White House spokesman on Stewart vs. Cramer: “I enjoyed it thoroughly”
posted at 3:34 pm on March 13, 2009 by Allahpundit
Quoth Jim Treacher a few hours ago, “I’ve never cared much about Jim Cramer, but it’s ‘funny’ how he didn’t become a problem for Jon Stewart until he became a problem for Obama.” And lo and behold, just across from Tapper at ABC:
He wasn’t sure if the president caught Mr. Stewart’s bloodletting of the host of “Mad Money,” but he himself gave the show a thumbs up.
“I enjoyed it thoroughly,” Gibbs said at his daily briefing…
Gibbs today said Stewart “asked a lot of tough questions” and that he wasn’t “surprised that CNBC hasn’t put the video on its website.”
Left unmentioned: The fact that Cramer was an Obama supporter. Oh, and the fact that Stewart’s chief criticism of CNBC, that it could have spared the public an economic catastrophe by investigating and exposing Wall Street’s reckless hyperleveraging, applies to 99.99% of the Obama-adoring media. Cramer’s taking the brunt of it here not for his shady admissions about how to game the market — that’s ancient history — but because, like Treacher says, he had the gall to turn on The One publicly. See also Mark Hemingway:
If you want to have Cramer on your show and bully him for sticking his neck out and being spectacularly wrong in hindsight, fine. Perhaps he deserves it, and certainly it’s not hard to see Cramer as emblematic of Wall Street arrogance. The problem is that Stewart’s critique of Jim Cramer, or of the financial press in general, is not new or particularly relevant — banks have been collapsing for a year. It only became an issue when Stewart wanted to delegitimize Santelli and Cramer’s comments on the Obama administration.
Indeed. Here’s the interview in three parts (there’s profanity, so please observe your official content warning); you can safely skip the first if you’re pressed for time. In fact, I encourage you to do so, as the only thing more insufferable than Stewart in his lecturing populist “clown nose off” mode is the embarrassing, hyperbolic adulation he gets for it from his media fanboys afterwards. Definitely watch the third clip, though, as it finds him sliding effortlessly from a critique of financial media into a critique of investment itself. How silly of Americans to think that they might make money from something other than their own labor.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 Next »
Cramer, if he intended to defend himself at all, did quite so quite poorly.
ernesto on March 13, 2009 at 3:36 PM
Dear Leader personally calls out Rush and Hannity, and now his spokesman has to applaud an attack on Cramer? The Onion’s administration is awfully thin skinned.
rbj on March 13, 2009 at 3:38 PM
Stewart is a bigger problem than Cramer to our well being. Cramer was low hanging fruit, and most of the drones that adore him will never know Cramer is a Democrat and former Obama supporter. As are many in high level finance, but that goes against the myth.
jp on March 13, 2009 at 3:38 PM
Stewart = buttboy.
JammieWearingFool on March 13, 2009 at 3:39 PM
You have to admit that Cramer looked scared sh!tless when Stewart started rolling Cramer’s old “market manipulation” tapes.
Cuffy Meigs on March 13, 2009 at 3:39 PM
I didn’t see it, but I read the part where Stewart decided that investing was bad.
Which brings me to a point I constantly make here:
It’s sad (pathetic really) that those who believe in wealth creation and small government cannot defend the concept when it comes under fire. Why is that?
It boggles the mind.
lorien1973 on March 13, 2009 at 3:39 PM
Allah, what exactly did Stewart do wrong here? Didn’t he say what pretty much everyone has been thinking? It’s attacking the message because you don’t like messenger.
SnarkVader on March 13, 2009 at 3:40 PM
Mr.Obama’s pothead gather when he is critized.They will take everyone down who challeged him.
steviedfromnc on March 13, 2009 at 3:40 PM
White House using Chicago thugs and comedians to do their dirty work…?
d1carter on March 13, 2009 at 3:41 PM
markets go up, markets go down…
this was almost a “kiss the ring” moment of self-righteous lefty indignation. Stewart is such a tool, and heavily influences the Youth
jp on March 13, 2009 at 3:41 PM
Snark is the belief set of far too many people.
lorien1973 on March 13, 2009 at 3:43 PM
Gibbs is an immature ass. And like the rest of his co-workers and boss – in over his head.
sherry on March 13, 2009 at 3:43 PM
Who has more viewers, Stewart or Olberdunce?
