The Daily Show

[Echewta]

I'm not a religious watcher but the times I have watched since Obama has won, they always show a clip of Obama saying something and then Bush having said the same or similar during his admin. Not too much different.

I have to give it to the Daily Show to be the only news source that seems to be doing that. (y)

[RobMoney$]

Think about it, what's the alternative?

Not making fun of the President isn't really an option for shows like that, is it?

[kaiser soze]

There was one episode where they went back a few presidents speaking about ending U.S. reliance on foreign oil, a round and round and round we'll go!!

[DroppinScience]

I'm not a religious watcher but the times I have watched since Obama has won, they always show a clip of Obama saying something and then Bush having said the same or similar during his admin. Not too much different.

I have to give it to the Daily Show to be the only news source that seems to be doing that. (y)

What was really clever was juxtaposing Obama and Bush's near-identical speeches on Iraq for the 2010 "withdrawal" of troops and how he was searching high and low for a difference. He sees "advisors" in Obama's speech and is all: "*Phew* THEY'RE NOT THE SAME."

I think this speaks strongly to how we react to two different Presidents saying the same thing. If it's out of Bush's mouth, we'll all wince, but if Obama says pretty much the same thing, we just nod our heads. I think that was the same thing with Clinton and Bush, too.

We always need to be challenged.

[RobMoney$]

I think this speaks strongly to how we react to two different Presidents saying the same thing. If it's out of Bush's mouth, we'll all wince, but if Obama says pretty much the same thing, we just nod our heads.


We? Speak for yourself.
I've never nodded my head at very much that came from Obama.

Shows like this piss me off. They were all Pro-Obama during the elections and contributed to getting him elected in the first place and now that he's in they're going to tell you how much he sucks?
Stewart is a flat-out hipocrite.

[LongDuckDong]

The Daily Show.

[QueenAdrock]

So you think Stewart should ignore it if Obama doesn't keep a campaign promise? Just smile pretty and pretend that it never happened because it would be hypocritical to criticize your candidate of choice? That's pretty naive. I voted for Obama, but I do want him to hold on to his campaign promise of getting us out of Iraq ASAP. Stewart probably does too, thus his anger. Hearing Obama say the same stuff as Bush in regards to that needs to be pointed out and he needs to be pressured into scaling back troops faster.

I support Obama, but if he does something I don't like, you'll hear about it. Blind support for a candidate regardless of his actions is just dumb, and reminds me too much of Bush supporters.

[Dorothy Wood]

We? Speak for yourself.
I've never nodded my head at very much that came from Obama.

Shows like this piss me off. They were all Pro-Obama during the elections and contributed to getting him elected in the first place and now that he's in they're going to tell you how much he sucks?
Stewart is a flat-out hipocrite.


no, he and the writers are realists. and the daily show is one of the only shows that made john mccain come off as an alright dude with a good sense of humor.

have you ever even watched the show or do you just read what people say about it?

[RobMoney$]

no, he and the writers are realists. and the daily show is one of the only shows that made john mccain come off as an alright dude with a good sense of humor.

have you ever even watched the show or do you just read what people say about it?


I've seen it a few times. Enough to know it's basically the same joke every show.
Trying to get various political figures or the like in "gotcha" moments or try to point out contradicting statements they've made.

It's not all that different than this place really, a lot of you all try to be junior Jon Stewarts. It's boring at best.

[Dorothy Wood]

I've seen it a few times. Enough to know it's basically the same joke every show.
Trying to get various political figures or the like in "gotcha" moments or try to point out contradicting statements they've made.

It's not all that different than this place really, a lot of you all try to be junior Jon Stewarts. It's boring at best.


well, you have a right to your opinion, but I think it's good that there are people monitoring that sort of thing. in a comedic fashion, no less.

I dunno, I like the show, but I don't have cable so I rarely see a full episode. usually just clips online. (because I do think it's a little boring sometimes).

[yeahwho]

The Daily Show is consistently excellent and has been for a decade. Stewart hit's one out of the ballpark weekly, as he did here on March 4th, 2009...

March 4, 2009: CNBC Gives Financial Advice (http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=220252&title=cnbc-gives-financial-advice)

If I only followed CNBC's advice I'd have a $Million$ dollars today...

[D_Raay]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/you-cant-be-serious-how-a-comedian-became-the-most-influential-voice-in-american-politics-901828.html

Just a sample of the influence that Jon Stewart has on politics and news.
It doesn't matter that this show is based in comedy, the message comes through just the same. Where else can you get news about how ridiculous the actual news is? And yeah someone needs to say "fuck you" on air for us to these ponzi artists and other greedy fucks that have wafted away with billions while people can't even pay their bills or feed their children.

I am sick of these petty baseless arguments about what perception one person may have to another. It's the same inane shit you would expect to encounter eating lunch at a high school cafeteria. Reality is what it is, if you can't see it you aren't fucking looking very hard or you are so far up your own arse you can't see it at all anymore. Everyone thinks they are an expert on everything because they can find a particular reason to bash something for the sake of bashing it, rather than actually researching what point they are actually trying to make. Chances are usually there isn't actually a point, only personally charged bias and bullshit.

[RobMoney$]

Where else can you get news about how ridiculous the actual news is? And yeah someone needs to say "fuck you" on air for us to these ponzi artists and other greedy fucks that have wafted away with billions while people can't even pay their bills or feed their children.

Where else can you get that kind of news you say?
I remember SNL used to play that game with politics and pop culture news. In fact they invented the Mock-News format I believe.

and LOL at you using "The Children" in your defense of TDS.
The best laugh I've had all day really.

[DIGI]

All day? It's 9:30 in the morning......

[RobMoney$]

Finally, someone's starting to get my sarcasm (y)

[checkyourprez]

err that just means you probably haven't encountered to many funny things and that any sort of laugh is your funniest of they day. so is it even that funny? err uhh ehhh

[D_Raay]

Where else can you get that kind of news you say?
I remember SNL used to play that game with politics and pop culture news. In fact they invented the Mock-News format I believe.

and LOL at you using "The Children" in your defense of TDS.
The best laugh I've had all day really.

Something funny about that huh? Are you suggesting that there are not people out there struggling to feed their children out there because of the economic disaster we have just undergone?

[RobMoney$]

And yeah someone needs to say "fuck you" on air for us to these ponzi artists and other greedy fucks that have wafted away with billions while people can't even pay their bills or feed their children.

Something funny about that huh? Are you suggesting that there are not people out there struggling to feed their children out there because of the economic disaster we have just undergone?


You're getting emotional because I don't take the Daily Show seriously or even find it interesting?
I'm not even saying I disagree with any of TDS's points of view. I just don't find the show all that interesting. It's just a difference of opinion.
Suggesting that the children need TDS is hilarous.
I am a single parent raising 2 kids on my own for years with no help from their mother, emotionally or financially.
I am one of the people you're talking about.

Maybe you need to calm down a bit, Bro.

[DroppinScience]

Suggesting that the children need TDS is hilarous.


That would be really hilarious, except that he didn't suggest that. His "children" remark was directed at CEOs and others who have scammed regular people out of money when they're struggling to take care of themselves and their own.

For someone who condemns others for "attacking the messenger," you're a master at doing this yourself.

[Echewta]

Oh, hello.

[Documad]

If it's out of Bush's mouth, we'll all wince, but if Obama says pretty much the same thing, we just nod our heads. I think that was the same thing with Clinton and Bush, too.

We always need to be challenged.

I agree with the last sentence. I disagree with the reason. I think that we've just gotten tired and we have pretty low expectations. But then I've never been a fan of change for change's sake.

I just want to say that I was a huge critic of Bill Clinton and Bush. I'm trying to be a bit more patient with Obama right now because he inherited a big mess but he and I don't agree on many policy issues. I'm more conservative then him on some things and more liberal on others. I'm terrific at separating the style from the substance.

