Whew! Cramer is really peeved that
Posted By: Backwards typist on 2009-01-24
In Reply to:
the government appointed Geithner. Watch the video. He is correct in his evaluation that if it was you or I, we'd be put in jail quicker than sh--- if we didn't pay our taxes. He talks about Thain, too.
http://www.cnbc.com/id/28813742
Complete Discussion Below: marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old. To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
Jim Cramer from
I am sure a lot of you think is well . . . I do like him and do listen to him.
RE: Jim Cramer
Dear Doing Okay: Have you the latest on Mr. Cramer?? Seems like he may be in huge trouble with the SEC - please check Huffington Post and they have a very interesting article about him.
RE: Jim Cramer
Dear Doing Okay: Have you the latest on Mr. Cramer?? Seems like he may be in huge trouble with the SEC - please check Huffington Post and they have a very interesting article about him.
RE: Jim Cramer
Dear Doing Okay: Have you the latest on Mr. Cramer?? Seems like he may be in huge trouble with the SEC - please check Huffington Post and they have a very interesting article about him.
Your boy Jim Cramer's track record
http://www.cxoadvisory.com/gurus/Cramer/
In short, as of 01/18/2009, Jim Cramer has been correct about his market predictions about 46% of the time, a little below average. You'd have been better off with a no-load index fund than Cramer's picks.
Read about his "stock of the year" NYSE Euronext debacle in 2007.
http://www.stocktagger.com/2007/07/jim-cramer-track-record-on-nyse.html
In short, Euronext lost 20% of its value since his "growth stock of the year" recommendation, despite flogging it repeatedly on his show and even bringing the CEO on his show and grilling him on why his stock was going down the tubes.
If Jim Cramer has an opinion on anything, the smart money choice is to do the opposite. This includes his opinion on the stimulus.
Jim Cramer vs. Jon Stewart...ouch..(sm)
http://www.thedailyshow.com/full-episodes/index.jhtml?episodeId=220533
Thank you Jon!
This is a great article written by Jim Cramer...
he is the money guy on CNBC. We listen to him sometimes, have read a couple of his books, and because of watching his show in Sept or Oct of last year, we pulled our money out of the stock market, which was the BEST idea. It is an interesting artcile to some, maybe not to others.
http://www.mainstreet.com/article/moneyinvesting/news/cramer-my-response-white-house
whew
Childish? Try me in a debate. Not childish here. Childish is to think we could invade a Middle Eastern country whose only mind set is being ruled by religious leaders and to think they will meet us in the street with flowers and hugs..childish and crazy is to think we will win the war on terror when terror is an ideology, not a person, not a country, an ideology. Give me a break. Childish? No, concerned about American and where it it headed? Yes. Concerned about terrorism that we have caused that will affect us and the world for decades to come? Yes. Concerned about the conservatives taking back rights of the people and going backwards when it comes to Affirmative Rights, pro choices rights, right to marry whomever you choose, right to worship whatever you choose without having a christian ideology plastered all over govt buildings, right to be able to die as you choose, right to be able to take marijuana with a doctors prescription when that is your only alleviating factor of pain..on and on..Childish? I dont think so. You with your head in the sand, yup. Either you are politically inexperienced or a republican in sheeps clothing to post like this..
Whew!
Sounds like someone has issues.
WHEW!
I'm glad I don't have a mortgage. I rent, and renting is a much better deal compared to how things have gone downhill nowadays with mortgages and folks losing their houses left and right. Good luck to those who own still own homes!
Whew! As an ex-Houstonian s/m
I'm wondering which Houston you're talking about. Surely not Houston, Texas! I still visit there frequently as I still have children and grandchildren there. They tell an entirely different story. Isn't Sharpstown, or example, a high crime community??? Inhabited by Mexicans and Asians? Maybe you live in River Oaks???? Otherwise, Houston is one of the highest crime cities in the country. Obviously not all of the melting pot is as happy as you appear to be.
I saw Jim Cramer this morning too. I have J&J stock and my 401K through Merrill Lynch
I am really upset and not sure what to do.
Wow....whew. The coldness of that hit me for a minute....
Okay, I get it. The wholesale slaughter of babies does not bother you. You have no care for them whatsoever. Better they are sliced and diced than to add to the population problem. What if some of them were serial killers? Sheesh. What if some of the dead Iraqis were going to be terrorists? Good grief!
Talk about oversimplification. Are you saying that every war that has been fought was for naught and should not have been fought? Is that your stand? Or is it just Iraq you are concerned about? I have asked numerous times and you have never answered. Should we never for any reason go to war?
Personally I think Roe vs Wade SHOULD be overturned, because it is unconstitutional on its face. It was enacted by activist judges overturning a state law ad taking it nationwide, which they have no right to do. Only Congress at state or local level can enact law. For that reason alone it should be overturned. Then, if individual states want to change/stop/whatever abortion law they should be able to do it. We are talking about killing of human beings here. You can shoot someone in your house who is a danger to you in some states and face jail time for it...yet we slice and dice innocent babies in the womb who are defenseless and say no harm, no foul? How contradictory is that may I ask? And when, oh when, can we just ask people to show more responsibility? With all the birth control methods there are available, we should not be seeing half a million abortions a year that are second, third, and fourth abortions. That is just nuts. And, though it probably does not matter a hoot to you, my work is done with women who find themselves in a situation where a choice has to be made, and work with organizations who offer a different choice. I would like to change minds because that is where the true answer is.
