11:58 p.m.

  Yes, indeed, since Cheney/Bush basically completed the replacement of the competitive Capitalist system with Crony Capitalism/State Socialism and started a couple of trillion dollar plus wars, and such economic system crashed and burned,and is unable to function, Obama has to prime the pump (or barely keep the pump going) in order to attempt to forestall a world-wide economic depression, which if it happens, will totally impoverish 10’s of millions of Americans.

  But, nice dodge, don’t change the subject. Which is Stewart vs. Cramer, and is reasonably judged as a Knock Out, TKO or otherwise, by Stewart, based on his superior argumentation, and facts.

• 

  cantyoureadthesigns on March 14 at 12:09 a.m.

  “You want it so bad that you believe it’s true: there is someone to blame for this mess and if we can just find him, we can have justice. Keep dreaming.”
  -WS

  Oh there’s a whole host of entities who are at blame, including, somewhat, certain Democrats. Their portion of the blame in the whole bloody mess is less than 10%. The ratings agencies, PAID by the securities firms bundling crap paper, TO RATE such paper as A-rated are to blame for at least 40% of the mess.

  Not to mention that every mortgage pusher, from Citibank to Countrywide, bonused their people not on the overall amount of RE loans submitted, but especially bonused them on the amount of Alt-A or subprime loans submitted.

• 

  JIMMYMAC on March 14 at 1:45 a.m.

  CYRTS,
  Somewhat, certain Democrats??? Please do some research into the debate of Federal Housing Recovery Act of 2005 and tell me who said what and voted how on the Senate floor. Actually, go back to fall of 2003 to see where the warnings about systemic, impending financial crisis came from. During that research you will probably find that the largest recepients of $$$ from FRE and FNM are quoted as saying “Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae are not in a crisis” and that “people are exaggerating serious financial crisis to the treasury that I see and are unfounded. These are funamentally sound entities.”

  Greed certainly clouded everyones judgement and it was blind to party lines, but somewhat and certain is pretty tame when the vote against said measures were blocked by 100% of Democrats. Hind sight is definitely 20-20.

• 

  Sisyphus on March 14 at 9:05 a.m.

  Whoa whipper, delusional much? If you did watch the show you would recognize that Stewarts criticism was largely confined to the so called financial news networks misleading its audience by their cozy relationship with the power brokers. The heart of the interview was when Stewart asked him to whom their responsibility was owed. I also think its kinda sad when the state of our journalism is such that a comedian has to provide an expose on some really bad practices which were all will placed criticisms. But Stewart did just that and the fact that the smackdown went viral demonstrates the underlying fallacy that Americans are pretty much tired of the lack of investigative reporting and that the media no longer seems to be looking after the ordinary citizen.

  But you and Jimmy drove this thread sideways into a partisan attack and while you both seem to have raised points worth noting but given the relative small contribution Freddie and Fannie gave to the overall scope of the financial sector’s demise, its really not much more than a Republican red herring. You do realize that you’ve boxed yourself into defending the bad guys, exactly the place Cramer found himself because he couldn’t run from the tape recording they had. Most agree it was again de-regulation that caused this and its champion was Alan Greenspan who admitted the error to Congress last October. Two nobel laureates in economics have already laid the blame at his door.

  The $700 billion TARP program was ostensibly designed to cleanse the market of the toxic assetts represented by derivatives that should have been regulated as insurance but we’re given a pass by insiders placed in the governement. Stewart never blamed Cramer for the mess and even acknowledged that most of Wall Street is composed of diligent hard working people who also suffered a disservice at the hands of these network cable channels. I know your tendency is to see the world in black and white but your efforts at recategorizing that specific program and shoehorning it into something you can attack are really kind of sad. Sadder still is the Santelli/Republican talking point of trying to blame the entire fiasco on ordinary Americans reaching for the dream and who may rely on snake oil salesman like Cramer.

