http://www.brockbatsell.com/2009/03/13/nyt-and-jim-cramer/ Sat, 26 Jun 2010 22:10:11 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0 http://www.brockbatsell.com/2009/03/13/nyt-and-jim-cramer/comment-page-1/#comment-72 wolfetone Fri, 13 Mar 2009 18:35:30 +0000 http://www.brockbatsell.com/?p=148#comment-72 You're absolutely correct, but you even missed one small bit that would give you much more to run with. Stanley wasn't complaining that Cramer was candid, her's is a problem with how open he was about the whole thing, as she wrote ..."he too candidly explained..." That word "too" is there for a reason--and it's not a copyediting error. Cramer was absolutely too clear in explaining how easy it is to game the financial markets. Stanley, her buddy Dowd, and so many of the big money pundits have a lot at stake here and they don't want the game cleaned of corruption--they want it fixed just enough so that they can continue to make piles of money condescending to us rubes who don't know how things work. You’re absolutely correct, but you even missed one small bit that would give you much more to run with. Stanley wasn’t complaining that Cramer was candid, her’s is a problem with how open he was about the whole thing, as she wrote …”he too candidly explained…” That word “too” is there for a reason–and it’s not a copyediting error. Cramer was absolutely too clear in explaining how easy it is to game the financial markets. Stanley, her buddy Dowd, and so many of the big money pundits have a lot at stake here and they don’t want the game cleaned of corruption–they want it fixed just enough so that they can continue to make piles of money condescending to us rubes who don’t know how things work.

]]>