Below is video of Jim Cramer defending himself against Jon Stewart's slam last week. I've got no problem with that. But Scarborough piles on by claiming Stewart is no longer "speaking truth to power" and then saying, "he's an ideologue and when George W. Bush was president, he spoke truth to power. Now that Barack Obama's president, suddenly nothing's funny about attacking the president."
Right. Which would explain this clip. Or this clip. Or this clip. Or this clip. Scarborough goes on to bizarrely criticize Stewart for not having transcripts that can be put up on YouTube (?!?!?). But, in fact, The Daily Show has some of the deepest archives on the net right now. If you want to see Stewart attacking The Surge, as Scarborough apparently would like to, all you need to do is go to Comedy Central's own site and search the archives, and watch the entire episode.
Look, Stewart isn't impartial, and no one who's seen their show would think that he isn't were. But arguing that they're somehow ignoring Obama is demonstrably false.
The Beautiful Struggle: A Father, Two Sons, and an Unlikely Road to Manhood 
Copyright © 2009 by The Atlantic Monthly Group. All rights reserved.
I heard Cramer's rant this morning on the Today Show and he came off as a crybaby. Personally, I find it hard that anyone, with any brains, actually listens to him or any economic pundit on CNBC. Those guys just spend their time yelling at everyone and each other. Bloomberg is a much better business channel.
It baffles me why Cramer keeps getting more and more press when its only become more and more clear that neither he, nor any of his cnbc compatriots, really have any idea what they are talking about. Why does there continue to be so many interviews with a man who has been so bad at his job? What authority does he still possibly command? The network has been parroting back the talking points supplied to them by huge corporate institutions and their leaders for the past decade - now we know that many of THOSE guys didnt know what they were doing either, yet we still are acting as if nothing has changed.
I'm sure that Stewart's done lots of criticizing Obama and stuff, but it kinda weakens your case that "this clip" and "this clip" and "this clip" are all, um, the same clip.
Umm... you mean he is partial, right? Like he isn't impartial?
Stewart's slam last week is tame compared to the bomb he dropped on Cramer last night. Is that up online? It was unreal.
Cramer's been defending himself for months, saying he never told anyone to buy Bear Stearns, he was just telling them not to worry about taking their money out of the bank. Turns out, in that one clip Stewart played, Cramer was right; it was out of context.
Stewart conceded that mistake, then went on to find multiple clips of Cramer urging people to, direct quote, "BUY BEAR." Unbelievable.
oh please. Scarborough is a hack that got lucky Don Imus ran off at the mouth so he could get a second bite at the apple.
Given how thoroughly Stewart and Co. dissected CNBC last week and Cramer last night, does Joe really want them to come through the dreck he's been offering up every morning?
Jon Stewart has a show on COMEDY CENTRAL. I mean, God bless him and I'm very glad he is there, but the people who are supposed to be speaking "truth to power" are the news media, and we all know how that's going.
I'm not one to ever correct grammar, but your last sentence is tough to understand. I think you mean he IS partial, right?
In this clip, I think even Cramer thinks that Scarborough is going over the top with whining. Why doesn't Mika kick him under the table or something? Her dad would.
Look, Stewart isn't partial, and no one who's seen their show would think that he isn't were
Yglesias? Is that you?
Tray,
Thanks for the catch. Fixt. Ditto others.
Stewart is speaking "truth to power" - the power being the news media.
Hacks like Jim Cramer are in positions of power, too. When Stewart turns his guns on them, he is speaking truth to power, even if they are oblivious to the ways their hackiness poisons the political process.
Joe Scarborough continues to prove just how stunningly superficial he can be.
One of the things I hate most about Joe S. is that he loves to pretend he is one of these poor, powerless, middle class everymen. Yglesias did a pretty good takedown of David Gregory for this type of thing. It's so phony, it hurts. I wish these guys would wake up and realize they are part of the elite fucking establishment. Here's a tip: if you are on teevee every morning, you're probably not representative of the average American.
I have zero pity for Cramer. The guy loves attention and said that Obama was trying to "destroy" the economy. Well, is he surprised that someone decided to push back? If you make a living offering opinions you better expect that sometimes when you're wrong it's going to get thrown back in your face. And if you're talking about how great a company is 6 days before it goes under you better expect that you're going to be made fun of.
