[danthedart]

[quote=ltokuda][quote=danthedart]Nope not intentionally misrepresenting his views. Don’t be stupid. Use some analysis. Actually listen to what Cramer is saying and actually listen to what Stewart is saying. Stewart does not make a critical argument. Don’t worship the guy just because he’s funny. He’s playing to the audience’s desire for a lynching. He scapegoats Cramer for ratings.

You think I’m going to take a lynching seriously?

Just look how Stewart is destroying the level of intellectual conversation in this country. [/quote]

Others have already exlpained what Stewart’s main premise was and why it has merit. However, since you’re determined to intentionally miss Stewart’s main premise, the debate is pointless.[/quote]

Yup the debate is pointless if you’re not willing to do analysis. I’ve already explained time and time again why Stewart’s “premise” and his anger is completely misplaced. You seem to share his anger and are not willing to critically self examine the situation. If that’s the case. Yes it is pointless. You want to lynch someone and no amount of reasoning is going to convince you otherwise.

[danthedart]

Nope not intentionally misrepresenting his views. Don’t be stupid. Use some analysis. Actually listen to what Cramer is saying and actually listen to what Stewart is saying. Stewart does not make a critical argument. Don’t worship the guy just because he’s funny. He’s playing to the audience’s desire for a lynching. He scapegoats Cramer for ratings.

You think I’m going to take a lynching seriously?

Just look how Stewart is destroying the level of intellectual conversation in this country.

[danthedart]

Nope not intentionally misrepresenting his views. Don’t be stupid. Use some analysis. Actually listen to what Cramer is saying and actually listen to what Stewart is saying. Stewart does not make a critical argument. Don’t worship the guy just because he’s funny. He’s playing to the audience’s desire for a lynching. He scapegoats Cramer for ratings.

You think I’m going to take a lynching seriously?

Just look how Stewart is destroying the level of intellectual conversation in this country.

[danthedart]

Nope not intentionally misrepresenting his views. Don’t be stupid. Use some analysis. Actually listen to what Cramer is saying and actually listen to what Stewart is saying. Stewart does not make a critical argument. Don’t worship the guy just because he’s funny. He’s playing to the audience’s desire for a lynching. He scapegoats Cramer for ratings.

You think I’m going to take a lynching seriously?

Just look how Stewart is destroying the level of intellectual conversation in this country.

[danthedart]

Nope not intentionally misrepresenting his views. Don’t be stupid. Use some analysis. Actually listen to what Cramer is saying and actually listen to what Stewart is saying. Stewart does not make a critical argument. Don’t worship the guy just because he’s funny. He’s playing to the audience’s desire for a lynching. He scapegoats Cramer for ratings.

You think I’m going to take a lynching seriously?

Just look how Stewart is destroying the level of intellectual conversation in this country.

[danthedart]

Nope not intentionally misrepresenting his views. Don’t be stupid. Use some analysis. Actually listen to what Cramer is saying and actually listen to what Stewart is saying. Stewart does not make a critical argument. Don’t worship the guy just because he’s funny. He’s playing to the audience’s desire for a lynching. He scapegoats Cramer for ratings.

You think I’m going to take a lynching seriously?

Just look how Stewart is destroying the level of intellectual conversation in this country.

[danthedart]

[quote=GoUSC]I think a lot of people are missing the point here. Stewart’s main premise…the main point he was trying to make until Cramer made it all about him was that we should expect more of our journalistic resources. If CNBC is going to tout themselves as the defacto standard for financial news then maybe they should spend a little time asking the tough questions. Don’t just ask the CEO’s “Is everything alright.”. Open the 10k’s, open the annual reports, READ THE FOOTNOTES (because that’s where all the REAL information is) and really push the people they interview.

CNBC does not do that. They are fluff programming with fluff information. They bring on a really smart contrarian to debate one of the typical industry shills and they give the two of them a minute 30 seconds to discuss. That’s what Stewart is trying to get at and I think he did an excellent job. CNBC is utter crap and he exposed them for what they are, Financial Farce wrapped in whipped cream.[/quote]

You’re buying into Stewart’s blame game. Sure CNBC didn’t do great reporting and wasn’t able to ferret out the problem before it happened. Guess what, nobody else was able to do it either.