[Documad]

I've seen it a few times. Enough to know it's basically the same joke every show.
You don't get to have an opinion, in my book, if you've only seen the show a few times. You can disagree with his politics, and you can say that you don't like humor based on satire. That's fine. But you can't argue that it's not fresh. It's been one of the most intelligent and funniest shows on TV--always fresh. There is a laugh out loud moment on every show, four days a week, for ten years now.

The Daily Show is consistently excellent and has been for a decade. Stewart hit's one out of the ballpark weekly, as he did here on March 4th, 2009...

March 4, 2009: CNBC Gives Financial Advice (http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=220252&title=cnbc-gives-financial-advice)

If I only followed CNBC's advice I'd have a $Million$ dollars today...

This. And I loved that clip because I hate CNBC.

[Documad]

Oh gosh. Some douche at CNBC criticized the accuracy of Stewart's reporting. So Stewart had another go tonight. His delivery is perfect.

[DroppinScience]

Oh gosh. Some douche at CNBC criticized the accuracy of Stewart's reporting. So Stewart had another go tonight. His delivery is perfect.

Personally, I'm absolutely digging the Jon Stewart vs. Jim Cramer showdown.

Here's Huffington Post (and the Stewart's follow-up):

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/03/10/jon-stewart-rips-into-jim_n_173454.html

[yeahwho]

Personally, I'm absolutely digging the Jon Stewart vs. Jim Cramer showdown.

Here's Huffington Post (and the Stewart's follow-up):

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/03/10/jon-stewart-rips-into-jim_n_173454.html

The little guy? He keeps referring to himself as the little guy, then he points out that Warren Buffet is the big guy. Whatever.

I do agree Jon Stewart is pouncing on CNBC correspondents probably harder than he needs to, the need for financial advice has dissolved to the lowest point in our lifetimes. They have nothing to offer us (my belief is they never did anyway) now and honestly CNBC should just burnout. Who is going to pay for advertisement on that channel?

How to get by on very little is the sort of TV needed now, NBC should start BNBC, the Broke National Broadcasting Co.

[RobMoney$]

You don't get to have an opinion, in my book, if you've only seen the show a few times. You can disagree with his politics, and you can say that you don't like humor based on satire. That's fine. But you can't argue that it's not fresh. It's been one of the most intelligent and funniest shows on TV--always fresh. There is a laugh out loud moment on every show, four days a week, for ten years now.

I'm not arguing the validity of Stewart or TDS's humor.
It's not my cup of tea, but if you dig it that's fine.

Quoting a Daily Show piece in a serious discussion about the economy is quite frankly embarressing. It's not legitimate news no matter how entertaining, fresh, or how many years of LOL's you've gotten from it.

For instance, DS has been climaxing over that Daily Show piece that shows Jim Cramer advising his audience to invest in Bear-Stearns only to see it completely collapse shortly after.

It was a "GOTCHA" moment that Stewart is pumping for all it's worth.

Now some may find it relevant or interesting. I do not. I find this type of act tired and boring. It's the same act every show I've seen and it makes me click the channel quickly.
I'm sure if you go through all the advice Jim Cramer has given out, there's plenty he got right on the money, but Stewart will never tell you about any of it because it doesn't add to his joke at all.

In the end, Jim Cramer gives advice. I don't think he ever claimed to be a clairvoyent. You can choose to listen to his advice or not.
The same way when you go to the racetrack there's a dozen guys out front selling tip sheets full of advice on who they think is going to win each race.
Or the way Mel Kiper Jr. puts out his NFL draft analysis and tries to predict who each team's going to pick in the NFL draft.
It's a prediction, it's never meant to be interpreted as fact.

You can't take the tip sheet back after the race and ask for your money back because they didn't get every race correct.

[yeahwho]

The CNBC 3/4/09 Daily piece is, has and continues to be in the media because really, if you take pause and think about it, Jon Stewart's Fuck You is pretty much justified and how millions of Americans feel about financial guru's being surprised that triple debt doesn't work.

The system they obey will not work, the people they interviewed lied to them, almost daily.... without ever once being asked true journalistic questions, just sycophant agreements with corporate CEO's and Investment brokers who profit coming and going.

This is real money, not the NFL or the racetrack, these are real people who have bills to pay. Stringing them along on a fantasy is wrong, not doing your job and asking real questions is wrong. I have no pity for CNBC, they should be ashamed of the bullshit they've perpetuated for several years without once looking at crushing mounting debt.

[DroppinScience]

The CNBC 3/4/09 Daily piece is, has and continues to be in the media because really, if you take pause and think about it, Jon Stewart's Fuck You is pretty much justified and how millions of Americans feel about financial guru's being surprised that triple debt doesn't work.


And as if that wasn't enough, Stewart's rebuttal to Cramer's claims that he was quoted out of context in a "gotcha!" moment (to borrow Rob's words) continues to make Mr. "Mad Money" look like a giant fool. Cramer claimed he never said people should buy Bear-Sterns in the infamous "Bear-Sterns is FINE" quote, and he was right. He was saying that crap 5 days before and continued to say it up to 7 weeks before the collapse. He had absolutely nothing to go on other than his "intuition."

Look, I don't care that Daily Show is a comedy show. That doesn't matter, and some people here should stop getting hung up on this, especially when using it as a rebuttal. Everything he's using is culled from the official record. Then when backed into a corner, a reply of "it doesn't matter" or that it's not relevant doesn't bolster your argument either.

[Documad]

Yes, it's a humor show, but it has more content and more accurate content than the vast majority of so-called news shows. Plus I sense that Jon Stewart and I are somewhat simpatico on policy issues.

[ThatGuy]

You were just looking for a reason to use the word simpatico, weren't you?

[RobMoney$]

This is real money, not the NFL or the racetrack, these are real people who have bills to pay. Stringing them along on a fantasy is wrong, not doing your job and asking real questions is wrong. I have no pity for CNBC, they should be ashamed of the bullshit they've perpetuated for several years without once looking at crushing mounting debt.


You're right, real people are losing their savings.
But remember when you said this the other day in the other thread...

I find CNBC as inept at forecasting my finances as Jon Stewart. I've never taken the advise of any television business analyst serious. I have never even considered to use any of their advise as part of a decision balance with my $$$.

I would use Jon Stewarts' skewered view of the world as a barometer for investment before I would take advice from any of these television hawkers. They really suck, I'm so happy I never paid them any mind.

Can anyone really blame Cramer if they lost money based on his "tips" about the market?
We are all responsible for our own actions. If someone lost money in the market, that's their action, not Cramers'.
Cramers' advice is worth exactly what you paid for it, and that's nothing.

[Burnout18]

Can anyone really blame Cramer if they lost money based on his "tips" about the market?
We are all responsible for our own actions. If someone lost money in the market, that's their action, not Cramers'.
Cramers' advice is worth exactly what you paid for it, and that's nothing.

Right, sticking with your NFL analogy, that would be like if the Lions made thier first pick based on what Mel Kiper thinks, and without doing any research of thier own.

Secondly I'd like to point out that the people who turn into CNBC are people who are willing to invest even in these times, but they still want to find bargains, and maybe these viewers sit home and day trade all day or whatever..... Fuck it, I did, why not right?

Cramer got on the Today show on October 6th and said sell now and get out the market if you need your money within the next 5 years. The today show has a much larger audience then CNBC,but includes the regular average joe, who might just have a broker do his work for him or something of that nature,

So basically he tells the public to get out, but for those of you who still tune into my show, i got some tips for ya.....

[yeahwho]

I would use Jon Stewart's investment advice before I used Cramer's investment advice. That video where Cramer tries to bolster himself from Stewart by calling him a "comedian" is troubling. When I give out bad advice I get to hear about it, I'm not insulated and it makes me understand to be wiser in the future.