  But most despicable is the effort to blame it on a government sponsored program designed to help the poor and minorities. While the program which is worthy of derision and overhaul you attack the poor stooges that did nothing but try and get a home, like the poor sots should have known better. I don’t think its Democrats misdirecting blame. Blame is deserved from the people with knowledge and the ability to stop it. That would be the people in the drivers seat which most certainly wouldn’t be the people who got into a home when the lender knew they couldn’t afford it. How you can defend the uber-rich power brokers is beyond me. But it does explain these results:

  http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/03/how-went-2008-election-looking-only-at.html

• 

  wheels on March 14 at 9:10 a.m.

  JIMMYMAC, After correctly predictiing the D in the mid 6k’s were you concerned when Wells Fargos stock dropped into the $7 range? This past weeks record rally must have calmed your concerns.

• 

  hmoffsuite on March 14 at 9:38 a.m.

  Sis >>> “But you and Jimmy drove this thread sideways into a partisan attack and while you both seem to have raised points worth noting but given the relative small contribution Freddie and Fannie gave to the overall scope of the financial sector’s demise, its really not much more than a Republican red herring.”

  Relative small contribution, Sis? Try this read from IBD. A Republican red herring? Hardly. Your remarks are simply an attempt to deflect the responsibility the democrats hold with regard to the housing situation, imo.

  http://ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles….

• 

  Arch_Druid on March 14 at 9:42 a.m.

  I guess that both Whippersnapper and JimmyMac forgot that GW was one of the principle authors of the “ownership society” and praised the fact that home ownership had increased sharply. But when you read the details in such solid reporting of say Time Magazine and etc. about the problems that were already ensuing, it didn’t even have to take an economist to warn that there were troubling signs ahead for the housing market and what would happen when the housing market bubble would burst. GW took center stage to praise all this and to encourage even more of it, never mind the worthless paper that essentially backed it.

  When visiting blogs and message boards on this matter some, I think 3 years before, I saw plenty of GW supporters who absolutely did not care to believe that anything bad could happen in the housing market. Now that it has, I guess the same cabal needs scapegoats. It is easier to blame Barney Frank, would be homeowners, the Dems in general Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae before blaming themselves for their blind allegiance to the dear leader.
  And esp. because it is going to cost money to deal with the toxic mess of the last 3 years.

  I’ll agree, it is sad that a comedian had to make that kind of expose. I sure wouldn’t attack Stewart for blowing the lid off the little cocoon CNBC’s business reporters wrapped themselves in.

• 

  hmoffsuite on March 14 at 9:42 a.m.

  Link didn’t seem to work. Second try ….

  http://ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=321237362312361

• 

  Arch_Druid on March 14 at 9:50 a.m.

  And Hmoffsuite, the GOP can also be blamed for their anti-reg craze that extended well past the failed S&Ls that required federal bailouts, not having learned from their mistakes, continued to destroy the basis of capitalism with continued anti-reg oversight. Bernie Madoff couldn’t have happened without that so called gvt keeping its hands off of private enterprise. I even find it interesting that Barney Frank and etc. were suddenly accused of growing spines to defend Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae when in fact they didn’t have spines worth reporting on when it came to any other GOP agenda, GW agenda, or following through on their own. I’m pretty amazed by all these 180* turnarounds I am seeing around here.

• 

  hmoffsuite on March 14 at 9:52 a.m.

  Arch >>> ” It is easier to blame Barney Frank, would be homeowners, the Dems in general Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae before blaming themselves for their blind allegiance to the dear leader.”

  Please read my second link posted above and get your information correct.

• 

  Arch_Druid on March 14 at 10:03 a.m.