I’m purposely missing Stewart’s main premise because that would be taking him seriously. You don’t take a comedian seriously right? I’m not buying anything from a self proclaimed snake oil salesman.

[danthedart]

[quote=GoUSC]I think a lot of people are missing the point here. Stewart’s main premise…the main point he was trying to make until Cramer made it all about him was that we should expect more of our journalistic resources. If CNBC is going to tout themselves as the defacto standard for financial news then maybe they should spend a little time asking the tough questions. Don’t just ask the CEO’s “Is everything alright.”. Open the 10k’s, open the annual reports, READ THE FOOTNOTES (because that’s where all the REAL information is) and really push the people they interview.

CNBC does not do that. They are fluff programming with fluff information. They bring on a really smart contrarian to debate one of the typical industry shills and they give the two of them a minute 30 seconds to discuss. That’s what Stewart is trying to get at and I think he did an excellent job. CNBC is utter crap and he exposed them for what they are, Financial Farce wrapped in whipped cream.[/quote]

You’re buying into Stewart’s blame game. Sure CNBC didn’t do great reporting and wasn’t able to ferret out the problem before it happened. Guess what, nobody else was able to do it either.

I’m purposely missing Stewart’s main premise because that would be taking him seriously. You don’t take a comedian seriously right? I’m not buying anything from a self proclaimed snake oil salesman.

[danthedart]

[quote=GoUSC]I think a lot of people are missing the point here. Stewart’s main premise…the main point he was trying to make until Cramer made it all about him was that we should expect more of our journalistic resources. If CNBC is going to tout themselves as the defacto standard for financial news then maybe they should spend a little time asking the tough questions. Don’t just ask the CEO’s “Is everything alright.”. Open the 10k’s, open the annual reports, READ THE FOOTNOTES (because that’s where all the REAL information is) and really push the people they interview.

CNBC does not do that. They are fluff programming with fluff information. They bring on a really smart contrarian to debate one of the typical industry shills and they give the two of them a minute 30 seconds to discuss. That’s what Stewart is trying to get at and I think he did an excellent job. CNBC is utter crap and he exposed them for what they are, Financial Farce wrapped in whipped cream.[/quote]

You’re buying into Stewart’s blame game. Sure CNBC didn’t do great reporting and wasn’t able to ferret out the problem before it happened. Guess what, nobody else was able to do it either.

I’m purposely missing Stewart’s main premise because that would be taking him seriously. You don’t take a comedian seriously right? I’m not buying anything from a self proclaimed snake oil salesman.

[danthedart]

[quote=GoUSC]I think a lot of people are missing the point here. Stewart’s main premise…the main point he was trying to make until Cramer made it all about him was that we should expect more of our journalistic resources. If CNBC is going to tout themselves as the defacto standard for financial news then maybe they should spend a little time asking the tough questions. Don’t just ask the CEO’s “Is everything alright.”. Open the 10k’s, open the annual reports, READ THE FOOTNOTES (because that’s where all the REAL information is) and really push the people they interview.

CNBC does not do that. They are fluff programming with fluff information. They bring on a really smart contrarian to debate one of the typical industry shills and they give the two of them a minute 30 seconds to discuss. That’s what Stewart is trying to get at and I think he did an excellent job. CNBC is utter crap and he exposed them for what they are, Financial Farce wrapped in whipped cream.[/quote]

You’re buying into Stewart’s blame game. Sure CNBC didn’t do great reporting and wasn’t able to ferret out the problem before it happened. Guess what, nobody else was able to do it either.

I’m purposely missing Stewart’s main premise because that would be taking him seriously. You don’t take a comedian seriously right? I’m not buying anything from a self proclaimed snake oil salesman.

[danthedart]

[quote=GoUSC]I think a lot of people are missing the point here. Stewart’s main premise…the main point he was trying to make until Cramer made it all about him was that we should expect more of our journalistic resources. If CNBC is going to tout themselves as the defacto standard for financial news then maybe they should spend a little time asking the tough questions. Don’t just ask the CEO’s “Is everything alright.”. Open the 10k’s, open the annual reports, READ THE FOOTNOTES (because that’s where all the REAL information is) and really push the people they interview.

