But There’s Cramer Again!


He cannot, and doesn’t want to, let this go.

“Was it a fair fight? No, it wasn’t even a fight. I came on with the idea of taking a high road approach and discussing the issues, obviously [Stewart] came on strictly to try to humiliate me,” Cramer said. “It was brutal. Was he stand-up? Absolutely not. Did he comport himself as a gentleman? Hardly. It was a deposition; he wants to be a prosecutor.”

Cramer also says that The Daily Show selectively edited him to make him look bad, but the linked article shows that selective editing probably helps him more than it hurts. The article lets him go on at length, repeating the same things over and over and getting progressively more self-absorbed. And it ends with a quote that unwittingly sums up everything:

“I am a highly controversial figure [on “Mad Money”]. I was not a controversial figure when it came to making money. And I can tell that guy, when he’s made his first 100 million in the market, I will respect his judgment about the market.”

The reason that sums up everything is that it’s the whole worldview that defines the CNBC/Fox Business culture (as opposed to legitimate financial reporting like The Wall Street Journal has traditionally done). It’s the idea that people who make lots of money do so because they are better than everyone else. Cramer made lots of money, therefore his judgment is not in question. The idea that you should take people’s word for everything just because they made lots of money in the market was the very thing Stewart was criticizing in the interview. And it’s still going over Cramer’s head.

Finally, though, he’s clearly enjoying the whole thing (getting defensive, but still enjoying it), and in a weird way he’s probably helping the network by taking all the heat. As has been pointed out many times, this isn’t about Jim Cramer; it started with Rick Santelli and his call for a John Galtian rebellion of the elites, which has led to tomorrow’s “Tea Party protests” against the idea of the government helping Santelli’s “losers” (more recently redefined as people who don’t make enough money to pay income tax). But it’s not about Rick Santelli, either; it’s about the notion that making bets is inherently the most productive and noble thing a person can do, and that those who bet successfully are the people entitled to the most respect and rewards. Even most of the people who are tea partying don’t agree with that, but it’s the founding principle of much of cable news. Cramer’s doing his network a major service by changing the subject to whether or not he himself is awesome.

Filed under:

But There’s Cramer Again!

      • Why would the Scaife and Charles G. Koch Foundations contribute significant funding to CSE/Freedom Works which “openly and aggressively advocates market-based solutions to the nation’s economic and social problems”? Gives “ironic” a new meaning?

        And these wingnuts believe their position makes sense because “it just does”. Buying opinions has absolutely nothing to do with it.

  1. “which has led to tomorrow’s “Tea Party protests”…”

    “Even most of the people who are tea partying don’t agree with that”

    I don’t mean to pick nits, but the term is “teabagging”. Hey, if you respect intellectually-challenged right-wing sheep the way I do, you’ll use their terminology.

    ‘Novice teabagger Christie Carden of Huntsville explains she has “no experience whatsoever doing anything like this before so it’s been a challenge from multiple angles”.’ (http://tbogg.firedoglake.com/2009/04/14/ted-nugent-singing-the-national-anthem-who-wouldnt-want-to-hear-that/)

    • Oh, and Jim Cramer is a whiny little coward. I actually thought he’d redeemed himself somewhat on The Daily Show – he did show up, after all, and didn’t seem to really believe his feeble excuses – but this post-facto whining proves that I was wrong.

  2. Cramer’s always been both self-aggrandizing and all over the map, ever since he wrote the business column for New York Magazine 15 years ago. A high-profile figure who deals business strategies in the same way the Sham-Wow guy deals car-cleaning rags is going to make himself a target when the market turns downward (i.e. — Cramer and Jon Stewart are probably closer together ideologically than Stewart and Cramer’s ex-CNBC partner/former Reagan Administration official/reformed coke fiend Larry Kudlow, but Kudlow’s current talking heads show on the network is much less of a source of parody/ridicule because it’s like dozens of other roundtable talking head shows on the news and business channels. Cramer’s act is more unique and opens him up to greater celebrity, but makes him a far bigger target when people are angry at the so-called business “experts”).

  3. “…it’s about the notion that making bets is inherently the most productive and noble thing a person can do, and that those who bet successfully are the people entitled to the most respect and rewards.”

    That’s the best summary I’ve seen of the mentality that led to the ruin of our economy and our political discourse.

Sign in to comment.