O'Reilly's claim about Stewart's motives undermined by Stewart's criticism of Cramer a year ago
Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.
SUMMARY: Bill O'Reilly said of Jon Stewart's recent Daily Show segments on Jim Cramer's coverage of the current financial crisis: "So, when Mr. Cramer began criticizing Barack Obama, Mr. Stewart -- an ardent Obama supporter -- let him have it." O'Reilly later added, "So here we have the melding of politics -- because if Cramer didn't attack Obama, Stewart would not be on his case." In fact, Stewart criticized Cramer in March 2008 over Cramer's claim that investment firm Bear Stearns was "not in trouble" less than a week before the company collapsed.
On the March 11 edition of Fox News' The O'Reilly Factor, discussing Comedy Central host Jon Stewart's recent segments on CNBC host Jim Cramer's coverage of the current financial crisis, host Bill O'Reilly claimed, "So, when Mr. Cramer began criticizing Barack Obama, Mr. Stewart -- an ardent Obama supporter -- let him have it." O'Reilly later added, "So here we have the melding of politics -- because if Cramer didn't attack Obama, Stewart would not be on his case." However, on the March 17, 2008, edition of The Daily Show, Stewart criticized Cramer for claiming that investment firm Bear Stearns was "not in trouble" less than a week before the company collapsed -- the same remarks that Stewart has highlighted on recent editions of his show.
Indeed, during the March 17, 2008, segment, titled "Broken Arrow: Crisis in the Chartland," Stewart criticized Cramer after airing a clip of the March 11, 2008, edition of CNBC's Mad Money, during which Cramer said: "Bear Stearns is fine. Do not take your money out. This is -- look, if there's one takeaway other than a plus 400 [inaudible] -- Bear Stearns is not in trouble. I mean, if anything, they are more likely to be taken over. Don't move your money from Bear. That's just being silly. Don't be silly." After airing Cramer's comments, Stewart said: "I love the way that Jim Cramer breaks down really complex financial issues into ones that are wrong. By the way, you may want to join Jim Cramer on his new show, No Matter How Good I Am At This Over The Next 10 Years, I Will Never Make Up The Amount Of Money I Blew For People Last Tuesday. Don't take your money out of Bear Stearns, it's only going to be worthless."
From the March 17, 2008, edition of Comedy Central's The Daily Show with Jon Stewart:
STEWART: It went from $60 a share to $2 a share in a few days. I mean, let me see if I can break this down for you. Let's say you had $60, and then after a night out, you had enough only for subway fare home. Now take away the night out. But, of course, obviously, someone like me, someone like you, we're not going to see this kind of disaster coming. That's what these financial shows are for. Right, there, Jim Cramer, last Tuesday?
CRAMER [video clip]: Peter writes, "Should I be worried about Bear Stearns in terms of liquidity and get my money out of there?" No, no, no.
STEWART: Well, that could mean anything. Perhaps we should give Mr. Cramer a chance to explain the subtlety of his position.
CRAMER [video clip]: No, no, no. Bear Stearns is fine. Do not take your money out. This is -- look, if there's one takeaway other than a plus 400 [inaudible] -- Bear Stearns is not in trouble. I mean, if anything, they are more likely to be taken over. Don't move your money from Bear. That's just being silly. Don't be silly.
STEWART: I love the way Jim Cramer breaks down really complex financial issues into ones that are wrong. By the way, you may want to join Jim Cramer on his new show, No Matter How Good I Am At This Over The Next 10 Years, I Will Never Make Up The Amount Of Money I Blew For People Last Tuesday. Don't take your money out of Bear Stearns, it's only going to be worthless.
From the March 11 edition of Fox News' The O'Reilly Factor:
O'REILLY: Directly ahead: After NBC financial guy Jim Cramer hammered President Obama, Jon Stewart -- an Obama supporter -- went after Cramer. Now the game is on. Right back with it.
[...]
O'REILLY: "Personal Story" segment tonight: It's getting very personal between comedian Jon Stewart and NBC financial analyst Jim Cramer. As you may know, Mr. Cramer has had a rough year, making bad stock calls on companies that collapsed, like Bear Stearns. So, when Mr. Cramer began criticizing Barack Obama, Mr. Stewart -- an ardent Obama supporter -- let Cramer have it.
