since "I won't be your monkey" destroyed CNN's Crossfire crew.

I too admire Kramer for going on there, I think a few of them think "oh, he is just a comedian" and understimate John Stewart.

He's a comedian in the way Lenny Bruce or George Carlin was a comedian....You underestimate their intelligence at your own peril.

Between Stewart doing Kramer and Colbert baking Glenn Beck the other week, it's time again to thank our lucky stars we have those two talented entertainers doing God's work in the vast wasteland that is TV.

Who won? Stewart and Cramer. They both got something out of it. Stewart showed that he's the intellectual heavy-weight, cross him at your own peril. Cramer, to his credit, showed up and took his lumps, probably putting an end to the media's fascination with "let's watch Cramer as he watches Daily Show clips" split screens.

The "I wouldn't say this on television" stuff was absolutely brutal though.

"We were lied to, we couldn't know better"
Roll 212!
'Well, it's illegal to lie, but no one can check'
Roll 216!
'And this is the sort of lie you want to tell'

For someone who makes money by telling people how to make money, that's a huge hit to credibility. Now, in the back of everyone's mind, that raises the question as to whether or not Cramer is any better than the spam e-mails with penny stocks that "are going to explode onto the market and should be trading at $4 at the end of the day!" Is he just sending out messages to benefit his own portfolio? Is he buying/selling short?

It's an allegation that's difficult to live down, especially when you get caught on tape telling people how to do it.

I just have to ask myself who sent Cramer out there to do the mea culpa alone.  The original spot on Stewart's show implicated the entire CNBC organization.  Why just Cramer?  

When does Rushbo appear to defend himself?

PEOPLE.  You are picking the the WRONG TARGET for your anger.  Jim Cramer is a Democrat who gets up there every day and actually talks about what is going on in the moment, the issues, risks and opportunities as he sees them, based on a lifetime of experience in investing.  His commentary happens AT THE MARGIN. - he gives advice at the end of the business day based on what happened that day.  He's brilliant but expecting him to know everything and catch every problem and tell us all about it in 30 minutes is idiotic.  

Why on earth is this story even huge?  Jim Cramer is not an angel and has never pretended to be.  He has a large biden-like mouth, but he's not a snake oil salesman and Stewart is setting him up.  Stewart is trying to make him the fall guy for this entire crisis, and it's just WRONG.  Cramer is actually out there trying to help.  This is the most unfortunate story of the last 2 months.

I truly don't understand how this was an evisceration.  I admit, I'm a financial analyst with a degree in economics, but dudes.  Change your target.  Cramer is just one more voice giving advice to us, and we are all adults who should think before we follow any advice.  

Believe it or not, Cramer is one of the good guys - his problem is that he's extremely high profile.  Yes, he does view investing as one big game, because it is.  It's a very high stakes poker game, just like politics.  That is not something to be condemned for.  

This video is no longer available due to a copyright claim by Viacom International Inc.

Grrr...

Cramer is one of the few Liberals at CNBC.  Probably the only one that would possibly agree with Stewart's observations.

He's spent years calling out (ranting) about lax enforcement, turning a blind eye, telling the public exactly how some of these schemes work and de-mystifying them to a large part of the investing public.  

This is a pump and dump engineered by CNBC.  This contest was hyped by CNBC, NBC, MSNBC, and Comedy Network.  This is the contest that happened because CNBC vetoed Santelli from appearing on the Daily Show.

By pumping up Cramer and letting Stewart dump on him, we gleefully pile on Cramer in true Lord of the Flies fashion.  Meanwhile, Santelli, Kudlow, Hanes and all of the other commentators who are hoping that Obama will fail, get off scott free.

CNBC wins!  (In true Wall Street Fashion, with a pump and dump scheme, and we went for it hook, line, and sinker.)

I really want Stewart to appear on Mad Money and call out the other ones who didn't have the guts to appear on his show.

Better yet, let them both appear at the same time with Olbermann, and let them riff off of each other about what is wrong with the system on Wall Street, how it has harmed America and what needs to be done to fix it!

I'm glad to here other liberals feel the same as me, many of my progressive friends are all anti-cramer right now and I just totally disagree.  

I was pretty surprised -- I remember when Stewart interviewed Lynn Cheney. It was a superb job; he managed to make his points while not seeming to attack her the way he did Cramer (and in the end, when she basically said it didn't matter about terrorist attacks in Spain and England so long as they weren't in the US, Stewart's strategy proved its brilliance).

So I was expecting similar treatment for Cramer. I have to say: it was a little uncomfortable to watch. But I don't get the Cramer apologists: yeah, he might be somewhat more liberal than the rest of the CNBC bunch, but he's a dishonest man.

As an example, if you honestly think that when Fuld lied to Cramer, Cramer had no idea what was going on -- that he didn't know Fuld was fomenting, just like Cramer knows the game is played -- then you are a little naive.

That's the point: Cramer knows how the pump and dump game is played, and he has no problem playing whatever role in the game he is currently assigned to. That was Stewart's main problem with him, and I have to say I agree.

Is MSNBC really censoring the story?

http://thinkprogress.org/2009/03/13/msnb c-dont-talk-cramer/?ref=fp3

We often called it that. Certainly companies want to put their best face forward and maybe I am old-schooled but I was taught that part of the role of being an equity analyst was akin to being a regulator. It was my job to keep companies honest.

One reason I can't stand Eliot Spitzer is that he destroyed equity analysis with his crusade against Henry Blodget and Jack Grubman. Fine, Grubman traded an ATT call for an admittance for his daughters to an elite private school. He should have been banned. And Blodget represented the "new breed" of analyst. He was a journalist. I often wondered if he had worked at USA Today or the National Enquirer. He was more cheerleader than analyst. I was paid to be skeptical not to be a cheerleader.

It is amusing to see one of my former competitors, Deborah Weinswig, embroil herself in the EFCA battle downgrading Wal-Mart. I wondered why not Whole Foods using that logic. Whole Foods is as anti-union as Wal-Mart thought WFMI does treat its employees infinitely better. There's a reason the company is considered one of the best places to work. Firedoglake has a pretty good summary of the Weinswig saga. Not to disparage a former competitor but Deborah worked at Bear Stearns before coming to Citibank. Bear Stearns, the home of cowboy capitalism. And which bank was the first to fold? I wonder why.