Sterwart vs Cramer: In Cramer we might be able to trust?

0.00 avg. rating (0% score) - 0 votes

For all its worth, the Stewart-Cramer showdown might have served one purpose: to give birth to a man not only brilliant in his analysis of the economy, but who has learned the hard lesson of humility (and no, I did not mean humiliation). Because while my admiration for Jon Sterwart increased exponentially for being so politely harsh (when was the last time you saw such a polite stripping down?) I have to admit that I felt sorry for Cramer, and I hope that he channels his genius into helping create the change needed in our society.

Then he could become poster-boy for Barack Obama’s ‘Be the Change’ motto. Who knows?

Until then, you can watch the interview here.

And for those of you who would rather read about it here is a little something from CNN. I found CNN’s take very interesting, although I wouldn’t agree with the way the article describes some of the exchange between Cramer and Stewart. I couldn’t help but post some personal comments on the article below.

By most accounts, the showdown was pretty brutal.

Many watching Thursday night’s “Daily Show” on Comedy Central felt that comedian-turned-media-critic Jon Stewart held bombastic financial guru and CNBC “Mad Money” host Jim Cramer’s feet to the fire.

And Cramer flinched.

Stewart, known for his zany, satirical take on the news, was serious as he took Cramer’s network to task for what Stewart viewed as their “cheerleading” of corporations at the heart of the nation’s current economic crisis.

And despite the title of his financial show, Cramer came off as less mad and more apologetic. (Sahar’s note: And Cramer should be applauded, first for appearing on the show knowing Stewart had him, second for not defending himself too much knowing that he made big mistakes, and third for apologizing. That’s pretty big.)

If it was a prize fight, they would have stopped it,” said Howard Kurtz, the “Washington Post” media critic and host of CNN’s “Reliable Sources.” “I was stunned that Jim Cramer kind of did a rope-a-dope strategy and didn’t really defend himself against Jon Stewart’s assault.”

Kurtz is very familiar with the style of both men.

He has appeared on “The Daily Show” and is the author of “The Fortune Tellers: Inside Wall Street’s Game of Money, Media and Manipulation,” in which Cramer is featured.

Kurtz said Stewart “made clear at the outset that he wasn’t going for laughs” and displayed very much the same passion for holding the media accountable as he did when he appeared on, and denounced, CNN’s “Crossfire.” (Sahar’s note: Too bad people – myself included – are too busy to see these things, up to a certain point, for themselves, especially in the age of blogging)

“When I went on [Stewart’s] show last year, he was so wound up in ripping the media that he went on for another 10 minutes, knowing full well that we were out of time,” Kurtz said. “Stewart, as funny as he can be, is a very trenchant media critic who cares passionately about this stuff, and we saw that Thursday night.”

iReporter David Seaman of New York said he was surprised at the vigor with which Stewart “attacked Cramer’s credibility.”

The public wants answers as to how the country got into such financial distress, and viewers really want someone to answer for the mess, Seaman said. (Sahar’s note: And it’s a little unfortunate that Jim Cramer had to take the fall. After all, he didn’t create the mess – he helped perpetuate it.)

“People want to see a lot of the financial gurus on a shish kabob, being skewered,” Seaman said. “It’s really important to hold people accountable, and as we saw last night, Jon Stewart is a bit of a wild card, so if you aren’t living up to expectations, he may call you out.”

David Brancaccio, host and senior editor of “Now on PBS,” commended Cramer for his bravery in going on the show, though he said he was surprised that the brilliant founder of seemed ill-prepared for Stewart’s very thoughtful questioning.

Brancaccio, the former host of American Public Media’s “Marketplace” radio program, echoed the comments of many in that he found the exchange visibly uncomfortable for the usually showman-like Cramer.

“You have the comedian as journalist, and you have the financial journalist as clown, in that on his show, Cramer’s goofing around and plays the clown,” Brancaccio said. “What a role reversal.”

Read the rest of the article here.

0.00 avg. rating (0% score) - 0 votes

2 thoughts on “Sterwart vs Cramer: In Cramer we might be able to trust?

  1. While I enjoy watching Cramer every night, one must remember the show is primarily entertainment. The financial networks exist to promote their advertisers financial and investment products. Who would expect them to warn about the credit bubble or coming Washington national debt collapse which will destroy much of the remaining private wealth in America today or what this will do to the dollar, the stock market, bonds, gold or the real estate market?

    China is now worried about their dangerous over investment in US Treasury obligations. Washington ’s long-term choice is either repudiation or monetization. For monetization to be effective, the depreciation in the dollar would have to be substantial and this in turn would dramatically raise prices of imports for American consumers which would mean a tremendous drop in foreign imports. Debt monetization would cause more disruption to exporting nations than selective repudiation of Treasury debt.

    The Campaign to Cancel the Washington National Debt By 12/22/2013 Constitutional Amendment is starting now in the U.S. See:


    Ron with 30 plus years in the investment business and banking industry.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *