If you like CNBC you will probably not enjoy this clip. Jon Stewart, jilted by CNBC’s Howard Beale-esque ranting reporter Rick Santellii, fills the time that would have been dedicated to an interview with more than 8 minutes of …. well, let’s just say that we’re glad that we’re not them.
The aforementioned CNBC bashing really gets going at about 2:25.
Yeowch.
More From Consumerist
-
Should You Demand A Refund If A Charity Event Goes Awry?
-
JCPenney Agrees To Refrain From Selling Martha Stewart Products Until April Court Date
-
Judge Warns JCPenney On Martha Stewart Products: Blame Yourself For Empty Shelves
-
Flying The Friendly Skies Friday: The Happiest of Birthdays; Upgrades For Everybody
-
Martha Stewart Testifies In JCPenney Vs. Macy’s Dispute: The More Deals The Merrier, Right?
Damn spoiler! I still have this thing sitting on my DVR.
@ScottRose: You were able to view it? The thing totally broke the home page and everything below it on this page for me.
@ScottRose: It’s not really spoiled yet. It’s quite an amazing piece of writing. Hulu has a good version: [www.hulu.com]
I know it’s minor and doesn’t really matter, but it’s Jon Stewart.
@Alice Arrington Radley: It absolutely does matter! Misspelling someone’s name is as bad as calling them the wrong name. Would it have been any different if the post read “Dave Matthews Absolutely Destroys CNBC”? Of course it would, because that is a factual error. John is not the same as Jon. Each name’s etymology roots are different, as well.
@OmicroN: If you’re on a message board of any kind…expect misspellings.
That being said. I have been done with the Daily Show for almost a year. If John Stewart has such great answers, maybe he should run for office. He has gotten WAY too high and mighty on his point of view.
I think it’s very important to realize that “John” Stewart is primarily an entertainer… he’s not really claiming to have any answers here…
@basilray: Didn’t you notice that it was a comedy show???
@Alice Arrington Radley: That’s right! John Stewart is a football player.
The Jon Stewart we all know and love assumes a stage name to entertain us.
I liked that in the same way I liked Letterman ripping into McCain after he canceled.
@Rebecca Brown: i.e. Soooo much.
His points were right on target. For all his sarcasam and personal views, he has hit the nail on the head with that rant. You gotta love John Stewart.
Yeah, the video’s ruined the comment section for me, too. I actually can’t even get the reply button to work.
@Rebecca Brown: Uh…. O_o
Epic !
simply amazing daily show!!
One could argue that CNBC destroyed themselves. Jon just reported on it.
@Homerjay (insert star here): Yay! My star is back! Thanks God!
@Homerjay (insert star here): Ironically, it is generally considered that MSNBC was at fault for destroying Bear Stearns by airing the incredibly destructive rumor that they were having solvency issues, causing a run on their stock and a whole sh!tload of other problems within the space of a week thereafter. And the fall of Bear Stearns could be considered that which got this whole economic mess rolling. Vanity Fair ran an excellent, detailed article about all of this: [www.vanityfair.com]
@deep.thought: Ooh! I’m gonna have to read that! So CNBC is the reason the entire world economy is in the shitter.
Thats quite the cross to bear.
@Homerjay loves stars.
: Are we talking about CNBC or MSNBC?
@ageekymom: I’m talking about CNBC. I assume deep.thought is too but I still haven’t read the article he linked to.
@deep.thought: No, it was just the straw that happened to break the camel’s back. I’m sure if Bear Stearns hadn’t failed then, something else would’ve made this Jenga-pile tumble anyways. Bubbles always burst.
@Homerjay loves stars.
: Oh, what a downward spiral this channel was in, they even stalked Obama’s daughters even though regular NBC decided not to.
I saw this last night and couldn’t be happier John put them in their place.
