The judgment of Sarah Palin and her family, Todd in particular, is amazing. Rather than just taking it in stride and leaving it alone, she decides to take a moral stand against David Letterman?
Well, at least one question is answered: Sarah Palin has no national political aspirations. No one with even the least amount of political savvy would publicly attack David Letterman if they had a national agenda.
Now, Dave and his writers should have been more aware as to which of the Palin daughters were on the trip before making those jokes, but this is an amateur, headline grabbing way of responding. Much like the miserably failed presidential campaign Palin was involved in, it does rally the base at the expense of that large swath of the middle that she only think she appeals to.
Congratulations, Sarah! The good news is that the presidential campaign season doesn’t really get going for another year and a half or so. There is time to recover although I am confident there will be plenty more forthcoming.
I've been following Josh Marshall's posts of reader comments (here, here and here) regarding the Jon Stewart - Jim Cramer "dustup." I've read through and agreed with most of the comments including when TPM reader DC says, regarding Joe Scarborough criticisms that Stewart attacked Bush daily but doesn't attack Obama, that:
Joe repeatedly says that Jon Stewart would always rip on Bush but now that Obama is in office he will not make fun of the President so he must go after people "in the arena," aka Kramer(sic). If any of them had been watching Daily Show last night or any other time recently they would have seen many segments making fun of the new administration and the Democrats in Congress.
Now just to understand better what I am, and will be, talking about, watch this video from TPM which included Jim Cramer on the Today show as well as Jim Cramer on Morning Joe:
First. Joe. Perhaps there aren't transcripts. Perhaps Viacom is a pain in the a$$ as far as putting stuff up on YouTube. But, if you want to know what Jon Stewart thought about ANYTHING on ANY particular day his show aired, his website kicks ALL of NBC's properties for ease of access. Go to the site, click "Videos" and then move the sliders to the appropriate date. For instance, this is an easily accessible clip from January 11, 2007. You know, the day after our dear departed President announced "The Surge":
Yup. Sure looks like he's hiding from all of his past calls. BTW, there are a lot of us who are happy that "The Surge" seems to have worked, who still will not, in retrospect, recant our opposition to the concept. (Actually, there are some who think that the result would have happened anyway and the the surge might have just sped things up a little but wasn't instrumental. That's a topic for a different day and post though.)
Apparently, Jim Cramer himself, though, is getting all buggy because Jon Stewart won't shut up, like last night:
You know, I don't have anything in the market. I did 10 years ago. I was around when The Street was launched. I thought Jim Cramer was a loud-mouthed jackass then. Not much has changed.
I have long been talking with a very good friend of mine about the market. A little over a year ago, he started moving money out until he had zero exposure. I agreed that was the best move. You know why? Because we both knew something bad was happening with the subprime crap and neither one of us thought there was a safe haven within the market. In that TPM video, Cramer states that "any stock you recommended is down", and that "I told people to sell...everything."
Well, first of all, you kept recommending stocks. Even in an incredibly unstable environment. Why? That's your job. At least as you and CNBC see it. The people who trust you? They see you more akin to a financial advisor. That's what makes you and your network so dangerous. Yes, you told people to sell after you spent month after month telling people to buy! You finally told people to see on October 6, 2008. Gee, Jim. By then the DJIA was off over 23% ALREADY for the year. (Some would argue that a media stock pundit saying "sell everything this week!" isn't particularly useful to the economy or the market either. You don't care. Tact isn't your schictk.) Don't cry to us now, jerk.
Folks. Let's just talk sense. Jon Stewart tends to make sense. He tends to be funny making fun of other people not making sense. That's why he's funny. Jim Cramer, yesterday, could not be made to see sense by an anchor on his own network. Stomach as much as you can of this crap:
(Side note: CNBC's video embeds like crap too.)
You really want to follow this guy's advice? I think he could use some Ritalin. If you want to listen to Jim Cramer and CNBC, and be assured, the vast majority of Americans are happily ignorant of his existence, more power to you. The rest of us will watch Bloomberg and probably lose less money than you.
(I will not go on too much disputing the numbers they bandied about in that last clip right now. Such as the fact that the top marginal rate went to 79% not 73%. At least she had the right argument. I know there numbers were wrong. Suprise! Jim was reading from a slip of paper too! At least she threw a somewhat accurate fastball between his eyes extemporaneously.)
Comments welcome,
Pat McGovern
It's got electoral votes. It's what politicians crave.
Update: Forgot to include one of the many 'critical of Obama and the Dems' Jon Stewart segments has, just for you Joe "I speak of things I don't know" Scarborough:
In case you missed it Keith Olbermann has much of SNL's politically oriented skits from Saturday Night, featuring Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson, as well as his own show's little 'cameo' in The Simpson's:
As a proud Ohioan, I say: Let is not be said that Ohio Democrats do not have a sense of humor:
Kudos to Todd Hoffman and company for this great spoof! I really do have to wonder how many people would call that number if this was indeed aired! That infamous 20 odd percent that has always and will always love George W. Bush and Dick Cheney. How sad. Oh well!
Comments welcome,
Pat McGovern
It's got electoral votes. It's what politicians crave.
