there is a video of this? I miss it…

Good entertainment would have been if Cramer had walked over to Stewart and slapped him silly.

#1– check out hulu.com, they have this and a ton of other tv shows you can watch. The interview was brilliant!! Jon Stewart is a freaking god.

the most harrowing moments of the interview/bitchslapping were the clips of cramer and that other guy playing-up the weasel angle; muttering, smarmy and slimey, arrogant and crooked.
each time they rolled another clip, you could see cramer sink just a little lower.
he's been in bed with those grifting CEOs for years.

On today's Cramer MAD MONEY show, he showed clips from Cramer vs. Stewart, but it was of a program on pie baking with Martha Stewart.

There hasn't been a decent Stewart since Jimmy died.

HA HA, Fano, well said! And, having said THAT, Drew, your post was well stated as well. What did anyone come away with? We all knew how indignantly funny/foul-mouthed Stewart would be; Cramer was just the latest to go againt the odds that are all with the house. We already knew the spectacle that would take place. With the exceptions of Cramer and that "Fast Money" slimefest, I will support CNBC against any of you who NEVER watched it on a regular basis, but now are 20/20 hindsight experts just because Cramer is an easy call as a jerk.

Great. CNBC elitists. Most people don't get all hyped up over what so called financial experts exhort viewers to do with their money, especially when it involves investing in the stock market. Shares of stock can be manipulated in an instant, and somebody always makes money while someone else loses.

Some of us invested in more tangible assets that are still assets and always will be. Keep on supporting CNBC or any other financial advice infomercial if you want, but it's kinda for dummies.

While I enjoy watching Cramer every night, one must remember the show is primarily entertainment. The financial networks exist to promote their advertisers financial and investment products. Who would expect them to warn about the credit bubble or coming Washington national debt collapse which will destroy much of the remaining private wealth in America today or what this will do to the dollar, the stock market, bonds, gold or the real estate market?

China is now worried about their dangerous over investment in US Treasury obligations. Washington ’s long-term choice is either repudiation or monetization. For monetization to be effective, the depreciation in the dollar would have to be substantial and this in turn would dramatically raise prices of imports for American consumers which would mean a tremendous drop in foreign imports. Debt monetization would cause more disruption to exporting nations than selective repudiation of Treasury debt.

The Campaign to Cancel the Washington National Debt By 12/22/2013 Constitutional Amendment is starting now in the U.S. See: http://www.facebook.com/group......amp;ref=ts

Thanks,

Ron with 30 plus years in the investment business and banking industry.

i'm trying to get my head around the amount of critiques about cramer vs. stewart, bastardized-huckster-driven business news, entertainment, CNBC and MSNBC turning their back on the story (duh!!!) and looking every which way, reading only one other person who brings up THE REAL story in all of this -
those video clips. those very DAMNING, huddled, muttered CLIPS in which cramer is admitting what might be CRIMINAL behavior, or is THIS acknowledged market manipulation just a matter of course?
the stony silence on this and at least one other blog (possibly more - i got too much on my plate just trying to survive) speaks volumes.
thank goodness i don't have two nickels to rub together.

@Ron: thanks, Ron. My concern is that either increased interest demanded by the Chinese or increase printing of money without borrowing will lead to inflation that will be crippling for a generation to come.

Interestingly enough, Olbermann had no comments about Cramer vs. Stewart on his program all last week. What do you suppose that means?

@gbybluemonday:
i thought the same thing when i saw those clips–what little pity i felt for kramer flew out the window. and i'm thinking those clips were one of the reasons stewart was more angry than funny. he was right on–asked the exact questions the 'true' news outlets should.

@fanofgrendel:
what could olbermann have done to follow stewart? jon nailed it pretty well. maybe olbermann has finally realized the blowhard rush-like behavior distracts from making a point.

@weezy: word was out from MSNBC management that they did not want the Cramer topic discussed after his Thursday night fiasco. Cramer canceled his appearance on the Friday Morning Joe. Olbermann, like most bullies, did not have the guts to buck his management. Mister, "I'll go after Fox for Worst Persons" at the drop of a hat, spoke not a peep. He has had to explain to his Daily Kos brethren, and to their credit, they are not buying his lame excuses.

I still haven't gotten over my hangover, and I've got to deal with weezy. It's like having a carbuncle on my ass.

@grendel: Buck up, li'l buckaroo. You'll get your boots back on.

so happy to have bothered you fanofgrendel. that makes my day.

so if olbermann mentioned the kramer fiasco, then he's an ass, and if he didn't, he's a wimp. glad to know you're fair.

The reason Olbermann wasn't speaking about Cramer on Jon Stewart is very clear, he works for MSNBC, Cramer is on CNBC, do you see a pattern here??????????

@Jana: Actually it shouldn't have mattered about MSNBC. If they aren't going to allow commentary on something that everyone is talking about for obvious reasons, then they are guilty of censorship in the extreme - extreme because they're only censoring what makes (or exposes) their own bullshit. That's no way to run programming that is supposed to inform the public. In fact, it's a tactic we would expect from China or Cuba in that regard. If Olbermann just refused to broach the matter because he personally dislikes Stewart, then he is an egomaniac and does his listeners a huge disservice.

People don't always invest for the money, there are people out there who invest in companies they believe in and hope will make a positive impact.

@maria: You sweet little idealist. Only the wealthy with extra $$ to burn put some money in companies that may possibly have a positive impact, cause they can handle the loss and it allows them to make people think they care. Other than that, people invest purely for a return on their investment.

If anyone knows anything about investing you know Cramer is a serious pro. It is humorous to see the clips of him recommending Bear I'll admit it. Yes, he got that one wrong, but anyone that goes out and piles $$$ into one single reco is the loser. Cramer always preaches diversity - so if your properly diversified you would only loose 4-8% depending on your weight. I like JS, but he kind of looks like an idiot on this one, but I guess that is comedy.