Here a link to the video for anyone else having problems watching it embedded here:
[www.thedailyshow.com]
@CyGuy: If I try to watch here I just get a comedy central logo animation. If I try to watch that link I don’t get any sound. Oh well
in before the first “GULL DERNED LIB’RALS RUININ’ THE COUNTRY! ZOMBIE REAGAN 2012! comment (or thereabouts).
@lpranal: Dude, I’d vote for Zombie Reagan. There’s a very good chance that zombies > any living politicians.
At least we’d know they’d stick to the ‘braaaains’ platform that they ran on, you know?
@Pink Puppet:
not the green party. Their zombie is a vegan running on the “graaaains” initiative.
@Pink Puppet: “What do we want? Braaaaaains When do we want it? Braaaaains“
@lpranal: Well if Colbert is any indication then we know for a fact that werewolf presidents would spell doomsday. Not sure about zombie’s.
The interview with Nocera was brilliant as well. I particularly loved Stewart’s equating the CNBC faces asking CEOs how their companies were doing with asking Hurricane Katrina if it planned to rain, and accepting its word when it says, “No, I’m totally sunny.”
“F*CK YOU!!!”
Couldn’t hit that harder on the head if you tried, Jon.
awesome , that why I love the daily show. I already new cnbc sucked anyways though
Srsly? Wht ds ths hv t d wth nythng bt cnsmrsm, cnsmrstc ctvts, r nythng f th sch. Ths s jst bltnt pltcl cmmntry n ths st. Jst sd.
@Chavez_must_die: This removing the vowels shit is just old now. Give it a rest.
@dohtem: The person adding the comment isn’t the one removing the vowels. It’s a “punishment” called disemvoweling.
@Chavez_must_die: Maybe it’s relevant, because, I don’t know, we’re talking about THE FUCKING ECONOMY?
@Chavez_must_die: hey isn’t this one of the comments that are going on the consumerist t’shirts. Don’t wear it out before the shirts get printed man.
@Tmoney02: Ah, my mistake. I thought commenters were doing it on purpose for some odd reason.
I shall go hang my head in shame now. Sorry guys.
@dohtem: click on the blocky A at the end of the original message to read about disvowling. Thats how you know it was a punishment and not self done.
@Chavez_must_die:
This isn’t really political; it is critical. They’re being critical of a media interest that purports to give good information and analysis that is not reliable.
It’s not political to say that CNBC doesn’t give accurate analysis.
In fact, it does involve consumerism in that they give advice or delivered news that consumers often used to make stock purchases or manage money. The fact that this was a short takedown of it’s mistakes and inaccuracy serves as a warning to those who would do that. So, in conclusion, it is very justifiable for a site that is focused on consumer issues to post a clip of a segment that is criticizing a media source for being giving unreliable financial views.
@Nigromancer:
Ignore the “being” in the last sentence.
That Leibowitz is one hilarious dude- so snarky! How is this relevant to the rest of the content of this website? Other than the relevance to the editors’ apparent conclusion that everybody loves Leibowitz and Obama! I am no fan of cheap O’Reilly style populism but plenty of people have legitimate reasons to complain about the current direction of this administration and the prior one- specifically the 90 million or so that own stocks and have seen their wealth evaporate while the taxpaying portion of the population has become indebted on an unprecendent level. Leibowitz mocking populism is the funniest part of this whole video.
@Big Poppa Pimp: So, how does it feel to be a billionaire, Pimp?
@perruptor: I will probably never know. My odds are getting worse every day actually…
@Big Poppa Pimp:
Well said.
@Big Poppa Pimp:
Indeed. Stewart presents a populist and demagogic blend of simplistic garbage every night to a drooling mob of know-nothings who find humor in such a one-trick pony (to the uninitiated: play clip, raise brows, offer rhetorically attractive but insipid argument, smirk to slack-jawed audience’s applause). How he can cast stones at another odious populist, and one who at least has some semblance of familiarity with the issue being discussed, is beyond me. Then again, Stewart’s whole appeal is beyond me.