[begin video clip]
CRAMER: Bear Stearns is fine. Do not take your money out. This is -- look, if there's one takeaway other than a plus 400 [inaudible] -- Bear Stearns is not in trouble.
STEWART: Wow. If I'd only followed CNBC's advice, I'd have a $1 million today. Provided I'd started with $100 million.
[...]
STEWART: Jim Cramer did write an article for MainStreet.com complaining that we had unfairly used a video clip out of context. He's not saying, literally, "I'm asking you to buy Bear Stearns." For that, you'd have to go back a full seven weeks before the stock completely collapsed.
CRAMER: I'm asking people who are watching this video to buy Bear Stearns.
STEWART: [Bleep] you.
[...]
CRAMER: If Jon Stewart wants to debate the merits of Tier 1 capital versus common equity, I'll do it. But the guy's a comedian, and he's decided to focus on some calls that I made during a bull market.
[...]
CRAMER: A comedian's attacking me. Wow. He runs a variety show.
[...]
STEWART: He makes it sound like I'm some kind of buffoon. Just flapping my arms with crazy buttons and wacky sound effects. [clip of Cramer sound effects]
[end video clip]
O'REILLY: Wow. Now out of this trivial pursuit comes a serious question: Why would anybody take advice from a television stock picker? With us now, Fox News business correspondent Stuart Varney. So here we have the melding of politics -- because if Cramer didn't attack Obama, Stewart would not be on his case -- and what I feel is a shaky industry -- television and radio stock pickers. What say you?
You know, maybe it's wrong of me (it is), but I am kinda entertained by O'Reilly. Maybe it's because I think of O RLY owl whenever I see him, but he's O.K. when you think of him as a satire of himself. So - in a twisted way - I can see why some might enjoy his show.
Despite his near-complete lack of nuance and self-reflection, he is far above cosmic hacks like Hannity and virulent hate-mongers like Malkin.
I actually kind of agree with you. I don't like O'Reilly. I think he's a puffed up, self important prick. But he can on occassion be reasonable. If I remember right he was once somewhat critical of Bush and the Iraq War. When he appeared on the Daily Show he sounded relatively reasonable too. He usually falls right back in to partison hackery though. Hannity, Malkin, Beck, Coulter, etc. are pretty much all just loons with nothing to contribute and no interest in hearing any ideas that don't agree with their own.
"Hannity, Malkin, Beck, Coulter, etc. are pretty much all just loons with nothing to contribute and no interest in hearing any ideas that don't agree with their own."
The issue is that they do contribute something very powerful - hate. I look at O'Reilly and I just see an arrogant bloke telling everyone what his thoughts are (nothing of consequence). But people like Malkin seem to know what they're doing, seem to revel in manipulations they're masterminding.
I see some liberal "leaders" doing likewise, but never with pure vindictive malice that Malkin and Coulter display (for example).
Does O'Reilly even try to get the facts straight? Or is he just making it up as he goes along?
Bingo!
This is just BillO trying to perpetuate the right-wing myth that Jon Stewart only goes after conservatives. Anyone who watches Stewart on a regular basis knows that Stewart goes after liberals too.
Besides, BillO has a personal beef against Stewart because Stewart has gone after him and a study has shown that Stewart's audiences are smarter than BillO's. BillO is using this Cramer v. Stewart dust-up to take a shot at Stewart and, pitifully, he's using a falsehood to do it.
Cramer is an avowed liberal though. Bill has a point. When these guys "step out of line" Stewart and the likes go after them tooth and nail. The example MMfA gives is misleading. The topic was Bear Stearns, not Bush policies. When Cramer was roughing up Bush, there was no hit from Stewart. Comparing apples to apples, Stewart would have had to go after him for a Bush policy take which he didn't do.
Cramer is not an avowed, "liberal." He donates to Democrats. Any liberal can tell you that, "liberal" does not equal, "democrat."
And the Daily Show clip is clearly being critical of Cramer on Bear Sterns.
And all of this presupposes that Stewart doesn't take jabs at Obama, which is incorrect.
To bad Jon isn't an actual reporter. How do you rate their most recent meeting, media voice to comedian?