I do not believe Cramer is the same, I think his appearance on Stewart's show Thursday night has much more to do with self promotion than apologies for being such a tool for investment brokers.

Anyway you slice it, the market is risky business. I have had the ways and means to play the market more than just a few times the past few years, I'm not going to do it. I did switch my deferred comp package to precious metals and have actually profited just a bit. It would be glamorous if home values and energy prices were in line, but they aren't.

Those who stayed with the stock market are just flatout pisssed and a many of the guys who were going to retire this year at work aren't. That's holding back on promotions and oppurtunities for us young guys and making those old guys age way too fast who have to stay beyond 60.

Most all of us here really enjoy the Daily Show, none of us here have ever been too impressed with CNBC. It just seems like an advertisement between commercials with a few occasional ads thrown in on top the sales pitch.

The Daily Show actually entertains and once in awhile makes ya think.

[D_Raay]

Seems pretty damn familiar to me. You know the cat gets run over by (Cramer, Beck, Bush <insert blowhard free market cheerleader here>) the car, and the driver of the car just says "it was trying to commit suicide".

How long are we of sane mind and body going to accept these pathetic excuses and coached rebuttals of little relevance?

[D_Raay]

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

Jon Stewart isn't relevant?

[DroppinScience]

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

Jon Stewart isn't relevant?

The Jon Stewart vs. Jim Cramer showdown was the stuff of legends. It's a shame we couldn't see the WHOLE interview (8 minutes were edited out of the original broadcast), but Stewart didn't let him off the hook for Cramer's and his network's complicity in rampant Wall Street greed.

All Cramer could really do was shrink like a violet and admit he and his cohorts made giant screw-ups after another.

It's like a compressed version of the Frost/Nixon interviews or something. (y)

Best quotes from Stewart:

"(Wall Street) burned the fucking house down with our money, and you guys knew! It was disingenuous at best, and criminal at worst.

I understand that you want to make finance entertaining, but it's not a ... game.

Those of you making horse race analogies should really take THAT quote to heart.

Also a highlight was that Stewart admitted that to an extent both he and Cramer are snake oil salesman, but Jon just sells snake oil, yet Cramer sells snake oil as "vitamin tonic."

[D_Raay]

http://www.thedailyshow.com/

Entire unedited is up on the daily show's website.

[RobMoney$]

Those of you making horse race analogies should really take THAT quote to heart.

That would be me, I made that analogy.
I've tried to avoid your half-hearted attempts to disparage me lately, but you just can't seem to treat me with the respect you should.
Please do me a favor DS, if you're gonna insist on insulting me, try to have enough testicular fortitude to say what you mean.
Nothing annoys me more than that Passive-agressive nonsense.

My point was if you're dumb enough to take financial advice from some talking head on your TV screen (and this goes for either Cramer or Stewart) then you're an idiot.
Do you disagree?
Is there something that you find wrong with that opinion?
Are you against the basic financial principle of "Caveat Emptor"?

Oh, that's right, you're pro-Obama. You think it's the Governments job to bail us out of everything, an entire Stepford nation incapable of exercising even a minimal amount of free-will or independence without being Goverened by someone else.

[DroppinScience]

That would be me, I made that analogy.
I've tried to avoid your half-hearted attempts to disparage me lately, but you just can't seem to treat me with the respect you should.
Please do me a favor DS, if you're gonna insist on insulting me, try to have enough testicular fortitude to say what you mean.
Nothing annoys me more than that Passive-agressive nonsense.

My point was if you're dumb enough to take financial advice from some talking head on your TV screen (and this goes for either Cramer or Stewart) then you're an idiot.
Do you disagree?
Is there something that you find wrong with that opinion?
Are you against the basic financial principle of "Caveat Emptor"?

Oh, that's right, you're pro-Obama. You think it's the Governments job to bail us out of everything, an entire Stepford nation incapable of exercising even a minimal amount of free-will or independence without being Goverened by someone else.

A few things:

1) Put down your Ayn Rand books. THAT warped ideology of thinking the government is not allowed to intervene almost anywhere has been thoroughly discredited over these last few years.

2) Why do you insist on thinking that I'm insulting you each and every time? I don't know about you, but when I engage in discussions and debates with people in real life, I don't resort to school-boy taunts and throwing dirt in everyone's face just because I've got nothing else to say. You debate your points, back them up, and learn to disagree in an agreeable fashion. My attempts to "disparage" you were actually ways of rebutting your arguments in which, from my point of view, I consider completely wrongheaded, misguided, and misinformed. We can engage in debates without it getting personal or insulting. You don't need to have a fist fight every time.

3) In the past, you've referenced CNBC and various other pundits (including Wall Street Journal columnists) who blast Obama's economic policies and deferred to their judgment. When it's revealed that said critics are actually inept and don't know what they're talking about, you retreat and say if people take their advice in the first place, they're morons anyway. I'm sorry, you can't have it both ways. And Jon Stewart never gives financial advice. I know you don't watch his show, but he doesn't tell people what stocks to buy or sell.

[DroppinScience]

Important point to realize in the Stewart vs. Cramer showdown. It's larger than bad economic forecasting and stock advice.

From "The Nation":

In fact, [Cramer] was so quick with his prostration that it seemed clear Cramer didn't really understand Stewart's argument at all, which wasn't about whether he or CNBC was right or wrong on this or that stock tip, but that the network's entire ethos made it part of the massive fraud that Wall Street has been engineering for the past decade or more. Stewart's was that oldest common sense argument: There's no such thing as a free lunch, and wealth you don't have to work for eventually goes poof. "There's a market for it and we give it to them," Cramer protested, showing, again, that he didn't get it. "There's a market for cocaine and hookers too!" Stewart replied.

http://www.thenation.com/blogs/state_of_change/417275/stewart_asks_cramer_where_s_the_d_oh?rel=hp_picks

[Bob]

treat me with the respect you should.

why exactly

[saz]

^bingo

[RobMoney$]

A few things:

1) Put down your Ayn Rand books. THAT warped ideology of thinking the government is not allowed to intervene almost anywhere has been thoroughly discredited over these last few years.

2) Why do you insist on thinking that I'm insulting you each and every time? I don't know about you, but when I engage in discussions and debates with people in real life, I don't resort to school-boy taunts and throwing dirt in everyone's face just because I've got nothing else to say. You debate your points, back them up, and learn to disagree in an agreeable fashion. My attempts to "disparage" you were actually ways of rebutting your arguments in which, from my point of view, I consider completely wrongheaded, misguided, and misinformed. We can engage in debates without it getting personal or insulting. You don't need to have a fist fight every time.

Why do you assume to know what I'm like, or that I resort to school boy taunts "in real life"? It's exactly what I'm asking you to refrain from doing.
I love how you make these passive-aggressive references to things I've posted (the analogy to horse racing tipsheets), and then object to not letting it get personal.


3) In the past, you've referenced CNBC and various other pundits (including Wall Street Journal columnists) who blast Obama's economic policies and deferred to their judgment. When it's revealed that said critics are actually inept and don't know what they're talking about, you retreat and say if people take their advice in the first place, they're morons anyway. I'm sorry, you can't have it both ways. And Jon Stewart never gives financial advice. I know you don't watch his show, but he doesn't tell people what stocks to buy or sell.

WTH are you talking about?
Be specific with whom you're talking about. Which link?
Then explain how they were "inept"?

And I realize Stewart doesn't give financial advice, he just samples soundbites of those who do and followed up by making a goofy face.

[RobMoney$]

why exactly


I guess it's kind of the same reason everyone doesn't laugh to your face for being a virgin.

Common Courtesy.

[Bob]

I guess it's kind of the same reason everyone doesn't laugh to your face for being a virgin.

Common Courtesy.

yeah, you're the paragon of that, i can see where you're coming from

[Bob]

And I realize Stewart doesn't give financial advice, he just samples soundbites of those who do and followed up by making a goofy face.

not to be a cheerleader, but have you ever watched his interviews? he grilled cramer (admittedly on his home turf with a biased audience, but he was still very professional about it), he got crossfire taken off the air by going on the show, he even made tony blair crack a little bit with questions about iraq (starting at about 7:00 (http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=185186&title=Tony-Blair-Pt.-2)). yeah, he's a comedian and he makes goofy faces, but give credit where credit's due, he does a little more than that

[checkyourprez]

I guess it's kind of the same reason everyone doesn't laugh to your face for being a virgin.

Common Courtesy.


big difference between a guy who can come off like a dick a lot of the time and another person whos a nice guy who just hasn't happend to bang a chick yet.

[RobMoney$]

treat me with the respect you should.

why exactly


Doesn't seem like something a nice guy who just hasn't happend to bang a chick yet would say.

That's something who's looking to say something obnoxious for no reason whatsoever would say.


It's not that I have a problem with being obnoxious for no reason. It's fun sometimes. But don't go and get your feelings hurt when I get obnoxious right back at ya, and when all you're doing is piling in on someone else's argument, you come off like a pussy.
It's the internet equivilent of the guy who runs in the middle of someone else's fight and kicks the guy when he's down.

[checkyourprez]

Doesn't seem like something a nice guy who just hasn't happend to bang a chick yet would say.

That's something who's looking to say something obnoxious for no reason whatsoever would say.


It's not that I have a problem with being obnoxious for no reason. It's fun sometimes. But don't go and get your feelings hurt when I get obnoxious right back at ya, and when all you're doing is piling in on someone else's argument, you come off like a pussy.
It's the internet equivilent of the guy who runs in the middle of someone else's fight and kicks the guy when he's down.

I know you can't be referring to me with that statement, if you are that shows me that you dont come off as a dick, you are a dick. And thats why you get treated like one.

[RobMoney$]

not to be a cheerleader, but have you ever watched his interviews? he grilled cramer (admittedly on his home turf with a biased audience, but he was still very professional about it), he got crossfire taken off the air by going on the show, he even made tony blair crack a little bit with questions about iraq (starting at about 7:00 (http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=185186&title=Tony-Blair-Pt.-2)). yeah, he's a comedian and he makes goofy faces, but give credit where credit's due, he does a little more than that


I don't want to be in the position of defending Cramer because I don't follow his show or financial advice, and for the record I don't dislike TDS either. I only objected to someone referencing TDS in a serious discussion about the economy.

But I think we should give a little credit to Jim Cramer for coming on Stewart's show and taking it like a professional.
He was humbled and accepting of the criticism and even apologetic.
He deserves some credit too.

[RobMoney$]

I know you can't be referring to me with that statement, if you are that shows me that you dont come off as a dick, you are a dick. And thats why you get treated like one.

and the fact that you can't figure out who I'm talking about even though I quoted him tells me that you're an idiot.

[Bob]

Doesn't seem like something a nice guy who just hasn't happend to bang a chick yet would say.

That's something who's looking to say something obnoxious for no reason whatsoever would say.


It's not that I have a problem with being obnoxious for no reason. It's fun sometimes. But don't go and get your feelings hurt when I get obnoxious right back at ya, and when all you're doing is piling in on someone else's argument, you come off like a pussy.
It's the internet equivilent of the guy who runs in the middle of someone else's fight and kicks the guy when he's down.

i wasn't saying it "for no reason whatsoever," i was taken aback by the fact that you demanded unconditional respect despite being one of the biggest dicks on the forum, and i took the opportunity to point it out

is this an example of "common courtesy"? because i'm not sure that "courtesy" means what you think it means

[checkyourprez]

some people use language to try and have people infer things, for many reasons whether it be out of cleverness or avoidance out of cowardliness, ect.

the fact that your quite quick to judge without knowing anything about me, and by reading a lot of your other posts confirms the suspected. you are a dick. way to go buddy. hopefully you carry yourself better in person than you carry yourself on the internet, for your kids sake.

[DroppinScience]

I think Bob has been de-virginized for some time now anyways. (y)

But why bring it up anyways? Jim Cramer and Jon Stewart have nothing to do with Bob's sex life.

It's just silly that Rob throws hissy fits for perceived offenses and then turns around and hurls school-boy taunts. Stop trying to have it both ways. Either treat everyone here with respect or learn to take what you dish out.

[checkyourprez]

i do find it funny that a fake news show is one of the only entities really busting peoples ass about things. they like to have a laugh but what he was really talking about with crammer was not a joke. and john wasnt treating it like one. he really gave it to the guy, i felt a little bad for crammer because he does seem like a nice guy, but "it aint about you" as john said in the interview.

[RobMoney$]

It's just silly that Rob throws hissy fits for perceived offenses and then turns around and hurls school-boy taunts. Stop trying to have it both ways. Either treat everyone here with respect or learn to take what you dish out.


Let's not try to twist it here DS. YOU started this.
You've made at least three "passive-aggressive" little personal shots at me this week and each time I've responded by asking you politely to try to not let it get personal. You can't.
So when I respond with something personal you get your feelings all hurt and I look like a bully to the rest of the board.

I'm not trying to have anything both ways. I have no problem taking what you dish out. And what Bob, checkyourprez, QA, or whoever else jumps in to dish out. I'm one of the only conservatives here.

And yes, I asked for you to show me common courtesy. A modicum of respect. If you had, this entire bitchfest wouldn't be taking place right now.

[Documad]

i do find it funny that a fake news show is one of the only entities really busting peoples ass about things. they like to have a laugh but what he was really talking about with crammer was not a joke. and john wasnt treating it like one. he really gave it to the guy, i felt a little bad for crammer because he does seem like a nice guy, but "it aint about you" as john said in the interview.

This.

When I watched that interview I kept thinking: "Why can't one single regular news guy do this?" Why is Jon Stewart the only one who seems to know what happened to Wall Street?

If you watch mainstream news you would think this is just about a 70 year old guy with a ponzi scheme. The fact that NBC is still putting the CNBC jackasses on the air to explain the economy to folks who watch the Today Show is making me furious!

[DroppinScience]

Let's not try to twist it here DS. YOU started this.
You've made at least three "passive-aggressive" little personal shots at me this week and each time I've responded by asking you politely to try to not let it get personal. You can't.
So when I respond with something personal you get your feelings all hurt and I look like a bully to the rest of the board.

Let me quote Stewart quoting Carly Simon: this ain't about you, so stop taking it personal. My so-called shots are at people (any people) who think this is a game. You happen to be one of them, but you ain't the only one. That simple.

And if you end up looking like the bully, that's your own doing. I don't see where calling Bob a virgin bolsters your case. If you wanted the upper hand, remarks like that would be off the table. So you did it to yourself.

[DroppinScience]

If you watch mainstream news you would think this is just about a 70 year old guy with a ponzi scheme. The fact that NBC is still putting the CNBC jackasses on the air to explain the economy to folks who watch the Today Show is making me furious!

Because NBC and CNBC are of the same media conglomerate, so it's all cross-promotion.

[b i o n i c]

the fact that most people* don't think of that when taking watching stuff like that is what's infuriating

*doc is not one of the people im pretty sure

[RobMoney$]

This.

When I watched that interview I kept thinking: "Why can't one single regular news guy do this?" Why is Jon Stewart the only one who seems to know what happened to Wall Street?

If you watch mainstream news you would think this is just about a 70 year old guy with a ponzi scheme. The fact that NBC is still putting the CNBC jackasses on the air to explain the economy to folks who watch the Today Show is making me furious!