CNBC does not do that. They are fluff programming with fluff information. They bring on a really smart contrarian to debate one of the typical industry shills and they give the two of them a minute 30 seconds to discuss. That’s what Stewart is trying to get at and I think he did an excellent job. CNBC is utter crap and he exposed them for what they are, Financial Farce wrapped in whipped cream.[/quote]

You’re buying into Stewart’s blame game. Sure CNBC didn’t do great reporting and wasn’t able to ferret out the problem before it happened. Guess what, nobody else was able to do it either.

I’m purposely missing Stewart’s main premise because that would be taking him seriously. You don’t take a comedian seriously right? I’m not buying anything from a self proclaimed snake oil salesman.

[danthedart]

[quote=SD Transplant]Dan,

I was hoping you were just joking during your first comments, but I see you’re defending Cramer all the way. I don’t watch Cramer’s show much, but I’ve seen it a few times. Come on…..Cramer is a tool, and he got called/caught in a funny skeet because his big mouth coudn’t take a comediant’s criticism. He could bearly keep a straight face when Stewart provided great evidence during the 2006 shady advise on hedge funds (manipulate the sheeple). He’s just a puppet for the many CEOs he has been interviewing..

Whom do you preffer? Steward being funny (maybe annoying to some) or Kramer the finacial advisor/trader and screwing people with his idiotic advice?[/quote]

Cramer was wrong. I’m not defending him about that. He runs an entertainment TV show. Stewart? He does the same. They both run snake oil operations right? But Cramer is the one pretending to be serious and Stewart is the one who admits he’s not serious? That’s what I have a problem with.

NOW Cramer is the one who is admitting he’s an entertainer and NOW Stewart is the one trying to make a serious critique and do “investigative journalism” some peoples words. ITS NOT. That’s what I have a problem with. Don’t eat up everything Stewart is saying just because he’s a funny guy.

He’s not making a serious critique. Nothing he has said gets to the root of ANY problem. He has VERY little understanding of the economy and how we got here. The easiest thing for him to do is blame CNBC because they are visible. It’s a BLAME GAME. We love to see a lynching.

The rest of us cheer him on because we want someone to blame. I don’t care for Cramer. I don’t like his predictions and how many times he called a housing bottom… but Stewart is doing the ABSOLUTE same thing. The difference?

Stewart is a hero in your eyes and Cramer is a villian.

They’re BOTH snake oil salesman and NO Stewart doesn’t come clean with that, not on last nights episode anyway. He pretends that or thinks that he’s making a serious critique when he has 0 substance.

[danthedart]

[quote=SD Transplant]Dan,

I was hoping you were just joking during your first comments, but I see you’re defending Cramer all the way. I don’t watch Cramer’s show much, but I’ve seen it a few times. Come on…..Cramer is a tool, and he got called/caught in a funny skeet because his big mouth coudn’t take a comediant’s criticism. He could bearly keep a straight face when Stewart provided great evidence during the 2006 shady advise on hedge funds (manipulate the sheeple). He’s just a puppet for the many CEOs he has been interviewing..

Whom do you preffer? Steward being funny (maybe annoying to some) or Kramer the finacial advisor/trader and screwing people with his idiotic advice?[/quote]

Cramer was wrong. I’m not defending him about that. He runs an entertainment TV show. Stewart? He does the same. They both run snake oil operations right? But Cramer is the one pretending to be serious and Stewart is the one who admits he’s not serious? That’s what I have a problem with.

NOW Cramer is the one who is admitting he’s an entertainer and NOW Stewart is the one trying to make a serious critique and do “investigative journalism” some peoples words. ITS NOT. That’s what I have a problem with. Don’t eat up everything Stewart is saying just because he’s a funny guy.

He’s not making a serious critique. Nothing he has said gets to the root of ANY problem. He has VERY little understanding of the economy and how we got here. The easiest thing for him to do is blame CNBC because they are visible. It’s a BLAME GAME. We love to see a lynching.