JammieWearingFool on March 13, 2009 at 3:44 PM
lorien1973, the sad thing is that Cramer is still a Democrat so he doesn’t exactly disagree with Obama’s agenda. He pretty much said so on Hannity’s radio show and on the show he did that caused all of this uproar in the first place.
Cramer simply wanted Obama to put the agenda on hold until the economy was in better shape. However that means Cramer didn’t pay attention to Emanuel when he said that a good crisis shouldn’t go to waste.
MobileVideoEngineer on March 13, 2009 at 3:44 PM
wake me when Stewart goes after Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, the Community Re-investment act and then after say the homeowners who lied about their income among other things.
there is plenty of blame to go around, and all Stewart cares about is playing the class warfare card for the Democrats. he is a partisian hack.
jp on March 13, 2009 at 3:44 PM
What did he say wrong besides his dopey knock on investment? Nothing, really. My question is why he’s singling Cramer out. And also, what’s his beef with Cramer’s show being zany, as though there’s no room for lighter fare on CNBC? Is his contempt for the public so enormous that he thinks people watching don’t know that Cramer’s picks aren’t always right? Is there no room for Stewart’s show, then, among audiences seeking out news? The Atlantic informs me that he’s the new Edward R. Murrow, you know.
Allahpundit on March 13, 2009 at 3:45 PM
…such as sitting around telling jokes & giving goofy opinions?
jgapinoy on March 13, 2009 at 3:45 PM
WHO REALLY RUNS THE DEMOCRAT PARTY?
JOHN STEWART?
/media off
Good Lt on March 13, 2009 at 3:45 PM
I seem to have heard that Gibbs has a veterinary degree from Auburn. I wonder if he specialized in small or large animals.
AubieJon on March 13, 2009 at 3:46 PM
Gibbs and Stewart are pompous idiot butt boys of Obama. Kramer is another doofus.
jencab on March 13, 2009 at 3:46 PM
both of them look like they are coked up all the time while buzzing off red bull at the same time.
Hey Stewart, what about the heads of Fannie and Freddie? or former, who are living large at the moment.
jp on March 13, 2009 at 3:47 PM
Replace Gibbs with Stewart.He will add to Wednesday night partys.
steviedfromnc on March 13, 2009 at 3:48 PM
And still, Stephen Colbert is ten times as funny and talented as Jon Leibowtiz and about a foot taller.
carbon_footprint on March 13, 2009 at 3:48 PM
is there such a thing as a “Jon Stewart Watch” website, like there is for Olberman?
jp on March 13, 2009 at 3:49 PM
Do people not remember the activist role the Bush admin took attacking critics?
This crap is more of what I talk about when I say Republicans need to ‘keep it real’.
Just because we hope the American people suffer from collective amnesia doesn’t make it so. Just because the public doesn’t bite our latest outrage apple doesn’t mean they are clueless.
Until we stop treating voters like morons they will keep rejecting our candidates.
I mean seriously, all this hand wringing and crying about the mean leftists makes us look like pussies. Not leaders.
barkolounger on March 13, 2009 at 3:49 PM
I relly can’t effing stand John Stewart.
crazy_legs on March 13, 2009 at 3:50 PM
Haw, Haw, Haw!
+1
jay12 on March 13, 2009 at 3:51 PM
Stewart is pompous, arrogant, and self-righteous. But he is excused by himself and the media because he hides behind “comedy”.
In a couple years when it is obvious that O’s policies have hurt rather than helped us, who will put Stewart on the spot, cherry-picking clips from his show cheerleading the one?
mdenis39 on March 13, 2009 at 3:51 PM
The same could be said for Cramer’s hair loss. The question is what one has to do with the other.
Jim Treacher on March 13, 2009 at 3:51 PM
He didn’t. He was originally taking a dump on all of CNBC and Cramer got angry because he was included. Then Stewart responded to Cramer.
I think his problem was that Cramer’s show is advertised as if he’s rarely if ever wrong, with all the “In Cramer We Trust” crap in the advertising.
Face it, he’s right and you’re just grappling for reasons to take exception with the interview because you have a disdain for the guy.
crr6 on March 13, 2009 at 3:52 PM
Stewart’s critique of investment is a critique of capitalism. In his view, it is evil to try to profit from our capital. Only that which is earned by our labor is worthy.
topdog on March 13, 2009 at 3:53 PM
Cramer is the only one from CNBC who agreed to be on. Santelli was supposed to be on but backed out. He’s been railing on CNBC for a long time, well before Obama came into office.