What bothers me a little about this whole thing is that I don't know if Stewart would be even bothering if Cramer and Santelli had not criticized Obama's economic plans.

Santelli's rant (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bEZB4taSEoA)

Cramer's rant (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-EqQwr7PLfA&feature=related)

It's interesting that Stewart will go back as far as 2006 for incriminating tape on Cramer, yet he's only surfacing this footage now.
And IMO, whatever Cramer's flaws are past and present, his specific criticism of Obama makes a lot of sense to me, and has not really been refuted in a convincing way. I also don't like this growing atmosphere I am seeing where anyone who takes a shot at Obama is going to be lambasted and ridiculed by people like Jon Stewart.

Another thing that "bothers me" is that they have disclaimers on those shows like Mad Money that say, "you may lose money".
If you invest money based on TV financial guys, who are just offering opinions, who is really at fault?

[Bob]

What bothers me a little about this whole thing is that I don't know if Stewart would be even bothering if Cramer and Santelli had not criticized Obama's economic plans.

Santelli's rant (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bEZB4taSEoA)

Cramer's rant (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-EqQwr7PLfA&feature=related)

It's interesting that Stewart will go back as far as 2006 for incriminating tape on Cramer, yet he's only surfacing this footage now.
And IMO, whatever Cramer's flaws are past and present, his specific criticism of Obama makes a lot of sense to me, and has not really been refuted in a convincing way. I also don't like this growing atmosphere I am seeing where anyone who takes a shot at Obama is going to be lambasted and ridiculed by people like Jon Stewart.

Another thing that "bothers me" is that they have disclaimers on those shows like Mad Money that say, "you may lose money".
If you invest money based on TV financial guys, who are just offering opinions, who is really at fault?

so it bothers you (http://www.beastieboys.com/bbs/showpost.php?p=1652713&postcount=5) that stewart is lambasting and ridiculing obama, and it also bothers you that stewart is lambasting and ridiculing people who lambast and ridicule obama

how can stewart win in your eyes

[DroppinScience]

how can stewart win in your eyes

By ridiculing and lambasting those "loser" homeowners caught in the mix?

[yeahwho]

Here is the thing, Cramer did appear neutered, uninformed and unable to really have any journalistic tough questions. He did not look street smart and his surprise that a failing corporate CEO from Bear Stearns would lie on National TV is a lie.

So after much consideration and review, not only did Jon Stewart expose what many of us have realized for years (this isn't too surprising if you read books and newspapers) he also catapulted his pedigree as one of the few entertainers willing to go beyond just jokes and ask some very hard questions about the failing of American Ideals. Mainly integrity and honesty within journalism.

He just had his finest hour thus far, anybody who's happy that CNBC is profiting from the financial failure of our Country is just a FUBAR individual.

[D_Raay]

Cramer voted for Obama. When faced with a candid sincere interviewer he admitted this. Anything else you may have interpreted from things he has said on his show were along the lines of what Stewart was getting at in the first place. There is an agenda being perpetuated by people who don't want to lose a little bit of their riches back to the people they stole this money from. He shouldn't be on Obama's side? Did you even watch the interview Rob? What part of it do you not get? Why don't you stop thinking of it in terms of repub versus democrat?

Stewart would be the first one to slam Obama if he were to become as corrupt as some of the people we have seen over the last 8 years.

Face it, you've lost this argument, you bet on the wrong horse in this one.

You could have just asked any of us who have watched TDS for a long time now and actually listened to us.

[RobMoney$]

Face it, you've lost this argument, you bet on the wrong horse in this one.


Perhaps,...but I'm not sure I even had a horse in this race.
I wasn't trying to defend Cramer or Stewart.
Thought I was pretty clear that I'm not a fan of either one.

I've lost over 40% of my 401k in the last 6 mos. and I fail to see how Stewart, Cramer, or CNBC are responsible for any of it.

And yes, I did watch the entire interview.
The thrust of the interview to me was that Cramer, as part of the media, was in a position to do some in depth reporting on the shenanagins that were going on, yet he stood by an did nothing while the network trumpeted the whole "loser mortgage people" as the cause of this mess,...in other words stood by and watched the foxes entering the henhouse if you will.
Stewart will have us believe that the irresponsible advice that Cramer promoted on his show led to the average american losing huge portions of their 401k's and pensions. The problem is Cramer has nothing to do with pensions and 401Ks. Casual investors can't move that money around. And while I agree that is not a process that a financial network should taint with bells, horns and flashing lights. (Especially when the host knows what really goes on and has been part of the machine that makes money off of misinformed investors.) Trying to put the burden of financial derivatives that even experts can't understand, Congress' misguided propping up of Fannie and Freddie, the American people's inability to financially see beyond their nose, and the hundreds of other screw-ups that led to this collapse on someone like Cramer is sad. He had nothing to do with it and I have yet to see someone even demonstrate that he knew it was coming. Certainly lots of people, insiders or not, didn't.

Also, where Stewart's premise goes wrong for me is the assumption that Cramer should be a legitimate journalist, as if he should have had a journalistic obligation to expose the shenanigans that Wall St. was propagating.
Cramer's an entertainer and an obvious goofball. You don't have to watch much of his show to see that. Stewart might as well have put Limbaugh up there and beat him up over not being a proper journalist.

Cramers show, like Stewarts', is satire.
Anyone interpreting it as anything else is clearly misguided and has no business investing money anyway. It's a dangerous game, and if you blindly throw money around you're gonna get burned sometime. I mean the network (NBC) is owned by a fucking publicly traded company (GE) and these anchors were seeing their net worth get crushed every single day. How can you expect to take their recommendations seriously? Of course they were bullish on a bunch of shit, anything to bump up that portfolio.

[Documad]

Because NBC and CNBC are of the same media conglomerate, so it's all cross-promotion.

I know. The "NBC" in both their names is a huge clue. :p

The fact that they're part of the same network is a huge part of why I'm furious. On the other hand, I guess they mentioned Jon Stewart on Meet the Press but I didn't see it this morning so I have no idea what they said.

But honestly all of the mainstream media is equally guilty. Again, they're letting everyone think that Madoff is responsible instead of telling americans that they were fooled for years into making investments they had no business making. We're all fools if we think that we have a right to more than a very modest return on any investment in the long term. And we're all huge fools if we don't understand that there is a risk of losing everything. The media should help explain that to people.

Here is the thing, Cramer did appear neutered, uninformed and unable to really have any journalistic tough questions. He did not look street smart and his surprise that a failing corporate CEO from Bear Stearns would lie on National TV is a lie.

So after much consideration and review, not only did Jon Stewart expose what many of us have realized for years (this isn't too surprising if you read books and newspapers) he also catapulted his pedigree as one of the few entertainers willing to go beyond just jokes and ask some very hard questions about the failing of American Ideals. Mainly integrity and honesty within journalism.

I was particularly galled by him repeating that the CEOs lied to him. He has no business being on a "business news channel" if he is simply parroting things that interested executives are saying!

[Documad]

I've lost over 40% of my 401k in the last 6 mos. and I fail to see how Stewart, Cramer, or CNBC are responsible for any of it.

I'm really sorry to hear that. Hopefully you lost your faux profits from past years instead of the money you actually earned and invested. I was lucky. I panicked after 9/11 and started putting more of my retirement money in fixed rate investments.

We're both lucky in that we have years ahead of us where we can still earn and save. I have some friends at work who are near retirement age and I feel just dreadful for them.

[DroppinScience]

Also, where Stewart's premise goes wrong for me is the assumption that Cramer should be a legitimate journalist, as if he should have had a journalistic obligation to expose the shenanigans that Wall St. was propagating.
Cramer's an entertainer and an obvious goofball. You don't have to watch much of his show to see that. Stewart might as well have put Limbaugh up there and beat him up over not being a proper journalist.