CNBC has been throwing out a bunch of "analysts" lately all criticizing Obama's economic plans stating it will lead us all to economic ruin. But the truth is they're all just a bunch of rich assholes that don't want their taxes to go up.
If CNBC wants to step into the arena that is their right. But they've got to understand that not a lot of people are going to be sympathetic to the Wall Street douchebags who are partly responsible for getting us all into this mess.
I loves me my Matt Lauer, but I may need to stop watching The Today Show. Every morning they have Cramer one talking about the economy. It's lunacy to ask a Wall Street hack how to fix the economy that was basically broken by Wall Street hacks...
Jim Cramer is a sorry ass former stock-broker and resident louthmouth of CNBC...he's basically Bill O talking stocks (NOT economy). Scarborough is resident louthmouth and MSNBC "blue-collar" representative asshat with a degree in false equivalencies...this is too fucking retarded to be true...First off, Stewart is not a "ideologue" anymore than Scarborough is accurate. He's a comedian...period...second, his "view" of what people should do, is presented everyday on his show, when ever he has a guest on, he challenges them. I've yet to see scarborough do this with anyone in his own ideological wing.
Stewart is by and large a lefty. It's disingenuous to say otherwise; however, the right are endlessly trite about what they think critiquing Obama or his programs ought to be about. The right, guys like Scarborough included, think that the only purpose to critical commentary is promoting tired conservative critiques to enhance their own entertainment cred. Criticize the stimulus with Reaganesque bromides--boraxo for our contemporary Death Valley Days, not critique the endless sinkhole that the financial and banking markets and their propagandizers and enablers have created.
But more, they don't see half the battle that Stewart is fighting is to point out in ways that non-specialists, non-theorists--people who are merely thoughtful and concerned can understand the quackish ways in which they are being manipulated by fools, who not unlike Mr. Scarborough, act like they know something when all they are is political vaudeville.
Amen Kat.
I'm loving this. Joe Scarborough is totally setting himself up here and Cramer looks like the proverbial deer in the headlights. One of things that the Daily Show does so well of course is prick the vanity of America's broadcast TV personalities while ON TV - and before they starting doing it who else was? These people need to be humbled. If The Daily Show hadn't done what it did Joe Scarborough wouldn't be admitting here that he makes mistakes, probably all the time - which is what he's basically doing. When your job is to speak extemporaneously on TV while projecting total confidence on subjects that you aren't really grasping and that don't actually fit into a ten to fifteen second clip - you deserve this kind of treatment. And they're very well compensated after all, so I feel no pity for them.
But TV lives in the ever lasting present - and rarely are they called to account over whatever horrendous thing they got wrong. I once watched Jim Cramer on the old Cramer and Kudlow show on September 12, 2002 say that "it was time to stop the mourning and START THE BOMBING". I'll never forget it - it freaked me out so much. He didn't say who to bomb - just START THE BOMBING. I guess he was talking about Iraq.
Thank God for the internet. Cable TV punditry has serious debased the level of political discourse, perhaps irretrievably so.
When they are out of their depth or don't know the answer I just wish pundits would come at their subjects from a position of curiosity by asking questions and exploring instead of just this bullshit pose of total authority all the time, forever blowing out their collective ass.
If The Daily Show hadn't done what it did Joe Scarborough wouldn't be admitting here that he makes mistakes
Scarborough, doesn't just make mistakes, he deliberately propagates lies.
stellar,
was that 9/12/2002 or 2001? it would be much more understandable (albeit still no better as an approach) if the latter.. -sv
sv - It was 2002 man. It was right after Bush made his speech to the annual gathering of the UN that basically began his campaign to gin up the Iraq War. It was a year and a day after the BIG day - I swear.
Jon Stewart vs Cramer is like KRS-One vs all those MCs that need to Act Like Ya Know:
"Some MC's don't like the KRS but they must respect him
Cos they know this kid gets all up in they rectum
Slappin' and selectin' em, checkin' em, disrespectin' em
Just deckin' em, deckin' em, deck-in' em"
Jon Stewart isn't SUPPOSED to speak truth to power, he isn't SUPPOSED to be "fair", "balanced", or objective.
He's supposed to be funny- and he succeeds, in part because he's sincere in his beliefs.