His interview was an actual INTERVIEW, what reporters are SUPPOSED to do, but haven't been doing for quite a while. It's worth seeing here: http://www.dailykostv.com/w/000987/index.html
I'm aware that Cramer is a liberal. He even voted for Obama. What I was trying to say and, unfortunately, didn't do a very good job of it is that BillO was making it sound like Stewart only went after Cramer because Cramer attacked Obama like the conservatives do (such as his Lenin comparison). BillO is making it all about Stewart allegedly defending liberal politics and Obama when in reality Stewart was going after the stupid advice given out by Cramer. BillO was misrepresenting what Stewart was doing with his Cramer segments when he foolishly tried to spin it into something political based when it wasn't. BillO wants his audience to think that Stewart only rips on people if they have a conservative sounding opinion.
The reason he went after Cramer is because Cramer was making assertion about the market and Stewart was just pointing out other times that Cramer made assertions about the market. Why does it even matter to Bill who Stewart goes after?
In a post a few days ago I speculated that perhaps Cramer is looking to move on from CNBC to very likely the Fox Business Channel...
And now suddenly... BillO is defending Cramer... hmmm
As nutty and mouthy as this Cramer guy is... he will be a perfect fit into the quagmire called FoxNoise... like Glen Beck.
Either way... pathetic!
Cramer should be thrown off the air, a complete idiot.
You may be right capt. I heard Cramer refer to being exiled in "cable tv hell". I can only assume he meant CNBC?
Jon Stewart at his BEST! In my "humble" opinion, he is the ONLY person in the media who is NOT full of "you know what".
I HOPE STEWART GOES AFTER OREILLY NEXT BECAUSE THE DAILY SHOW IS A HIT BECAUSE THEY TELL THE TRUTH ABOUT PEOPLE LIKE O'REILLY, FOX NEWS AND WALL STREET.
yeah and then that will spark another war with stephen colbert cause colbert is o'reilly spin off......but in a good and funny way.
Dear Bill,
I am thinking, and I'm probably not alone here, that Stewart was actually, you know, making fun of Cramer, not because Stewart is an Obama supporter (he is), but because Cramer made a reasonable fool out of himself recently, and it was, well, funny, and easy to make fun of.
I don't know if you realize it or not, but Stewart takes things out of context, on purpose, to make it look funnier than it really is.
Cramer is like a clock, correct twice a day.
Mags...
Why are you trying to explain comedic practices to the funniest guy on TV.... ??
;>)
Put a blonde hairpiece and mustache on Jim Cramer and you have slapstick comedian Rip Taylor.
CNBC's image is severely tarnished so changes are in the works.
Cramer's popularity is built on delivery, not substance. Yes, his days at CNBC (Clueless NBC) are numbered and he'll move to the WTFox channel.
I couldn't agree more. I think the other talking head "journalists" could learn a thing or two from Stewart about interviewing politicians.
Frankly, I think the Right Wing toadies are just a little bit afraid of Stewart.
Jon Stewart's Finest Hour:
I often felt that during the lead up to the Gulf War Jon Stewart was the only one on TV told the American people the truth. We had nothing but propaganda from our media for six months. Eventually, as the inescapeable truth came out some journalists began to ask the right questions. With the financial meltdown we see the same pattern. Journalists ask some tough questions now that it's undenably a disaster, but where were they before?
Stewart asked Kramer this question on his show. He also asked him about shady tactics that Kramer himself engaged in and what is a financial news network doing if it can't tell its audience companies that are leveraged at 35 to 1 might be a dangerous investment? Kramer had no good answers. Probably the last thing he expected was real journalism from Jon Stewart.
How pathetic is it when America has to rely on comedians to ask the really important questions? When the history of this periodis written it shoulc be called, "Only When Comedians Told the Truth."
This is typical red herring BillO. CNBC's behavior in the run-up to the financial meltdown was indefensible. Instead of defending it just call the other guy a partisan hack and pretend you aren't one yourself. BillO has consciously changed his image and delivery over the years in response to criticism but the idea that he is in some other league than the Sean Hannity Rush Limbaugh crowd is a bit of a stretch. He still uses the same tactics: Mislead, Misinform, Distract but essentially deflect any criticism of neo-conservative ideology. CNBC is in real trouble here. They are supposed to be a financial NEWS network and instead of shedding light on the financial crisis and warning the American public about it, they helped the bad guys rip everybody off by providing a soapbox for hedgefund managers and CEO's to trumpet bad stocks, bad investments, and ultimately a bad economy.
If Ted Knight was still alice, would it be type-casting to have him play O'Rielly in a made-for-TV movie about the man?
Obviously, that should say "ALIVE". Ted Knight was never 'alice.'