Stewart v. Cramer

The forum for general posting. Come join the madness. :)
Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
Bob78164
Bored Moderator
Posts: 22148
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:02 pm
Location: By the phone

Stewart v. Cramer

#1 Post by Bob78164 » Sat Mar 14, 2009 3:01 pm

Oh . . . my . . . God.

I just saw Jon Stewart absolutely dismantle Jim Cramer. I know that the interview aired Thursday, but since I watch very little cable news or commentary, I hadn't heard about it before. The commentary in the blogosphere got my attention, though, so I watched the unedited interview via links on fivethirtyeight.com.

If that's what Stewart's show is like, I may need to start making time for it on my schedule. --Bob
"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." Thomas Jefferson

User avatar
elwoodblues
Posts: 3875
Joined: Mon Nov 12, 2007 2:36 pm
Location: Texas

Re: Stewart v. Cramer

#2 Post by elwoodblues » Sat Mar 14, 2009 3:09 pm

I watch The Daily Show fairly often, and this is not typical. He usually has an interview at the end of the show, but it is rarely as hard-hitting as this one. He mostly makes jokes about the news of the day from the liberal perspective. But he does occasionally make a joke about Obama, which is more than most of the late-night comics will do.

User avatar
Jeemie
Posts: 7303
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 5:35 pm
Location: City of Champions Once More (Well, in spirit)!!!!

Re: Stewart v. Cramer

#3 Post by Jeemie » Sat Mar 14, 2009 3:17 pm

Stewart is pissed off at the way the media shilled for Wall Street and glorified the unadulterated gambling that was going on from the late 90s-early 2000s...at our expense.

I don't think I've ever seen him so angry.

And he PWNED Cramer. Absolutely PWNED him.
1979 City of Champions 2009

User avatar
Weyoun
Posts: 3358
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 9:36 pm

Re: Stewart v. Cramer

#4 Post by Weyoun » Sat Mar 14, 2009 3:55 pm

Stewart gets serious when he smells a danger to liberalism. It's too bad that he doesn't realize that anti-growth policies at this juncture are the last thing that liberalism needs.

User avatar
silverscreenselect
Posts: 24622
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:21 pm
Contact:

Re: Stewart v. Cramer

#5 Post by silverscreenselect » Sat Mar 14, 2009 5:45 pm

Weyoun wrote: It's too bad that he doesn't realize that anti-growth policies at this juncture are the last thing that liberalism needs.
Unfortunately, the last thing liberalism needs is what they have right now, a faux-liberal president who is in way over his head and whose failure will be trumpeted around by the right wing as a failure of liberalism in general.
Check out our website: http://www.silverscreenvideos.com

User avatar
MarleysGh0st
Posts: 27966
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:55 am
Location: Elsewhere

Re: Stewart v. Cramer

#6 Post by MarleysGh0st » Sun Mar 15, 2009 8:51 am

Bob78164 wrote:If that's what Stewart's show is like, I may need to start making time for it on my schedule. --Bob
This showdown was building all week, after Stewart ran a segment critical of CNBC, Cramer responded to Stewart (using various other shows as his forums), Stewart responded to that, until they got to this interview.

A cynical person might imagine that the two sides organized this whole spat as a cross-promotion, except that Cramer came out of it so much worse! :twisted:

User avatar
Sir_Galahad
Posts: 1516
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 7:47 pm
Location: In The Heartland

Re: Stewart v. Cramer

#7 Post by Sir_Galahad » Sun Mar 15, 2009 8:52 am

silverscreenselect wrote:
Weyoun wrote: It's too bad that he doesn't realize that anti-growth policies at this juncture are the last thing that liberalism needs.
Unfortunately, the last thing liberalism needs is what they have right now, a faux-liberal president who is in way over his head and whose failure will be trumpeted around by the right wing as a failure of liberalism in general.
Well put, SSS. I'm not liberal by any stretch. But, it seems to me that the last thing liberalism needs is a guy in the WH that has no clue as to what he is doing and pushing a far-left agenda that is actually goes against the grain of what the American general voting public believes. Unfortunately, by the time 2012 rolls around, I fear this country will not be your grandfather's country any longer and it will take many years to unravel what Obama has planned to implement. Just one man's opinion. The only Hope and Change I can look forward to now is 2010.
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing" - Edmund Burke

Perhaps the Hokey Pokey IS what it's all about...

User avatar
Jeemie
Posts: 7303
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 5:35 pm
Location: City of Champions Once More (Well, in spirit)!!!!

Re: Stewart v. Cramer

#8 Post by Jeemie » Sun Mar 15, 2009 10:10 am

Weyoun wrote:Stewart gets serious when he smells a danger to liberalism. It's too bad that he doesn't realize that anti-growth policies at this juncture are the last thing that liberalism needs.
This makes absolutely no sense.

How does the financial meltdown represent 'a danger to liberalism"?
1979 City of Champions 2009

User avatar
Weyoun
Posts: 3358
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 9:36 pm

Re: Stewart v. Cramer

#9 Post by Weyoun » Sun Mar 15, 2009 10:17 am

Jeemie wrote:
Weyoun wrote:Stewart gets serious when he smells a danger to liberalism. It's too bad that he doesn't realize that anti-growth policies at this juncture are the last thing that liberalism needs.
This makes absolutely no sense.

How does the financial meltdown represent 'a danger to liberalism"?
Sure, it can be played to give Obama more power. But if the economy really collapses, then it's going to be hard to pin this on Bush. And I've seen nothing in Obama to suggest he can Fireside Chat his way through this.

User avatar
Tocqueville3
Posts: 702
Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2007 8:39 am
Location: Mississippi

Re: Stewart v. Cramer

#10 Post by Tocqueville3 » Sun Mar 15, 2009 11:50 am

silverscreenselect wrote:
Weyoun wrote: It's too bad that he doesn't realize that anti-growth policies at this juncture are the last thing that liberalism needs.
Unfortunately, the last thing liberalism needs is what they have right now, a faux-liberal president who is in way over his head and whose failure will be trumpeted around by the right wing as a failure of liberalism in general.

Barack Obama has no idea what he's doing. Half the time he looks like a deer in the headlights and the other half he's reading from a teleprompter. His incompetence really scares me.
"I would drape myself in velvet if it were socially acceptable."
--George Costanza

Post Reply