OTOH, the people bitching aren't funny at all. In fact, it's kind of infuriating that they're holding him to standards most cable journalists don't even meet, AND that they only seem to do it when he turns his sights on them.
Scarborough is wrong, and here's why...
David Foster Wallace laid out the fundamental tension: irony and satire are very efficient at destroying, but can't rebuild afterwards. Scarborough gets this. But what Scarborough doesn't get is that the satirist and the rebuilder need not be the same person - Jon Stewart doesn't have to maintain a highly successful investment firm in order to be justified in attacking Jim Cramer. Some things desperately need destroying - for example, George W. Bush, Jim Cramer, CNBC, and Joe Scarborough - and so pointing out their ridiculousness is enough.
In this sense, Stewart is performing a public service on the Daily Show. But I'd argue that we on the left are doing so well lately not just because we have these incredibly effective satirists taking the conservative movement apart a piece at a time in a very high-profile way, but because per DFW, *we also have offer to replace it*. Specifically, we have an extremely positive and coherent national political movement, with a politician driving it who is as good at communicating way to rebuild as Stewart is at destroying. In effect, when considering the left *as a movement*, we're able both to say "those guys are *jackasses*" AND "let's try this instead." And it's working - Scarborough's party has lost their asses two elections in a row.
The other things people have pointed out - Stewart actually does criticize Obama, these guys are crybabies, etc. - are valid. But even if they weren't, Scarborough's complaints would still be hollow.
Alternately, this snarky response:
"You know, Jon, Scarborough criticizes your show, criticizes the way you do comedy, but he's never done standup! He's never gotten on your show to discuss the theory and practice behind The Aristocrats! All Scarborough has to do is sit in his unfunny office and say unfunny things, wait for you to mock one of his friends, and then he jumps on you. Writing comedy day after day is difficult, and it's hard to make jokes in a tough time; Scarborough has no idea how hard it is. And then you tell one unfunny joke, and he's all over it."
Coates
Here is the best part which there isn't a clip to up yet online. Later on during "Morning Joe" they played a clip from last nights "Daily Show" when Jon Stewart made fun of President Obama giving a box set of DVDS to Gordon Brown. Of course they didn't let the whole clip play, only the beginning and they never even spoke about it after it played. Joe Scarborough is just a frikkin idiot who has no room at all to speak on journalistic ethics.
BTW I thought you weren't going to post this kinda stuff anymore. I personally was against the ban anyway but I was just wondering what made you change your mind.
Not only is it demontrably false that Stewart ignores Obama, but Stewart isn't under any obligation to go after Obama the way he went after Bush, something that Scarborough seemed to allow for when he labled Stewart an ideologue. And why would he go after Obama if he agrees with his politics?
I think the line between journalism and opinion has been so blurred that even people who should know the difference --like Scarborough-- are confused.
Joe S is a hack that lives in the past. His kind of thinking is why America is in decline, and Cramer is the enabler of the Right Wing Trickle-Down Economic mindset. Jon Stewart is the Fool telling the truth to the Power that be (Media, Politician, Financiers, etc..). Keep the Good Work Stewart!
The Cramers and Bill Kristols of the world would never survive in the merit-based society they claim to support.
The Cramer trying to exculpate himself clip isn't playing for me, but the fact that Jon Stewart basically compared Obama to Bush in regards to the residual force in Iraq by using side-by-side clips noting similar language makes Scarborough and Cramer's contention that he's soft on Obama is hollow. Heck, the whole media is jumping on Obama as if this is his fault. I mean Ronald Reagan inherited a crisis in '81 and even after dropping the highest tax bracket to 50% from 70% (how "socialist" of him to keep it that high until 1988 when it went down to 30%)THE. MARKET. DIDN'T. REBOUND. 'TIL. LATE. '83.
I'm very conservative in my social opinions, but economically liberal so I think a lot of truth is liberally biased and I'm fine with that. So, to me Jon Stewart is right about how the media has not done its job which is: evaluating evidence, presenting all sides of an argument and calling out people who lie. That is their job. Period. Case closed. And they have been negligent in that regard for years since all the news media is own by some corporate conglomerate. The MSM for at least a decade-and-a-half has been acting like the D.A. and the high-price defense lawyer on Law and Order. They pretend to hate each other but when the case is over they go the bar for a nightcap and congratulate each other for arguing their case well while the poor, unknowing and sometimes innocent defendant has been carted off to Rikers.