@ Rebecca
I haven’t been able to get it to work all day. I don’t think it has to do with this post.
I <3 J.S.
I was surprised to see that there was no equivalent humor newscast featuring right-wing viewpoints until I remembered their “humor” was implying the President of the United States was a gunned down chimpanzee or that crushing a child’s testicles would be anti-terror “tough love”.
ha ha ha. Boy, what cards those guys are, what cards!
@Trai_Dep: When Rush Limbaugh points out liberal hypocrisy, he is funny.
When he doesn’t have any good points, he generally gets diarrhea of the mouth and gets himself in trouble (remember his rant on Donovan McNabb?).
I guess he is the closest thing…
@Trai_Dep: Our humor is watching you guys make policy. Shootin from the hip
@Trai_Dep: The Daily Show does not make fun of conservatives, it makes fun of the media. Its target is the media. Sometimes, that reflects on Republicans, sometimes on Democrats. Since the “Liberal Media” really spews GOP talking points most of the time, it more frequently reflects on the GOP>
@Trai_Dep: They gave it a shot not too long ago. It was called The Half-Hour News Show or something. It was about as funny as Sean Hannity’s Bill Clinton impersonation.
Jon Stewart IS funny.
The Daily Show is NOT news.
Rick Santelli IS RIGHT to be outraged.
Jim Cramer IS an idiot.
@t-r0y: Sure Santelli WOULD have been right to be outraged, IF he had not been a hypocrite. He is all for bailing out Wall Street, but heavens forbid if some money went to helping people who are about to lose their homes because wall street screwed up, sunk their investments, bankrupted their employers and brought down the whole housing sector after artificially creating the bubble.
I would have been outraged too if the money was going to losers who bought houses which were clearly beyond their reach, but that is not the case here. It helps to read something about the homeowner bailout before talking about it.
@Lucifer_Cat: the assumption that money was going to people who bought mic mansions was grossly exaggerated. It would go to people who have modest homes in the hardest hit areas. Most of those people are minorities who were taken advantage of.
That said I still don’t think giving money to anybody is a wise idea wall street, or mainsteet(god i hate that meme).
“Give a man a fish he’ll eat for a day, teach a man to fish he’ll eat for a lifetime.”
@Skankingmike: Word.
@Skankingmike: People were tricked into buying houses that were far overpriced. In fact tricked is too light a word. Some people really didn’t have much choice (save to rent).
All the bailouts are bad. Every single one of them. Doesn’t matter who it’s going to, it’s out of your pocket, and even if it’s coming back to consumers it’s still less than what you put into it. Plus you don’t get a choice.
Would I be happy if the bankers and wallstreet got a bailout and then homeowners didn’t? No. But I would be hopeful that at least this trend of footing down bailouts would stop.
You think losing your home is bad? Wait until hyperinflation hits, and you’ll see how much of a spec of dust it is in comparison.
@Skankingmike:
“Give a man a fish and he’ll eat for a day, give a fish a man and he’ll eat for a week.”
@t-r0y: btw completely agree with you on all four points.
That made my day.
Let’s be fair: comparing Rick Santelli to Howard Beale is insulting to Howard Beale. Beale at least admitted that he “ran out of bullsh!t,” while Santelli was simply making more of his own.
This is one of the best Daily-Showin’ Em! ever, not only for slapping CNBC around, but for taking on the blame-homeowners-first crows and the utter fiction of the free market.
Brilliant!
US only. Any worldwide accessible links to watch?
@t-r0y – I agree fully on all points except that Rick is right to be outraged. I don’t think the homeowner bailout is a good idea, but here are the ways Rick Santelli has no right to any outrage-
1) While the Daily Show is NOT news, Rick Santelli IS supposed to be a reporter! His ranty BS was waaaaay out of line by journalism standards.