SnarkVader on March 13, 2009 at 3:53 PM
Actually, no, I don’t recall any examples of the Bush administration taking an active role in attacking critics. Can you provide a couple examples?
hawksruleva on March 13, 2009 at 3:53 PM
In order: yes and no.
Snowed In on March 13, 2009 at 3:54 PM
I enjoyed it thoroughly too.
A classic crashing of cramer.
getalife on March 13, 2009 at 3:54 PM
And yet you don’t have any problem with TDS being advertised as a comedy show.
Jim Treacher on March 13, 2009 at 3:54 PM
Stewart is a snap shot of American stupidity, hence his “fame”. Witty sound bites, with goofy graphics – and walla! Political Expert on everything.
As to Cramer – I have no idea why a guy who lags the indecies year after year is considered an investment “guru”. Sure he can be loud and entertaining – but based on his track record, and myopic “pick 1 stock based on 1 hopeful parameter” for the masses is exactly the idiot knowledge people react on – and lose money.
As a former licensed broker, I have always found it amusing that a licensed person selling investments has to go through regulatory hoops – yet http://www.givemeyourmoney.com asset management, mutual funds, bankc etc – were set up for “self directed investing”, whereas people took Billy’s college fund, the vacation money, sold a CD, etc – put it into equities with horrid advice, allowed by the SEC, NASD – and now you know where “everyday Joe wealth went”
Both are equally useless and dangerous.
Odie1941 on March 13, 2009 at 3:56 PM
What’s scary about his is you have someone that was critical of AP’s Master silenced out of fear and shame!
Kramer, to me, is just another blowhard – but he has some skill and ability to speak and instead of challenging Stewart he caves!!! He lets the host’s loaded questions (the favorite speech technique of the Left after blatant lies) overwhelm him instead of calling it for what it is!
Hey, how about The One’s missteps on the lack of concern for the market – the financial system he says he doesn’t have time to deal with it THAT ITSELF IS THE FRICKING CRISIS!!!
Hey Stewart – invite the inimitable Ann Coulter on the subject of the Market and The One and it’ll be the Right’s turn to laugh it up!
Stewart may fare a bit better than Mahr, but not by much!
klickink.wordpress.com on March 13, 2009 at 3:56 PM
I watched the interview earlier. Cramer did a pisspoor job defending himself. In fact, he made almost no effort to offer up a defense. And in fairness, it’s pretty hard to when Stewart shows the clips that he did.
What’s interesting about this interview(and what no one has discussed thus far) is how Stewart spends about 20 minutes berating Cramer and his colleagues for not seeing this coming. Yet Cramer has been out there for weeks now piling on Obama for ignoring the financial crisis and instead focusing all his attention on his social programs.
Others like Rush, Hannity, and Beck have gone even further arguing that these programs will destroy the US economy. Yet all of them are derided by the drive-bys and accused of rooting against the President and America in effect.
So my point is this. If/when the economy does tank even further thanks to Obama’s misplaced priorities and radical left-wing agenda, will people like Stewart credit Rush and the others for warning everyone about what was coming? Will they confess to their own shortsightedness in supporting Obama and never adequately examining his policies or which unintended consequences they could bring about?
The obvious answer to all of this is no. But I just wanted to throw that out there.
Doughboy on March 13, 2009 at 3:56 PM
zing!
hawksruleva on March 13, 2009 at 3:56 PM
It’s ‘voila’.
AubieJon on March 13, 2009 at 3:57 PM
Jon Stewart thought it was a riot to attack Bush daily,
however,when Kramer snapped about Obama,Jon Stewart thought
it was duty,as a good Liberal to defend Obama,
and, how dare,ANY Liberal criticize Obama!!
canopfor on March 13, 2009 at 3:58 PM
That’s not how it works. The assertion is the proof.
Jim Treacher on March 13, 2009 at 3:58 PM
Why hasn’t the right ever had a successful version of TDS or Colbert?
SnarkVader on March 13, 2009 at 3:58 PM
On a separate note, recently Stewart lampooned the Obama administration for its egregious errors in gifting to PM Brown & the Russians. I give the Daily Show kudos for “going out a limb” and burning the O (Ok it was more like a singe).
But I was especially intrigued by the nervous laughter from his audience – I imagined the sycophants looking at each other in awe, “Did he really just SAY that?”