The rest of us cheer him on because we want someone to blame. I don’t care for Cramer. I don’t like his predictions and how many times he called a housing bottom… but Stewart is doing the ABSOLUTE same thing. The difference?

Stewart is a hero in your eyes and Cramer is a villian.

They’re BOTH snake oil salesman and NO Stewart doesn’t come clean with that, not on last nights episode anyway. He pretends that or thinks that he’s making a serious critique when he has 0 substance.

[danthedart]

[quote=SD Transplant]Dan,

I was hoping you were just joking during your first comments, but I see you’re defending Cramer all the way. I don’t watch Cramer’s show much, but I’ve seen it a few times. Come on…..Cramer is a tool, and he got called/caught in a funny skeet because his big mouth coudn’t take a comediant’s criticism. He could bearly keep a straight face when Stewart provided great evidence during the 2006 shady advise on hedge funds (manipulate the sheeple). He’s just a puppet for the many CEOs he has been interviewing..

Whom do you preffer? Steward being funny (maybe annoying to some) or Kramer the finacial advisor/trader and screwing people with his idiotic advice?[/quote]

Cramer was wrong. I’m not defending him about that. He runs an entertainment TV show. Stewart? He does the same. They both run snake oil operations right? But Cramer is the one pretending to be serious and Stewart is the one who admits he’s not serious? That’s what I have a problem with.

NOW Cramer is the one who is admitting he’s an entertainer and NOW Stewart is the one trying to make a serious critique and do “investigative journalism” some peoples words. ITS NOT. That’s what I have a problem with. Don’t eat up everything Stewart is saying just because he’s a funny guy.

He’s not making a serious critique. Nothing he has said gets to the root of ANY problem. He has VERY little understanding of the economy and how we got here. The easiest thing for him to do is blame CNBC because they are visible. It’s a BLAME GAME. We love to see a lynching.

The rest of us cheer him on because we want someone to blame. I don’t care for Cramer. I don’t like his predictions and how many times he called a housing bottom… but Stewart is doing the ABSOLUTE same thing. The difference?

Stewart is a hero in your eyes and Cramer is a villian.

They’re BOTH snake oil salesman and NO Stewart doesn’t come clean with that, not on last nights episode anyway. He pretends that or thinks that he’s making a serious critique when he has 0 substance.

[danthedart]

[quote=SD Transplant]Dan,

I was hoping you were just joking during your first comments, but I see you’re defending Cramer all the way. I don’t watch Cramer’s show much, but I’ve seen it a few times. Come on…..Cramer is a tool, and he got called/caught in a funny skeet because his big mouth coudn’t take a comediant’s criticism. He could bearly keep a straight face when Stewart provided great evidence during the 2006 shady advise on hedge funds (manipulate the sheeple). He’s just a puppet for the many CEOs he has been interviewing..

Whom do you preffer? Steward being funny (maybe annoying to some) or Kramer the finacial advisor/trader and screwing people with his idiotic advice?[/quote]

Cramer was wrong. I’m not defending him about that. He runs an entertainment TV show. Stewart? He does the same. They both run snake oil operations right? But Cramer is the one pretending to be serious and Stewart is the one who admits he’s not serious? That’s what I have a problem with.

NOW Cramer is the one who is admitting he’s an entertainer and NOW Stewart is the one trying to make a serious critique and do “investigative journalism” some peoples words. ITS NOT. That’s what I have a problem with. Don’t eat up everything Stewart is saying just because he’s a funny guy.

He’s not making a serious critique. Nothing he has said gets to the root of ANY problem. He has VERY little understanding of the economy and how we got here. The easiest thing for him to do is blame CNBC because they are visible. It’s a BLAME GAME. We love to see a lynching.

The rest of us cheer him on because we want someone to blame. I don’t care for Cramer. I don’t like his predictions and how many times he called a housing bottom… but Stewart is doing the ABSOLUTE same thing. The difference?

Stewart is a hero in your eyes and Cramer is a villian.

They’re BOTH snake oil salesman and NO Stewart doesn’t come clean with that, not on last nights episode anyway. He pretends that or thinks that he’s making a serious critique when he has 0 substance.

[Author]

Posts