2) Everyone he got to shout was just as (but probably much more) likely as anyone else to be short on cash soon or out of a job and be underwater and unable to pay their mortgage. If they stay IN their jobs and houses, it would be due in great part to gov’t intervention.
3) He’s a REPORTER who wants to be Jim Cramer.
4) He misunderstood the cliche “Pick your battles.” Maybe it would be helpful to add “better” to the end of that.
Yes, Santelli was ranting and raving. Regardless of his message, it’s always fun to mock the loon.
But Santelli wasn’t exactly enamored with the financial bailouts, either.
The question remains, should we bailout homeowners with this cramdown? And how can you mock individual responsibility? I, as someone who doesn’t own a house but would like to, would like to see housing prices fall back to where wages can support them. But everything President Obama and Pelosi have been crafting is trying to prop up prices. The uncleared inventory is going to stay that way, and those who played by the rules and didn’t fall for a NINJA, negative amoritization loan, or option-ARM when they could afford a fixed feel like suckers.
The trader on the floor said it best: How about we all stop paying our mortgages; it’s a moral hazard.
I know people will reply that you have to sign a hardship affidavit. But we’re all facing these tough times and hardships, and the responsible ones who saved are getting screwed.
Also, the “damning clips” are of Cramer (ok), a guy from the Financial Times (he doesn’t work for CNBC), and Marc Faber (who was reporting what Thain said). And CNBC is not for the armchair investor or average Joe (other than Cramer). The people who watch those shows are traders and brokers—-big difference. But the point is it’s an ad hominem attack. What other show hosts and contributors say should not cloud Santelli’s message: If we’re going to start helping people make their mortgage payments, what’s next? And I think we’re seeing the next shoe with the consumer bailout (are you keeping track at home) where the Treasury is going to buy auto loan and credit card securities.
So now we’re all involved with peoples’ houses, credit cards, and cars—the two biggest monthly expenses for most people.
Is this what America’s really about?
The blame pie should be doled out to a lot of parties.
And it goes to those who thought housing would appreciate for years upon years, and made $50,000 a year HH income and took on a no-interest $700,000 loan.
It also goes to the lenders who gave them out.
It also goes to the financials who securitized them, and knew they weren’t AAA but just wanted to get them off their balance sheets.
It also goes to the CDS owners and the bankers who now own the houses and are shocked that they may never get that money back.
It goes to the Federal Reserve who thought we could print our way out of 9/11 and NASDAQ.
It goes to Clinton and Bush for raving about how they got blacks and the lower class to buy homes, when there’s no shame in renting and saving to buy a home.
There’s a lot of blame to go around. And if Jon Stewart supported all of those policies, then he can only look in the mirror and dole a slice to himself, too, as he and I are now footing the bill for this mess.
@Michael Gibbons: I’m sorry, I wasn’t paying attention. Could you repeat that?
@Tightlines:
Isn’t that what the head of AIG said the other day?
Michael Gibbons:
Your list of parties to blame is correct, however, for most people (John Stewart included), It isn’t sexy.
Americans love a monolith, in good times and bad. During boom times, no matter the complexities involved, we heap praise on one guy (Greenspan, Bill Clinton, Reagan), when it all goes to pot we blame one guy(Barney Frank, W, Greenspan).
In short, no one wants nuance, they want answers, and if they are far to complex to understand, they want shorter ones that fit on bumper stickers. And if you can’t provide it, you must be a fascist or a communist, or a fascist communist.
@Michael Gibbons: @sebadoh128: Both of you, well said.
@Big Poppa Pimp: So, you agree with Santelli?
@tc4b: I agree with a lot of what he said- I am not against helping those who are really in need and unfortunate but I think a lot of the anger that Santelli was tapping into (or exploiting, in a sense) has to do with the massive amounts being spent on bailouts and in the name of stimulus and “helping folks out” that is a) coming out of the pockets of those who are responsible and productive (and many small business owners who will lay people off), b) will have no positive effect on the economy especially for those who need it the most and c) much of which will be wasted. I certainly would not refer to people who are having trouble making ends meet as “losers.” I’ve been broke before and remember how it felt. I still think it was oddly placed on the consumerist- government re-writing mortgages is essentially the government re-writing a contract. That can cut both ways- for and against consumers and it will result in many hidden costs.