Any joke about GWB would receive an outburst of laughter, clapping, and whistling – no matter how unfunny or unapplicable the joke.
mdenis39 on March 13, 2009 at 3:59 PM
Wow, the con enemy list is getting rather large and the big tent will be empty.
getalife on March 13, 2009 at 3:59 PM
These are the type of people that will end up committing suicide when Obama’s approval rating dips below 50% (which at the rate it’s falling will happen shortly).
These type of people don’t even care that people like Warren Buffet, Jim Cramer, et. al. actually agree with everything that Obama wants to do. All that matters is that they dared to criticize Obama. If that’s not the definition of a cult follower, I don’t know what is.
MobileVideoEngineer on March 13, 2009 at 4:00 PM
Stewart and SNL are part of the Dem’s personal destruction crew. Don’t take them lightly.
Cramer was pathetic. Groveling. Begging.
(BTW, Gibbs was a band boy at Auburn high school and did not attend Auburn Univ)
faraway on March 13, 2009 at 4:00 PM
I’d argue that Rush’s old TV show wasn’t too different from The Daily Show aside from a lack of guests. Rush also talked about current events within the realm of politics and would often use clips of people to highlight their hypocrisy and stupidity. Hell, he could’ve done an entire month’s worth of shows using only Jocelyn Elders.
Doughboy on March 13, 2009 at 4:01 PM
If that’s true, I’m relieved.
AubieJon on March 13, 2009 at 4:01 PM
WTH do you think Glenn Beck is?
BrideOfRove on March 13, 2009 at 4:01 PM
To be fair, it was a comedy show when they started out, back in the Craig Kilbourne days.
Farmer_Joe on March 13, 2009 at 4:01 PM
There is the problem on a nutshell, O Creator of Worlds.
The GOP is wearing clown shoes but they still aren’t funnie.
;)
strangelet on March 13, 2009 at 4:02 PM
Can’t find any conservative completely void of any integrity?
d1carter on March 13, 2009 at 4:02 PM
Stewart vs. Cramer = Buttboy vs. Buttgirl
Seven Percent Solution on March 13, 2009 at 4:02 PM
He’s taking a dump on CNBC because CNBC’s taking a dump on Obama. I repeat my point: Practically no one in the media, including the financial media, saw the collapse coming. Why the special opprobrium for CNBC?
If that’s his problem, he’s a moron. How does he expect them to advertise the show, “Jim Cramer — right 50% of the time”? Newsflash, Jon: People advertising their product tend to exaggerate its worth. Film at 11.
Allahpundit on March 13, 2009 at 4:02 PM
Same reason the left has never had a successful version of Rush Limbaugh and Bill O’Reilly.
Jim Treacher on March 13, 2009 at 4:02 PM
P.S. Kevin Smith stinks.
Jim Treacher on March 13, 2009 at 4:03 PM
This crap is more of what I talk about when I say Republicans need to ‘keep it real’.
Vera71 on March 13, 2009 at 4:03 PM
Jim Treacher on March 13, 2009 at 4:02 PM
Cons are not funny.
getalife on March 13, 2009 at 4:03 PM
I remember when Craig Kilborn hosted the daily show, it was actually funny back then.
rollthedice on March 13, 2009 at 4:04 PM
The republican party has ignored corruption and graft, worse they have covered for it, encouraged it, and rationalized it.
Now when Stewart calls out market manipulation many republicans and commenters here pretend Stewart is a commie against capital instead of playing a populist and reaming the manipulation and graft.
We need to end this siege mentality we developed during the Bush admin. Stop pretending every criticism is an evil commie plot, or libtard scheme.
Instead of calling out Rush for playing Rahm’s game all the way to the bank rather than acting like the patriot concerned about America’s future like claims to be, we circle the wagons and shoot ourselves, taking one for team Rush.
Will people like Rush ever take one for the team if they know no matter what they say or do we will react like Pavlov’s dog and jump to their defense as long as they are able to spin the ‘conflict’ as us vs them?
Not bloody likely.
barkolounger on March 13, 2009 at 4:04 PM
I don’t think Glenn’s show is intentionally funny. It just turns out that way because he’s batshit crazy.
SnarkVader on March 13, 2009 at 4:04 PM
Odd part was Stewart went after all of CNBC, and Cramer seemed unprepared to defend the network–in part because he’s an entertainer not an executive. The result was an interview that was tedious and one-sided.
Stewart is not alone in calling CNBC out on their patticake interviews with CEO’s or with the free air time they give to fund managers who pump their product.