Cramers show, like Stewarts', is satire.
Anyone interpreting it as anything else is clearly misguided and has no business investing money anyway. It's a dangerous game, and if you blindly throw money around you're gonna get burned sometime. I mean the network (NBC) is owned by a fucking publicly traded company (GE) and these anchors were seeing their net worth get crushed every single day. How can you expect to take their recommendations seriously? Of course they were bullish on a bunch of shit, anything to bump up that portfolio.

I was with you and more or less agreeing with you up until these last two paragraphs here. If Cramer is considered an entertainer, he should be sold to the public as an entertainer. Instead you get ads like "In Cramer We Trust" and is being paraded around on the other NBC networks as a voice of authority and trust. His show is never touted as "satire" and yes, he does act like a goofball on his "Mad Money" show, but you're meant to get the impression that his show has some semblance of credibility.

Hey, it's really wonderful that you're able to see through the bullshit and should take Cramer for what he actually is, but unfortunately he and others like him led many, many people off a cliff, and it's irresponsible of CNBC and other networks to sell snake oil as vitamin tonic.

I know you're a big fan of touting personal responsibility, and I'm with you here, but I don't find it unreasonable to tout journalistic responsibility among media conglomerates like CNBC either.

[RobMoney$]

I'm really sorry to hear that. Hopefully you lost your faux profits from past years instead of the money you actually earned and invested. I was lucky. I panicked after 9/11 and started putting more of my retirement money in fixed rate investments.

We're both lucky in that we have years ahead of us where we can still earn and save. I have some friends at work who are near retirement age and I feel just dreadful for them.


I'm really sorry to hear about your friends losing thier money, but if they were so close to retirement they really should have lowered their exposure and got into something with a lot lower risk like you did. Bonds, maybe even cash.

[RobMoney$]

I was with you and more or less agreeing with you up until these last two paragraphs here. If Cramer is considered an entertainer, he should be sold to the public as an entertainer. Instead you get ads like "In Cramer We Trust" and is being paraded around on the other NBC networks as a voice of authority and trust. His show is never touted as "satire" and yes, he does act like a goofball on his "Mad Money" show, but you're meant to get the impression that his show has some semblance of credibility.

Hey, it's really wonderful that you're able to see through the bullshit and should take Cramer for what he actually is, but unfortunately he and others like him led many, many people off a cliff, and it's irresponsible of CNBC and other networks to sell snake oil as vitamin tonic.

I know you're a big fan of touting personal responsibility, and I'm with you here, but I don't find it unreasonable to tout journalistic responsibility among media conglomerates like CNBC either.

Yeah but you know what, those people were going to go over the cliff regardless of what Jim Cramer and CNBC advised anyone to do on thier network. Hell, they've got one foot over the edge and the other's on a banana peel themselves. No one is above this collapse.

And yes, it sucks that I've lost a huge chunk of money, but I understand what "high risk, high-reward" means and I'm not about to blame Jim Cramer for not properly explaining it to me on his show.

[ms.peachy]

The Daily Show opens every show with a (rather humourous) disclaimer that it is not a news show, that it is satire, and therefore comedy. As far as I am aware, CNBC does not run a disclaimer at the opening of Mad Money that says "This is just for entertainment, you shouldn't actually listen to any of this as advice, and when we say 'in Cramer we trust', you know, we don't really mean you should trust him, as he doesn't actually know very much about money, he's just here to entertain you".

[checkyourprez]

The Daily Show opens every show with a (rather humourous) disclaimer that it is not a news show, that it is satire, and therefore comedy. As far as I am aware, CNBC does not run a disclaimer at the opening of Mad Money that says "This is just for entertainment, you shouldn't actually listen to any of this as advice, and when we say 'in Cramer we trust', you know, we don't really mean you should trust him, as he doesn't actually know very much about money, he's just here to entertain you".

to build on that, who is purely watching mad money for entertainment purposes only? that is such a retarded stance to take i really cant fathom how someone could really try and make a point out of that.

[RobMoney$]

The Daily Show opens every show with a (rather humourous) disclaimer that it is not a news show, that it is satire, and therefore comedy. As far as I am aware, CNBC does not run a disclaimer at the opening of Mad Money that says "This is just for entertainment, you shouldn't actually listen to any of this as advice, and when we say 'in Cramer we trust', you know, we don't really mean you should trust him, as he doesn't actually know very much about money, he's just here to entertain you".


Ahh...another person who doesn't know the difference between investment advice and reporting.
Jim Cramer offers advice, he's not a reporter or a journalist. Stop expecting him to be one.
You're suggesting we skewer Jim Cramer for failing to be the one guy in the history of man who couldn't actually predict the future accurately, and do it for free on TV?
While I rarely ever watch his show, I've heard Cramer suggest often that you should do one hour of homework per week for every stock that you own.
And anyone who sees a promo for Mad Money like "In Cramer We Trust" and takes that as anything other than obvious tongue in cheek satire is just foolish.



"The only function of economic forecasting is to make astrology look respectable."- John Kenneth Galbraith

[Dorothy Wood]

I don't watch that cramer guy because he's always yelling. but he acted like a bashful bunny on the daily show.

rob, it seems like you're just arguing for arguing's sake, and because jon stewart is "liberal".

and maybe you forgot, but there are a lot of foolish people in this country. and they take things like, "in cramer we trust" seriously. did CNBC bring down the economy? no, proably not, but stewart was just pointing out that their "advice" was irresponsible.

[yeahwho]

I was particularly galled by him repeating that the CEOs lied to him. He has no business being on a "business news channel" if he is simply parroting things that interested executives are saying!

I have really had no beef with this Cramer guy until he said that he couldn't believe a trusted friend (who happens to be the CEO of Bear Sterns) would lie to him.... Cramer himself was exposed lying on how to make a hedge fund sell short at that very moment, talk about total bullshit, lying to make money is what happened here, people were pathologically lying and this was supported, encouraged and nurtured in the Banking, Real Estate and Corporate cultures of the United States.

I hate to get on a moral crusade but C'mon!

Has he not even a clue to his own pathological bullshit? He isn't fucking kidding me. This isn't some fucked up game, this is our very foundation of truth liberty and the pursuit of happiness, the American way he is trying to twist.

Stewart exposed him with kid gloves, I can fill in the spaces, this isn't a Liberal or Conservative issue, it's an integrity and honesty issue.

[ms.peachy]

Just so I understand where you're coming from Rob, is it your contention that CNBC has acted responsibly in both their advice (when that's what it is) and reporting (when that's what it is)?

[RobMoney$]

I'm sitting here picking my March Madness bracket as I type this.

If Dick Vitale comes on ESPN and says he thinks North Carolina is going to win the title and they don't, is that irresponsible of him?
There are millions of americans getting ready to bet $10 on their office pools using Vitale's advice.



It's my contention that Cramer offers advice. Whether you follow it is YOUR decision. Expecting him to be a proper journalist and have an obligation to expose a fraud he had knowledge of is hilarous to me.

If you walked into the offices of Merrill Lynch and you met with a guy that was honking a horn at you and throwing little plastic Cows through his legs (things Cramer does on his show), would you trust him with handling your retirement fund?

I like applying lessons I've learned from my time at horse tracks and gambling (because that's exactly what Wall St. is, legalizied gambling).
When you go to the track, you buy a program that tells you every horse running in every race that day, along with a bunch of info about each horse.
On the front and back of each program is an ad for gamblers anonymous. It gives a phone number to call along with their slogan, which is one of my favorite sayings,... "bet with your head, not over it".
People shouldn't risk more than they can afford to lose, whether it's at the track, or on Wall St.

