Housing Doom

i had been lookin forward to last night’s show due to the overhype this “rivalry” has got in the media the last few days. i thought that stewart would go easy on cramer and it’d be very light. i was actually impressed that he just continued to push the issues and even aired those clips the cramer admitedly “never thought would be on tv.” LOL!!! in fairness though to cramer…..he’s an entertainer, just like stewart. if anyone lives and dies by his stock picks, then they are the fool.

Wow, I just finished watching the full interview on the daily show website & I am just amazed at Jon Stewart. He completely dismantled Cramer. I am so impressed. & I love what he said about CNBC, catering to the worst in people. When really they would have a ton more viewers if they actually took the time to truly educate people about the real market.

i suppose if you can sell “it’s a great time to buy” whether housing is goin up, down, or is stable, then i guess you can see how “re/max” looks jus like “rehava”?????? i don’t think they look remotely similar.

yes igor….it’s “silly”

Linenoise-

I’d find CNBC a lot more entertaining if they did pull clips of things that analysts and CEOs said a year ago. I’d love to see guys nailed to the wall for talking their book quarter after quarter.

I guess that’s what the blogs are here for- [I believe that we were the first ones in the blogosphere to post Cramer's hedge fund "confession".] but I have to admit, CNBC has better access to video clips than we do.

Stewart is, without fail, the smartest and most prepared interviewer on television — and he runs a damn comedy show. If the financial news networks (hell, if ANY news network) took their jobs as seriously as Stewart does, we’d all be much better off.

This is an absolute must study data source for potential investors, and unlike the greatly touted books, CD’s, E-courses and seminars
It is absolutely free.
http://www.sec.gov/litigation/litreleases.shtml

Note the frequency of the following phrases or variations thereof:

1. The Defendants consented to the entry of the orders without admitting or denying the allegations of the Commission’s complaints.

2.The Court enjoined each of the Defendants from future violations of rule(..)of the Securities Exchange Act…

3.The Court ordered the payment of disgorgement, interest, and civil penalties

4. Give us some money and promise to play nice from now on, or you could be in real trouble.

Metro-

It’s good to see you around!

I wonder sometimes if Stewart doesn’t have a bit of an advantage being a comedian. I don’t know if you ever listened to the old group Peter, Paul and Mary. [They were before my time too!] They had a song called “I dig rock and roll music”. The last verse said:

I dig Rock and Roll music
I could really get it on in that scene.
I think I could say somethin’ if you know what I mean
But if I really say it, the radio won’t play it
Unless I lay it between the lines

By “laying it between the lines” of his comedy, Stewart can “really say it”.

John-

Thank you- I was thinking that I should try and dig up a video for youngsters like me that can’t remember back that far. : )

I’m always amazed that anyone expects the mainstream media to ‘be fair’, or introspective. The great media study, ‘Manufacturing Consent’ laid bare media principles many years ago.
Initially, the book (and the documentary) lay out the first, most obvious truth.. if a media is funded by advertisers, then its first interests are its advertisers, period.
If its advertisers are ‘conservative’ corporations, then its programming with reflect that, with few exceptions. One exception is that, after an unexpected ‘event’ or disaster, there is very often a period of truth-telling before corporate ‘flack’ and other filters set in.
In other words… why do we expect mainstream media to defend our interests as people, vs. their advertisers?