Stewart is telling them to act like the Fourth Estate--an independent and necessary part of a democracy--and they are not. They can't if they want to get interviews. Now, it's only the jesters--Stewart, Colbert and DL Hughley (he had the best interview with Michael Steele even though I hated the show in general)--who can tell the truth since the jesters can't be punished for being truthful since they are "just jokesters." It is really sad that despite my college education, Stewart--A COMEDIAN--was the only person imho who properly explained vis PROPERLY INTERVIEWING--ASKING QUESTIONS from a guy from NYT how AIG was acting like a hedgefund.
In that same episode he basically explained how Cramer and all those other financial reporters were negligent b/c they didn't ask the right questions or predict the meltdown. Again, it is sad that only a comedy show is doing that. Yet, you have shills like Santelli going on about "losers" and responsibility when he and Cramer, Bartelomo, et. al. were making money of those "losers'" irresponsibility and weren't calling banks and brokers irresponsible. I can't even watch the tee vee anymore for news b/c none of these people seem to care about making sure there remains a middle-class in this country. They just belly-ache and "socialism." I wonder if Eisenhower as a socialist since the top tax rate under his administration was 90%. These shills act as if "the bondtrader shall inherit the earth" and everyone else can go take a leap off a tall building for all they care.
The same could be said for journalism, no? Assuming of course reporters did their jobs. Not saying they all don't, but I'm talking about a world in which the "media hack" was a rarity.
The same could probably be said for novels, movies, other art forms. The artist recognizes a problem and illustrates that problem in a way that people become aware of it. Its then somebody else's job to point out the solution. The issue-spotter and the problem-solver working in tandem.
Why does Stewart have to go after Obama the same way he went after Bush? It's not about Stewart going after the presidency, Stewart goes after IDIOTIC, HYPOCRITICAL, INCOMPETENT, DELUSIONAL and THUGGISH behavior, if you're not acting like a jackass, he's not going to treat you like one. Which is why Stewart goes beyond making fun of politicians...he basically goes after anyone who has no idea what they're talking about but wants to pretend that they do and reap rewards from their ignorance.
Why should Obama be made fun of the same way that Bush was, if Obama holds himself to a higher standard, if he treats himself and the public with respect and dignity. Stewart goes after BEHAVIOR, he goes after inconsistency and stupidity and lies, he isn't just about going after the office of the president because it's there. Don't act like a fool, and you won't be treated like you're a fool. That's the difference between Bush and Obama, and that's why they're treated differently, because they choose different BEHAVIOR.
Whenever "news" folks get all stressy over Stewart, I am reminded of something he said when he went on Crossfire and basically killed the show. Tucker Carlson was giving him crap about TDS not being objective (or some other canard) and Stewart reponded (paraphrasing), "But I'm not the one sitting at this table that has an obligation to live up to journalistic standards. I'm on *Comedy Central.* The Daily Show leads in to a show starring puppets."
The episode where Stewart compares Obama to Bush made me wince and then lmao - its funny cause its true and it hurts cause its true.
Scarborough is an ass and is suffering from a huge case of little man syndrome.
@ GAPeach7: 'Tis true but the thing is Obama has the SOFA so he can bail w/o blowback. He's not staying there when Afghanistan/Pakistan is such a mess. That's what we should be worrying about b/c it's a wrap for Iraq. Iran or some Sunni caudillo is going to end up running it either way.
@GAPeach7: I'm with you on the Obama/Bush comparison. However I feel compelled to defend Obama on this one, for now. (1) Bush frakked up so much and left so much wreckage that Obama can't just overturn everything Bush did immediately or at all. He can pull all US forces out of Iraq despite the fact they should have never been there in the first place. (2) Bush during his last year in office started to do things or say he was going to do things that at least sounded like he was backing away from his ridiculous policies while Obama was already talking about the things Bush just started to talk about. (3) Bush said a lot of things that might have sound good but never had any intention on making good on those statements. Obama may be saying some of the same things, but I get the feel that he means what he says. At least as far as a politician can mean what he says.
AdHoc,
Interesting that you use the term "jester," since the court jester was often the only person who could speak the truth to the king during the middle ages. Sad that we're back at this stage, instead of the MSM doing its job.