[RobMoney$]

rob, it seems like you're just arguing for arguing's sake, and because jon stewart is "liberal".


I'm not here for that today. TY

[D_Raay]

I'm sitting here picking my March Madness bracket as I type this.

If Dick Vitale comes on ESPN and says he thinks North Carolina is going to win the title and they don't, is that irresponsible of him?
There are millions of americans getting ready to bet $10 on their office pools using Vitale's advice.



It's my contention that Cramer offers advice. Whether you follow it is YOUR decision. Expecting him to be a proper journalist and have an obligation to expose a fraud he had knowledge of is hilarous to me.

If you walked into the offices of Merrill Lynch and you met with a guy that was honking a horn at you and throwing little plastic Cows through his legs (things Cramer does on his show), would you trust him with handling your retirement fund?

I like applying lessons I've learned from my time at horse tracks and gambling (because that's exactly what Wall St. is, legalizied gambling).
When you go to the track, you buy a program that tells you every horse running in every race that day, along with a bunch of info about each horse.
On the front and back of each program is an ad for gamblers anonymous. It gives a phone number to call along with their slogan, which is one of my favorite sayings,... "bet with your head, not over it".
People shouldn't risk more than they can afford to lose, whether it's at the track, or on Wall St.

This is where you disconnect from alot of us here. You are a selfish petty person who imagines himself as intelligent.

There's quite a difference between some blowhard college basketball analyst and a network that claims to be a financial news outlet. There is no disclaimer upon viewing CNBC that what they report is akin to horse racing or betting on college basketball. They set themselves up as a serious news agency. And when one of theirs refers to people who are now in serious financial peril as "losers" they damn well better expect to feel some blowback and some anger. The only thing that surprises me is it wasn't tenfold. I seriously doubt anyone's going to lose their home if they lose the office bracket.

This man Cramer all but admitted that he knew "shenanagins" were taking place and chose to continue throwing plastic cows through his legs. He chose to. That in and of itself aligns him the likes of you, maybe it's fate.

[Bob]

There's quite a difference between some blowhard college basketball analyst and a network that claims to be a financial news outlet. There is no disclaimer upon viewing CNBC that what they report is akin to horse racing or betting on college basketball. They set themselves up as a serious news agency. And when one of theirs refers to people who are now in serious financial peril as "losers" they damn well better expect to feel some blowback and some anger. The only thing that surprises me is it wasn't tenfold. I seriously doubt anyone's going to lose their home if they lose the office bracket.



it's also worth noting that the only people who can get screwed by bad bets on sports games are people who make bets on sports games. i don't have a mortgage and i've never bought or sold a stock but i'm still screwed

[yeahwho]

it's also worth noting that the only people who can get screwed by bad bets on sports games are people who make bets on sports games. i don't have a mortgage and i've never bought or sold a stock but i'm still screwed

This is proof that college is better than the working life, that's what I've been thinking and trying to say all along.

[saz]

(y)


There's quite a difference between some blowhard college basketball analyst and a network that claims to be a financial news outlet. There is no disclaimer upon viewing CNBC that what they report is akin to horse racing or betting on college basketball. They set themselves up as a serious news agency. And when one of theirs refers to people who are now in serious financial peril as "losers" they damn well better expect to feel some blowback and some anger. The only thing that surprises me is it wasn't tenfold. I seriously doubt anyone's going to lose their home if they lose the office bracket.

This man Cramer all but admitted that he knew "shenanagins" were taking place and chose to continue throwing plastic cows through his legs. He chose to.

[RobMoney$]

it's also worth noting that the only people who can get screwed by bad bets on sports games are people who make bets on sports games. i don't have a mortgage and i've never bought or sold a stock but i'm still screwed


Yes, let's all feel sorry for the kid walking around with the law degree.

Poor you.

[Bob]

Yes, let's all feel sorry for the kid walking around with the law degree.

Poor you.

thanks, i apprecia heyyyy

[Burnout18]

This man Cramer all but admitted that he knew "shenanagins" were taking place and chose to continue throwing plastic cows through his legs. He chose to. That in and of itself aligns him the likes of you, maybe it's fate.


except for when he got the on the today show and said "get out if you need your money in five years" the week before the dow tanked in October.

[RobMoney$]

This is where you disconnect from alot of us here. You are a selfish petty person who imagines himself as intelligent.

There's quite a difference between some blowhard college basketball analyst and a network that claims to be a financial news outlet. There is no disclaimer upon viewing CNBC that what they report is akin to horse racing or betting on college basketball. They set themselves up as a serious news agency. And when one of theirs refers to people who are now in serious financial peril as "losers" they damn well better expect to feel some blowback and some anger. The only thing that surprises me is it wasn't tenfold. I seriously doubt anyone's going to lose their home if they lose the office bracket.

This man Cramer all but admitted that he knew "shenanagins" were taking place and chose to continue throwing plastic cows through his legs. He chose to. That in and of itself aligns him the likes of you, maybe it's fate.


I don't fashion myself as anything. I'm a dope, I've got no problem admitting that. I dropped out of college in my second year when my wife became pregnant with my first kid and never returned. But what I may lack in formal education I make up for with common sense and hustle.

I'll tell you something else, One thing I am not is a fucking elitist snob, and that's how you come off in that post with your "you don't fit in around here because you only fashion yourself as intelligent" bullshit.

I'll tell you why I don't fit in around here. It's because I'm not a 22 yo. liberal college student. I'm a 37yo. conservative father who happens to be a diehard Beasties fan. There's not many people here who fall into my demographic.
I used to be the 22yo. liberal student who thinks they can change the world through a protest, but then I grew up, got a job, had kids, got a mortgage, and took responsibility for myself and my family and saw how the world really is.

[RobMoney$]

except for when he got the on the today show and said "get out if you need your money in five years" the week before the dow tanked in October.


Cramer is the scapegoat, that's their story and they're sticking to it.

[Bob]

I don't fashion myself as anything. I'm a dope, I've got no problem admitting that. I dropped out of college in my second year when my wife became pregnant with my first kid and never returned. But what I may lack in formal education I make up for with common sense and hustle.

I'll tell you something else, One thing I am not is a fucking elitist snob, and that's how you come off in that post with your "you don't fit in around here because you only fashion yourself as intelligent" bullshit.

I'll tell you why I don't fit in around here. It's because I'm not a 22 yo. liberal college student. I'm a 37yo. conservative father who happens to be a diehard Beasties fan. There's not many people here who fall into my demographic.
I used to be the 22yo. liberal student who thinks they can change the world through a protest, but then I grew up, got a job, had kids, got a mortgage, and took responsibility for myself and my family and saw how the world really is.

do you not see how condescending and snobbish this sounds?

[RobMoney$]

No. I don't see how it's the least bit snobbish actually.
Maybe you should educate me on why it's snobbish since you're educated and therefore not disconnected from most of the people in this forum.