Cramer isn’t at fault for being a clownish stock picker. If you watch Mad Money with your E-Trade account open, typing in orders, then you are missing the point. CNBC should do a better job of delivering skeptical journalism during the hours Mad Money isn’t on.
The guy Stewart should have had on was Dylan Ratigan. Ratigan is as quick-witted as Stewart and is also the journalist at CNBC who has consistently asked the most critical questions of guests.
dedalus on March 13, 2009 at 4:05 PM
What does Kevin Smith have to do with anything?
SnarkVader on March 13, 2009 at 4:05 PM
I’ve been pooping on you, AP, for Rushgate, but I gotta say, you got Stewart pegged better than anyone. I’d love to see you put him on the hotseat.
Pasalubong on March 13, 2009 at 4:05 PM
Stewart better have someone from WashPo on – they have abandoned the Business section of their paper now.
The Dow keeps going down. It’s easier to hide now.
faraway on March 13, 2009 at 4:05 PM
I still don’t think the past tense applies to Cramer at all…his slam on Obamanomics is only that it’s hurting him in the short term. During his anti-Obamanomics Mad Money speech, he pointedly said that he was 100% in line with Obama’s “centrist” goals (including higher taxes and cap and trade), he only wanted Obama to postpone it a few quarters until the economy heals and he can continue to make some money. So, Cramer being Cramer, I expect him to get the message and fall back in line soon. Cramer hasn’t changed his stripes at all…he was just foolish enough to sound apostate on air. This is really just another Blue-on-Blue public whipping.
The lesson is that the power base of the left (Obama and the MSM) really is consistent in it’s treatment of apostates who don’t toe the line…even dopey ones like Cramer.
AUINSC on March 13, 2009 at 4:06 PM
Every time I bother to read your essays on here, I can’t help but wonder who this “we” is to whom you keep referring.
AubieJon on March 13, 2009 at 4:06 PM
He wears a permanent tin foil hat.
getalife on March 13, 2009 at 4:06 PM
It’s been tried. All he does is say, “I’m just a comedian – I don’t expect to be taken seriously.”
Farmer_Joe on March 13, 2009 at 4:06 PM
Cramer got completely pwned. It was actually pretty impressive on the part of Stewart.
The Principal Chair on March 13, 2009 at 4:07 PM
Rush finally said that?
getalife on March 13, 2009 at 4:09 PM
Stewart is funny because he has become a self-parody. I’m still torn whether it’d be funnier if he realized it.
Christien on March 13, 2009 at 4:09 PM
I remember during the famous Crossfire interview, Tucker Carlson (who I’m no fan of), was trying to make the “clown nose on, clown nose off” point, and Stewart just replied, “You’re a d—.” Like Olby, he can’t be confronted; he has to control the terms of the debate if he allows any at all. I’m sick of the adulation he gets.
Pasalubong on March 13, 2009 at 4:10 PM
After shell-shocked investors finish tearing their brokers’ new ones, CNBC is the next best target for venting rage. Beyond its recent Obama bashing (Santelli, Cramer, etc.), it’s been the ringleader of financial masturbation for the past 15 years.
The stars simply aligned.
Cuffy Meigs on March 13, 2009 at 4:10 PM
Plus One!
carbon_footprint on March 13, 2009 at 4:10 PM
barkolounger on March 13, 2009 at 4:04 PM
Stewart’s rant was nothing more than Rahm’s team destroying private citizens for criticizing Obama.
faraway on March 13, 2009 at 4:10 PM
I bet you were one of those kids who made heavy use of “I know you are, but what am I?”
Farmer_Joe on March 13, 2009 at 4:10 PM
I think Allahpundit is the counter to Stewart…
d1carter on March 13, 2009 at 4:11 PM
Yeah, Comedy Central is really good for laughs on the rare occasion I feel like a Mad TV rerun.
RepubChica on March 13, 2009 at 4:13 PM
Made? He still uses that line.
AubieJon on March 13, 2009 at 4:13 PM
Ummm….would that reason be party affiliation due to stratification of IQ, Mistah Treacher?
Ye’ll take the lowbrows an’ we’ll take the highbrows and we’ll get to DC afore ye!
strangelet on March 13, 2009 at 4:13 PM
Even the Fed Chair didn’t initially see how big a train wreck it would be. Cramer could have made that point but was a no show for the Daily Show interview.
Still CNBC has to ask itself whether they do a disservice to by disseminating information from people like Dick Fuld or Jimmy Cayne to their audience without corresponding critical commentary.
dedalus on March 13, 2009 at 4:13 PM
Cramer came off as a wuss and Stewart came off as fairly knowledgeable, which is a shame b/c this is where the Obots get their info from.
