******************** THIS BLOG HAS MOVED TO WWW.LEGALINSURRECTION.COM ********************

This blog is moving to www.legalinsurrection.com. If you have not been automatically redirected please click on the link.

NEW COMMENTS will NOT be put through and will NOT be transferred to the new website.

Thursday, March 5, 2009

Cramer Joins Brooks In Mea Culpa

Jim Cramer, the television investment personality, has been in the news recently since he criticized Barack Obama's economic plans as a destroyer of wealth. The petty White House reaction to Cramer has put Cramer on the White House enemies list, along with Rick Santelli and Rush Limbaugh.

Cramer gives his "response" to the White House's sniping on his website. I agree with most of what Cramer says about Obama's ill-conceived hostility to the markets, and Obama's failure to understand the relationship between the markets and the economy. I also appreciate Cramer's willingness to go public in his opposition.

So I will fight the fight against that agenda. I will stand up for what I believe and for what I have always believed: Every person has a right to be rich in this country and I want to help them get there. And when they get there, if times are good, we can have them give back or pay higher taxes. Until they get there, I don't want them shackled or scared or paralyzed. That's what I see now.

If that makes me an enemy of the White House, then call me a general of an army that Obama may not even know exists -- tens of millions of people who live in fear of having no money saved when they need it and who get poorer by the day.

But buried in Cramer's response is a not quite "I'm sorry" mea culpa, which echo's David Brook's lament that Obama is not who Brooks thought he was:
I am proud to have voted for the Obama who I thought understood the need to get us on the right path, and create jobs and wealth before taxing it and making moves that hurt job creation -- certainly ones that will outweigh the meager number of jobs he's creating.
Why are you proud you voted for someone who you say is a destroyer of wealth and whose policies you compare to Lenin?

Just admit you made a mistake. You will feel better once you say it. Obama was not who you thought he was, and you were duped by one of the slickest salesmen "in my adult life." Repeat after me:
I am sorry I voted for Obama. It was a mistake. I was not as smart as I thought I was. I drank the cool-aid. Did I say I'm sorry? Well, I am. Please forgive me. I'm not a bad person. I just wanted everything to be cool.
If David Brooks can do it, so can you.

Here is a compilation of Cramer clips from Media Matters, the Democratic "watch [attack] dog" organization which did us a favor by putting Cramer's comments in one place:


  1. Silliness. Cramer rants (the White House is pushing "a radical agenda" that "put a level of fear in this country that I have not seen ever in my life.")

    Press corps asks White House Press Secretary about Cramer rant.

    White House Press Secretary pretty much blows off the question, without mentioning Cramer by name:

    "if you turn on a certain program it's geared to a very small audience -- no offense to my good friends or friend at CNBC, but the President has to look out for the broader economy and for the broader population."

    Right wing blogosphere goes into hyperventilation. Cramer, understandably, tries to milk it for all it's worth, which makes sense since as an actual predictor of the market he has no value whatsoever.

    America wonders why the right wing seems determined to trivialize itself.

  2. The silliness or amateurishness is on Obama and his administration. They are attacking from the bully pulpit people in the media. They should be above this and act like leaders, not like 5th graders. This is embarrassing for our nation that our President is picking fights with any of our media, whoever it is.

    Secondly, Cramer should man up and admit he was wrong, as so many more in the media. My gut tells me more and more will be coming forward and saying that Obama was not the candidate that they thought he was.


  3. Attacking? As I showed, the Cramer response was a very tepid "attack". And Gibbs comments on Santelli were barely stronger:

    "I'm not entirely sure where Mr. Santelli lives or in what house he lives. But the American people are struggling every day to meet their mortgage, stay in their jobs, pay their bills to send their kids to school, and to hope that they don't get sick or somebody they care for gets sick that sends them into bankruptcy. I think we left a few months ago the adage that if it was good for a derivatives trader, that it was good for main street. I think the verdict is in on that." That, and an invitation for Santielli to actually come over and read the bill, if he hadn't downloaded it.

    That's not an attack - that's framing, and done very well. The Obama Administration is making it clear that they don't see the way out of this recession to be looking after Wall Street first. These are hardly aggressive or inflammatory words, except if you're the sort of person who is used to always being able to attack others, and never being called on it.

    I will admit that Obama is taking Limbaugh on directly. But we're talking about the guy that the Conservative movement has put front and center to represent their point of view to the public. I'm looking forward to seeing which spokesman the broader public (and not just the dittoheads) tires of hearing sooner - Obama or Limbaugh.

  4. As an outsider, that is I am not a U.S. citizen, I am trying to view all of this without bias. What I am seeing is that the Obama administration is extraordinarily incompetent, and this only after about a month in office.
    Since we are all experiencing a period of recession I have found myself going back and relearning my economics - it is a boring subject. It is the only way to cut through the bull that I have seen in so many news reports and blogs. When someone in the finance world, someone who is a Democrat supporter like Cramer comes out and berates the actions of the POTUS then I have to sit up and take notice. The reason to take notice is based upon the fact that suddenly you have someone who is not feeling a tingle up his leg, or having wet dreams and the rest of the things that have been said, but someone who is analyzing what is happening and how the policies being put in place can only lead to a deeper recession, maybe even another Great Depression.
    Much of what has come out of the White House since the changeover has been totally disgraceful and well below the standard of what is expected of White House staff.

    Just like in Australia though, there is a long way to go before these journalist/commentators get a good kick where they deserve it because of the influence that they have exercised over the minds of a fickle population.