Scarborough has a love/hate relationship with TDS and Colbert. He'd spend whole segments of Scarborough Country replaying segments of their shows, and is enough of a fanboy to participate in a TDS piece on conservative dating:
http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=82277&title=Must-Love-Dogma
How much Hayek does Scarborough really know?
I've been thinking - always a dangerous thing, I know - but Cramer and CNBC must have taken a serious hit if they had him on NBC and MSNBC this morning in damage control mode. Obviously, they remember what Steward did to CNN's "Crossfire" and they're a bit scared.
I guess that's the advantage of being a big media conglomerate, though. When one of your guys is getting hammered you can have him go on another show and get softballs from the host while a sidekick stands at your side ready to defend you.
By the way, did Cramer's suit look two sizes too big?
Daughter,
I did mean it in the middle ages context. I just didn't remember that the court jester could speak the truth to the king. Very interesting. Oh, I went to the Daily Show site and I know I'm mad late to the Jon Stewart fad, but I love Jon Stewart. I just nearly broke several ribs laughing and agreeing with some of his clips. And he's great looking silver fox.
@ Dave: Last night's ep is up on the site. Cramer got his behind handed to him on a platter with Salinas County grapes and slices of brie. The Buy Bear clip from 7 weeks before Bear Stearns collapsed was damning. Plus, he looked real guilty when he was recommending it. I almost felt sorry for him since in the Scarborough clip Cramer was being really diplomatic when Scarborough was accusing Jon of being impartial. Cramer told him to tone down the rhetoric since Jon is only a comedian.
John Stewart isn't impartial, but he's closer to it than the mainstream media are these days. At least he knows the difference between true and false, and calls out people -- from all sides of the political spectrum -- for their lies, mistakes, and idiocies. The media is either too frightened, too corrupt, or too stupid to do this.
Mr. Scarborough ought to give it a try.
To be fair to Cramer, he defended himself while avoiding the Scarborough's bizarre attack on Stewart, and even called Scarborough out for attacking a comedian.
And he really did tell people (around the beginning of Oct, I think, with the Dow in the neighborhood of 10,000) to take anything they needed in the next 5 yrs. out of the market. I'm sure there are plenty of people who wished they taken that advice.
If your TeeVee show has a set reminiscent of PeeWee's Playhouse, it's not wise to attack another fellow for being immersed in satire. As for Joe Scarborough, he is one of the biggest One-Note Idiots on the tube. The person, though, who really deserves contempt on that show is Mika Bee, who stares at the camera like a cow and allows the douchebag in the driver's seat to claim he's got a liberal on balancing his views. She makes Alan Colmes seem like Michael Moore. Also, what the hell is that mummified General Electric CEO doing on an NBC subsidiary show laying out the corporate talking points ? These guys should at least aspire to the morals and integrity of the average hooker.
Stewart and Colbert Nation,
Here is a Promo Poster/Image I made for Thursday's showdown! Hopefully Colbert or Stewart will see this and use it on Wednesday to promote the show!
http://gloombergnews.com/?p=470
GN
I just can't wait to see the show on thursday. I don't know how Crammer plans on not looking like an asshole.
Poor Cramer did have that deer in headlights look. He had a mission - damage control - and Scarborough went off script. He don't want nothing with Jon Stewart. He tried to reel Scar back in by saying "he's a comedian," but Scarborough was already full speed into his own agenda that had nothing to do with Cramer: to use the Cramer "beef" to tear down Stewart (at which he was unsuccessful, 'cause he IS a comedian). He just wanted conservative "street cred" and was overplaying this situation to get his two cents in. What does Obama or Bush criticism have to do with the Cramer clips? Nothing! It's hilarious to me that Scar felt he needed to respond in any way besides playing it down: "he's a comedian, so how seriously could we take him?" To try to diss Stewart just makes Scar look like a dude in an armor suit with a sword and shield that's actually threatened by the court jester - the dude who supposedly doesn't even have a sword. Dork. It just makes Stewart look even more diesel than he's supposed to be.
Anyway the "he's a comedian" line cracked me up, 'cause it reminded me of Steele on Hughley's show calling Rush an "entertainer". Except Stewart is real with the fact that he is actually a comedian. Punks jump up to get beat down. I hope Stewart comes at Scarborough, hard. Cause I could use the giggles.