At the same time, Stewart is a freakin hypocrite for going after CNBC and other financial networks for not doing more honest “investigative” reporting. His MSM buddies gave The Messiah a free pass for 2 years and NEVER did any investigative reporting on him which is why his carcass is in the WH.
davek70 on March 13, 2009 at 4:14 PM
Has anyone noticed that almost all content from nationalreview.com, including the corner and other blogs, since Nov. 2008 is gone?
bilups on March 13, 2009 at 4:14 PM
A sphincter says what?
LimeyGeek on March 13, 2009 at 4:15 PM
Neither did the then-head of the NY branch of the Fed, known to you and me as Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner.
Allahpundit on March 13, 2009 at 4:17 PM
BS.
Topsecretk9 on March 13, 2009 at 4:18 PM
But me and my true love
Will never meet again
On the bonnie, bonnie banks of Loch Lomond.
…
strangelet on March 13, 2009 at 4:18 PM
Yeah, she was challenged to provide an instance of that happening and disappeared. Waiting a new thread, most likely.
AubieJon on March 13, 2009 at 4:20 PM
George Soros wrecked a nation via currency trading to get rich….when you going to attack him Stewart?
jp on March 13, 2009 at 4:24 PM
Still MSM has to ask itself whether they do a disservice disseminating information from the likes of Obama, Gibbs and insert random Dem pol name here, without corresponding critical commentary. That Cramer is somehow on trial here is equally absurd as Rush being targeted. We have no press we have no democracy.
msmveritas on March 13, 2009 at 4:25 PM
Timmy boy was busy trying to figure out Turbo Tax.
rbj on March 13, 2009 at 4:25 PM
Stewart’s funny because his humor so smacks of effort, and he clearly takes himself so damned seriously. Kind of a conflict-of-interest when the court jester becomes part of King Barry’s noise machine, right Jon? Tell us how you’re just becoming ridiculous yourself so you can more effectively ridicule The Man.
Christien on March 13, 2009 at 4:26 PM
I thoroughly enjoyed these clips because it reinforces the Narrative:
1. Obama is thin skinned and needs to punish those who criticize him. (How else to explain goofball Gibbs’ reaction?)
2. The MSM is in the tank for Obama. His defenders emerge out of the woodworks, like those anonymous martial arts guys in a Bruce Lee movie.
3. The Daily Show is a legitimate cartoon news service of more depth than even CBS, ABC, and NBC news. (Once Katie Couric leaves CBS, why wouldn’t they get Stewart to read the news?)
4. Obama doesn’t know what he’s doing about the economy. Jimmy Carter II.
What was Gibbs so cheery about?
EMD on March 13, 2009 at 4:28 PM
Someone asked who the Bush admin ‘went after’….Moore and Wilson are just the first two off the top of my head.
Were/are they douchebags? Sure. But they were both ‘private citizens’ that the administration actively attacked.
Rightly so, but that’s not my point. My point is that we look like hypocritical hacks pretending this is unprecedented.
What is also moronic is our side screaming about the constitution all of a sudden when nary a peep was heard from our side while one after another constitutional protections were ignored in service of the WOT.
This is looking like an “I know you are but what am I’ strategy.
Everything the Dem’s accused us of doing we are going to accuse them of doing it.
Except when we did do it…Or maybe not. In the Pelosi plane ‘scandal’ there are people here claiming it’s ok to attack now because Hastert was wrong when he did the same thing.
Even though it was our vaunted WOT that mandated the AF flights.
I’m getting effing sick of this crap and I’m starting to think maybe 20 years in the political wilderness is suitable punishment for the lazy, dishonest, and bankrupt arguments we have decided will pull us through this dark period.
barkolounger on March 13, 2009 at 4:29 PM
Don’t kid yourself, they knew what could happen. Anyone who’s ever had to manage a portfolio of derivatives knows the risk that can be taken on. I used to trade options and had many friends who were short gamma players (I was a long gamma person). They just hoped against hope that the music wouldn’t stop, especially since the morons in Congress and the courts had made so that it couldn’t be stopped.
It is a well-known fact that many price/economic series movements are not normally distributed and that 5 standard deviation moves occur on the downside with regularity. This is something that all people know, intuitively.
progressoverpeace on March 13, 2009 at 4:29 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 Next »