@Big Poppa Pimp:
Exactly. Respect for contract law is part of what makes this country so great, and to reduce prinicpal because people got underwater is the first of many shots at private property law that the Democratic Congress and White House is going to shoot.
We all lamented George Bush’s wiretapping. AT&T, rightfully, took a lot of grief on this site. Why? Because of the fairness, liberty, private freedom, and the Constitution. This is equally as bad, IMHO.
@michaelgibbons: Contract law is OK, but it’s no substitute for trust and accountability in business dealings. It’s mostly an employment program for lying weasels. Lots of countries have strong contract law and are still completely f***ed up.
The Bush-DeLay Bankruptcy Bill of 2005 was a massive transfer of power from consumers to lenders, affecting all consumer financial contracts. The 2009 mortgage cramdown bill just gives consumers back a little of what they lost in 2005.
Bottom line is, there are much higher values than the sanctity of contract law. Consumerism encompasses many of these.
@theodicey: Contract law is more than OK, it’s the law, unless the U.S. Government breaks er.. changes it.
@tc4b: This, like a comment I replied to above, seems to be a failure to understand situations completely. It’s like people only notice what they want to notice or only analyze the parts of the issues that deal directly with them.
@Nigromancer: I may not have understood Stewart’s rant (or “situation”) completely since I did not make it through the whole 8 minutes so that is a fair point. The piece, which I understand to be part of a comedy show and not a serious editorial program, takes many opinions out of context and paints an unfair view of CNBC. Cramer, for instance, while wildly wrong about Bear Stearns, raised many concerns about TARP and the Fed’s actions that turned out to be quite prescient. They were omitted from Stewart’s satire. And the first couple of minutes were spent mocking Santelli’s rant as being wrong- which I think is a political judgment on Stewart’s part. At best, this video is funny and is satirical but imo is not relevant here.
They went back to December of 2007 to find video they could use against Jim Cramer? Please.
1. Merrill Lynch clip, the host was just repeating what Merrill Lynch themselves were saying.
2. In one of those clips, it’s an outside analyst, who doesn’t even work for CNBC, giving his opinion.
3. If CNBC had a team of writers and people who could pour over years worth of videos, they could easily put together 6 minutes of “Jon Stewart was wrong” clips too.
Brilliant.
Im sorry were you making a joke because it wasnt funny?
My personal opinion – nobody should be bailed out. Wall street creates these bubbles every four years, then walks away when they bust. This time, the mortgage bubble back fired on their financial market. Let the businesses fail, other businesses will buy the assets, and move on.
The reporter talking about personal responsibility – when was the last time wall street took personal responsibility for any of the bubbles they created? They take their million dollar bonuses at the expense of the average investor.
Check out the web hosting bubble of 2000, the telecom bubble of 2004 and now the mortgage bubble of 2008.
Where is the SEC in all of this?
@Dave Nichols: I agree in prinicple. The problem is that if we let some banks fail, it will cause a cascade and then lending will shut down, along with our economy.
Now if we had paid attention earlier, we might have mitigated this and would not have needed to bail out so many. But we fought about whether there was an issue at all, whether it was just the media, if Obama was using it to scare people, etc. While we were fighting about it, it happened.
Funny, how the “Liberal Media” can’t seem to research and find the same clips TDS finds. It is always TDS that shows back to back clips that shows politicians and the media lying, politicians and the media being dreadfully wrong, or politicians and the media just being jackasses.