  Hmoffsuite, why would I visit the link you posted since you are so busy regurgitating it here? You do find it a whole lot easier to blame Barney Frank and etc. who in 2005 was a minority member of Congress and wasn’t a ranking chairman on the Finance Committee since those chairs were doled out to the GOP in the majority. Rep. Frank at best would have been a no vote on the committee, but not the deciding factor as to why the regulatory bill re Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac did not leave that committee. This particular discussion was thrashed down to its last piece of skeleton of a dead horse on A Matter of Opinion some months back. Gary Crooks for one made note of the super-abundance of GOP on the committee and wondered why in particular they didn’t provide the votes to pass such a necessary regulation. They listened intently to Rep. Franks that they have been so public about despising?

  I am familiar with facts, when I need an opinion I’ll visit HBO and read yours.

• 

  Sam on March 14 at 11:22 a.m.

  Doesn’t seem like Jimmy or Whippersnapper watched the interview.

  I thought it was probably one of the best interviews I’ll ever watch on TV. Stewart made it clear that he didn’t think it was fair that CNBC had basically made Cramer the face of the criticism that Stewart was lobbing at them.

  But I think his point was that CNBC is supposed to serve as an independent observer that deliver fair and accurate information about financial issues when what they really appear to be doing are acting as the lapdogs, not the watchdogs, of the very people who got us into the economic crisis the country is in. Stewart didn’t seem to ONCE talk about George W. Bush or politics. He talked about corporate CEOs, Wall Street traders, etc.

  So I have no idea where Jimmy and Whipper are getting their info.

• 

  Rosalind on March 14 at 11:56 a.m.

  Ditto to what Sam said.

  Some people tend to have very select hearing to the point where they just make stuff up. Perhaps before ranting on some more, certain individuals should actually watch (and listen!) to the interview (again if they missed it the first time).

• 

  hmoffsuite on March 14 at 12:27 p.m.

  Sam >> “But I think his point was that CNBC is supposed to serve as an independent observer that deliver fair and accurate information about financial issues”

  Anyone who uses Cramer for financial or investing advice is not in good hands, imo. His stock recommendations have hit about 48% of the time, as I recall. Just like flipping a coin. So, he shouldn’t be taken seriously and should just be considered to be ‘entertainment’ which he is. Because of this, I don’t think CNBC is too awfully accountable for what Cramer does. If it were a cnbc in depth report or something with editorial support I would feel differently. Many hardcore investors actually prefer Bloomberg to cncb or FBN, fwiw.

• 

  JIMMYMAC on March 14 at 1:33 p.m.

  Wow, I have so many people i have to respond too….where to begin???

  Sam,
  
  Lots of people paint Cramer into something he is not. I merely stated that Cramer has had quite the opposite political ties that most people assume. Stewart didn’t mention GWB, but a lot of people do assume that this current crisis stems from the former administrations oversight. The guy did a lot of stupid stuff but it isn’t fair to peg him entirely for the mortgage crisis. It was actually Whippersnapper and Cantread that got the topic into a political debate and I felt compelled to get involved since I have done a fair amount of research on the topic. That and I haven’t gotten into any political debates on HBO in a while so I was had to dive in ;) My bad, bro. I did say that Greed was on both of the aisles, I just didn’t like the broad brush that Cantyou was stroking.

  Arch,
  So do tell: who killed the Federal Housing Recovery Act? Had it passed, would have much needed regulation been put in place? Poor little Barney Frank…that’s how you sound.

  Sis: Whoa dude, are you really serious with this statement, “relative small contribution Freddie and Fannie gave to the overall scope of the financial sector’s demise”
  Really, really, I mean really? You might want to get one of those yellow and black books about GSE’s, derivatives, credit default swaps and CDO’s. Also take a look at the exposure of subprime mortgages that Fannie and Freddie took on after the FHR act was killed. It will probably blow your mind.

  Wheels,
  I bought at $8. A lot more than my wife would be comfortable with. I sold half at 13 and will do the same thing if we see $8 again. Still, I have to be honest, I did have a little pee going down my leg when we hit the 7’s. Overall I’m way leveraged on WFC, but young enought to not give a damn ;)

  Take care yall.

« Back to Huckleberries Online

• ›Scanner traffic