[Bob]

No. I don't see how it's the least bit snobbish actually.
Maybe you should educate me on why it's snobbish since you're educated and therefore not disconnected from most of the people in this forum.

i don't know if this is an act, but alright, i'll bite

what i hear you saying is that you're above all of the campus fuckfaces on this forum because you've got life experience; you have kids, a mortgage, a family, personal responsibility, and you know how the world really works, unlike all the naive campus liberals (whom you're better than, though to your credit you don't actually say that explicitly) who've never worked a day in their life and will become good sensible conservatives just like you once they get out of school and see how the world really is. you've got this very frustrating "you think you're better than me?!" complex where you feel the need to condescend to everyone who finished/will finish college and tell them how much more knowledgeable you are than them about the world and you didn't even need a high falootin' education to do it, so how dare they make you think that they think they're better than you

i apologize if you feel like i'm lording my education over you. i'm not. i don't care that you didn't finish college, i don't think i'm smarter or better than you (i majored in political science, i didn't learn shit), and i don't mean to come off as elitist, and i apologize if anything i say makes you feel like i want you to feel like you're inferior (again and again, i don't) but it's just ironic how condescending you can be when you're bragging about how elitist and snobbish you aren't

maybe i just misread it though, i don't know

[RobMoney$]

i don't know if this is an act, but alright, i'll bite

what i hear you saying is that you're above (Different than) all of the campus fuckfaces on this forum because you've got life experience; you have kids, a mortgage, a family, personal responsibility, and you know (have a different perspective on) how the world really works, unlike all the naive (less experienced) campus liberals (whom you're better than, though to your credit you don't actually say that explicitly) (consider that maybe I don't say that because it's not how I think) who've never worked a day in their life (not my opinion at all!) and will become good sensible conservatives just like you once they get out of school and see how the world really is. you've got this very frustrating "you think you're better than me?!" complex where you feel the need to condescend to everyone who finished/will finish college and tell them how much more knowledgeable you are than them about the world and you didn't even need a high falootin' education to do it, so how dare they make you think that they think they're better than you


I don't have a negative opinion of anyone with a degree, in fact I've got no problem admitting I'm envious. I wish I had the degree you have Bob.
I stress to my kids ALL THE TIME how important education is.
At this point in time I feel pretty confident that they've got that message loud and clear because they're both honor-roll students and are on the right path to higher education.

And I absolutely do not think any of you "have never worked a day in your lives" either. Not sure how you infered that from anything I said.
I worked and paid for my tuition myself when I was going to school, and my GF, (who's currently in grad school) works a full-time job while paying her own tuition along with helping with the bills here.
So no, I don't think that all college students have "never worked a day in their lives", but I do think that about some of the people who post here based on the things they post.

[Dorothy Wood]

After graduating from William and Mary in 1984, Stewart held numerous jobs, including: contingency planner for the New Jersey Department of Human Services, contract administrator for City University of New York (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City_University_of_New_York), puppeteer for children with disabilities, construction worker, caterer, busboy, shelf stocker at Woolworth's (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F._W._Woolworth_Company), assistant soccer coach at a high school, and bartender at a local blue-collar bar, the Franklin Corner Tavern.



I just wanted to stick that in here to get the thread back to the subject. it's from wikipedia, so who knows if it's completely true or not.


anyway, jon stewart's a pretty cool dude in my humble opinion.

[Documad]

Rob, I am not trying to be pissy, but I'd like to know how you behaved when you were a liberal in your 20s. Did you volunteer at a homeless shelter? Advocate for affirmative action in your workplace? Crusade for gay rights? How did you express your liberalism? You don't seem like someone who was ever truly liberal.

I'm over 40 and my politics haven't changed very much. I think that american politics has changed. Republicans used to stand for something other than douchy behavior. Prochoice folks used to be at home in the party (at least in my state). I still have some deeply rooted republican values, but I have nothing in common with Rush Limbaugh or Mitt Romney, et al. I've always been a fiscal conservative and a social liberal. My views are a bit more tempered by my life experience now but that just makes them more deeply held.

But back to the subject: I am a little more in love with Jon Stewart every year.

[D_Raay]

I am a college student, well a 35 year old college student going on year number 6. I have two kids, am recently divorced (she liked the drink a little more than anything else), and don't consider myself anything anymore. I mean if I am a liberal by my actions then so be it , but I certainly don't set out thinking "hey, I'm a liberal and I need to behave like this, or say that".

My point with Rob was if there is one thing I have learned in my life is there is no point in being selfish and bitter, life is to damn short and is much more rewarding when you put others before yourself. Humility and nobility are the real values of life, not a political affiliation.

And then there is just simply reality. If common sense were indeed a quality possessed then seeing reality should come easier. The reality is that Jon Stewart very succinctly yet comically put together a few things for his audience that are the reality of the situation. The means to this end mean little as the reality is the same. It's like arguing that a grilled cheese that looks like Jesus ceases to be a grilled cheese.

[Bob]

with bush out of office i was worried the daily show would run out of material and get boring, but thank god for fox news, the show's possibly even better now

http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=223862&title=baracknophobia-obey

(i dunno if non-americans will be able to watch that but...suck my truck nutz)

[kaiser soze]

hahaha!

How quickly their tune changes.

Before it was Freedom now it's Tyranny

[checkyourprez]

with bush out of office i was worried the daily show would run out of material and get boring, but thank god for fox news, the show's possibly even better now

http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=223862&title=baracknophobia-obey

(i dunno if non-americans will be able to watch that but...suck my truck nutz)

thank you for bringing this to my attention bob.


this is eff'in funnnnnny. republicans....biggest hypocrites ever, im talking the history of time here. i think their next campaign slogan should be, "hypocrisy-lets get back to business 2012".

[Bob]

thank you for bringing this to my attention bob.


this is eff'in funnnnnny. republicans....biggest hypocrites ever, im talking the history of time here. i think their next campaign slogan should be, "hypocrisy-lets get back to business 2012".

i wouldn't even pin it on republicans in general really, it's just these ridiculous war drum thumping fox news pundits. it's simultaneously amazing and terrifying that people watch this shit, think it's "news", believe the "fair and balanced" slogan, all that shit...it isn't news, it's propaganda that's disguised as news (compared to something like the daily show which is propaganda that has the courtesy to dress as propaganda)...it's unsettling.

in a related story, fuck glenn beck, seriously (http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/223279/march-31-2009/the-10-31-project)

[kaiser soze]

oh yeah, fuck Glenn Beck with a fish dick

[King PSYZ]

how sad is it that a comedy show delivers some of the hardest hitting stories of the day when we have whole networks dedicated to news?

[NoFenders]

hard hitting lmao!

[King PSYZ]

keep laughing, it hides the tears

[NoFenders]

Holy shit! That actually made me laugh. No tears yet, so keep'em coming.

A comedy network as the hardest hitting news source. Sure , there's some truth to his show. But isn't the point of it to make you laugh? News today is hardly laughable. Especially the hardest hitting stories of today. Maybe to you, but not to most in this world.

I find his show kinda predictable. I know where all of his bits go before he even gets to his punch line. Very scripted, and more of the same just about every day.

[King PSYZ]

my point is, the networks dedicated to news gloss over what a half hour comedy show seems to be able to communicate even under the guise of humor.

[Burnout18]

I find his show kinda predictable. I know where all of his bits go before he even gets to his punch line. Very scripted, and more of the same just about every day.

you know who isn't that predictable,,, that goddam steven colbert. He is fucking genious.

[Bob]

you know who isn't that predictable,,, that goddam steven colbert. He is fucking genious.

yes, (http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/220649/march-04-2009/doom-bunker---glenn-beck-s--war-room-) indeed (http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/220650/march-04-2009/doom-bunker---jack-jacobs-and-stephen-moore)

[checkyourprez]

Holy shit! That actually made me laugh. No tears yet, so keep'em coming.

A comedy network as the hardest hitting news source. Sure , there's some truth to his show. But isn't the point of it to make you laugh? News today is hardly laughable. Especially the hardest hitting stories of today. Maybe to you, but not to most in this world.

I find his show kinda predictable. I know where all of his bits go before he even gets to his punch line. Very scripted, and more of the same just about every day.

prove it.

[yeahwho]

yes, (http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/220649/march-04-2009/doom-bunker---glenn-beck-s--war-room-) indeed (http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/220650/march-04-2009/doom-bunker---jack-jacobs-and-stephen-moore)

lol, that doom bunker intro alone is funny as anything I've seen all year

[NoFenders]

you know who isn't that predictable,,, that goddam steven colbert. He is fucking genious.

He's got some funny stuff indeed. Genius might be a little overboard, but hey, we've all got a different sense of humor.