Jon Stewart is funny and that is where it ends… anyone can rehash a video clip and poke fun at the content. it is completely different to stick your neck out there and take a chance by saying what your thoughts are at the time. in Oct 07 the market was on fire… NO ONE thought we would be in this mess today (including Jon Stewart… don’t believe me… if Stewart had known about it as he spins the video to make fun of those that said everything was fine then wouldn’t he have been yelling that the market is going to tank?) makes for nice fodder though.
i used to like jim cramer…bad advice should be a crime! i wonder how many are broke now because they followed his word.
Wow. Disemvowled for what? Asking the relevance to the site. I mean come on. Apparently if you have a disagreement with the political tone of this site you automatically get disemvowled. Yeah for freedom of speech and all that.
@Chavez_must_die: So you don’t think that the stimulus bill, bailouts or layoffs have anything to do with consumerism (considering that is the foundation of our economy)?
@Chavez_must_die: No such thing as freedom of speech on a private owned website. Just a fyi
Disemvowled for what? Asking the relevance to the site.
@Chavez_must_die: YES
Junk comments get disemvoweled. You can’t make a “Why is this here” comment and then claim you were targeted for political reasons.
Damn you consumerist and your constant linking to funny videos that are region locked and won’t stream to canada! Daaammmmn youuuu!
@ gttim
Didn’t fox try with the “half hour news hour”? As i remember they only made fun of democrats and half their jokes were cribbed straight from The Daily Show.
Oh and it had such low ratings it was canceled a few months in.
@Big Poppa Pimp: I disagree with a lot of what he said, and I would probably disagree with you a lot if we had a conversation, but at least your second post is thoughtful and constructive.
@tc4b: Thanks, tc4b. I sometimes hesitate to post on these issues because the debate denigrates to name-calling and personal attacks on the intelligence or sanity of the person posting. I’m sure many of the people on this site disagree with me- I’m just happy to be able to have a civil discussion about it.
Oh dear, your screen name just traumatized this Star Wars geek.
Ahhh Yeah!!! liberal on liberal action! That’s what I’m talken about!
THAT WAS CLASSIC!!!!
This rocks my socks.
….that is all.
ahhaaha, Jim Cramer has been totally outed as a moron
When it comes to being informed I’d say people who turn to CNBC for ALL their financial advice are on par with those who turn to the Daily Show for ALL their news.
Both can be informative but neither should be treated as an end all be all source of “news.”
Do you always lie to make your points about those EVUL RETHUGLICANZ or is this a new tic?
Ahh crap. That was supposed to be a reply @Trai_Dep. Oh well. Still applies.
Funny and insightful…
Stewart isn’t paid or trusted to predict the markets though. DUh.
What I don’t get is that if you’re against the Wall Street bailout you’re a horrid populist liberal. If you’re against the mortgage bailout, you hate average Americans.
I guess I hate everyone, because I don’t want to see anyone bailed out for their speculations.
@oneliketadow: The problem here is how its sold to you. MANY f the people whos mortgages are in default now had perfectly fine jobs, and where in perfectly affordable (if somewhat inflated) houses.
And then they lost their jobs thanks to Wall Street.
While initially the people being hit where assholes who yes got money from banks they couldn’t pay back, now its a lot of people who COULD have paid it back had they not lost their jobs thanks to the bubble busting. So there is a VERY valid reason to help these people out, because the last thing the US needs is a homeless crisis on top of the mess to boot. But conservatives are trying hard to spin this the complete opposite of what it is and the AMerican media and public are actually believing these people are the McMansion loving crowd. They aren’t and thats the sad part. They where doing everything exactly right and got shat on by the upper class.
Well I feel like a loser homeowner now. Does this mean I sell the house and “rent” instead of “buy” and let the owning become someone else’s problem?
Dammit I hate being a loser.
Although I thin CNBC has me beat in the loser dept.
I wish the consumerist would keep in mind they have readers outside the states – FAIL
@Leigh Grant: What are they supposed to do? Break copyright law and post it on YouTube?