All that being said, my active work is not going toward overturning Roe v Wade, though it should be for the reasons stated above. Judges need to be reined in. At least then if people are going to condone abortion (pro choice) then let them go to the polls and put their vote where their mouth is, so that we know the true will of the people. If, as you say, over half the country does agree that abortion should be legal, that thought should not scare you and I don't know why it does. And if abortion remained the law of the land, then I would continue the work I am doing, and that is trying to change minds and hearts, and give women in that situation a choice different from abortion. Because I do believe in following the law of the land. Hence, no picketing of abortion clinics, no bombings, no shooting doctors, no demonizing women in that situation. I want to offer a different choice, to give them time to think about what they are doing and the long-reaching effects. And I see nothing wrong with that. If a woman decides to go ahead with an abortion, she is certainly able to do so and receives no condemnation from us. It saddens us, of course. But the women/girls we work with are not sent away with ridicule and condemnation and if they return later with regret they are welcomed and counseled. And we see a fair amount of those as well. And, wonderfully, we are beginning to see more women making a choice for life, whether keeping the child herself or choosing adoption. I realize on the national level it is a tiny, tiny drop in the bucket...but one life saved, to me, is worth it. I cannot concentrate on the many who are lost, or I would never get anything done. I have to concentrate on the ones saved.
The real purpose of an abortion law is to encourage responsibility, because obviously something is haywire when half a million abortions a year are repeat abortions. If that is not using abortion as birth control, kindly tell me what is.
And as a final note....the June Cleaver thing is a really old chestnut. You can't tell me that 1.2 million women a year would turn into horrible mothers and the child would be better off dead than alive with their mothers. There are far more success stories than not, and there are many, many families looking to adopt newborns. There are many stories of girls/women who make that hard choice, and instead of the their lives being ruined, the child is the impetus for change in their lives. The good stories far outweigh the bad. And like I said...I am a glass half full kind of person. If we can save even a portion of those 1.2 million lives, then I believe the efforts are worth it. I certainly cannot just stand by and act like it does not matter to me. Because it does.
We are never going to agree on this subject. You can't understand why I would want to save babies and still think defending this country is okay, and I can't understand how you feel such empathy for casualties of war and feel none for aborted babies. I certainly feel empathy for casualties of war. However, I feel that war is sometimes necessary. I have no trouble with that decision. And I cannot equate the two...abortion and war. And I don't know how you can.
I personally don't make the decision to go to war. You don't personally make the decision to get an abortion. Either way, people die, although the numbers dying are much higher on the one side. And, frankly, I don't think even with the war the number of dead Iraqis has caught up to what Saddam did when he was in power. And that was not collateral damage, that was planned wholesale murder...very similar to abortion. Gas them all, men women and children, defenseless and unable to fight back. Line them up on the side of a pit, shoot them all, cover them up. Torture, beheading. Slice and dice, partially born, suck their brains out. There is a similarity. Murder. Barbarism. Same result. Dead human beings. When all is said and done, if a free Iraq emerges and that sort of behavior does not occur again, then I am willing to bet the Iraqis, down the road, will believe that it was worth it. They thought so when they were waving American flags and hugging soldiers and toppling Saddam statues. Just like we believed after the Revolutionary War and the Civil War, horrible and bloody though they were, were worth it.
I sleep well at night and am comfortable with my decisions. I assume you do too. So at least I will agree to disagree.
:)
Whew....don't have the time or inclination...
to respond to all this "drivel"...let's just hit the high points, shall we?
I suppose I am to assume that this is your normal response to someone not agreeing with you and not the result of someone pushing your buttons. Aha. Got it.
I would suggest you look up the words "obnoxious," and "personal attacks," "cliched catch phrases," "dodges" (especially dodges), deflections and deceptions and then re-read your own post. I would also suggest you read your own definition of "bigot" and then look at your reactions to what Hannity says and what I said. Uh-oh...
Y'know...sticks and stones, trotter. You have stuff in this diatribe I never said...like that "pure race" "drivel" (to use your word). Never said a word about a pure race. What in the world have you been reading?
Yeah, like you, I have better ways to spend my time. Oh and by the way...you don't have to be "rich" or "entitled" to speak in an elitist fashion or have an elitist attitude...you don't have to have a dime. You just have to have the 'tude. And believe me when I say this, with all due respect, you definitely have an elitist attitude and a definite condescending view of people you feel are not what you perceive as intelligent or enlightened. And there are many who speak in this way, which is why generally what you say is lost in the way you say it. One has to dig past the "gotchas" hunting for substance, and one rarely finds it. You are so angry about so many things, even if someone is not talking about those things you find a way in insert them in the conversation and ascribe to people things they never said or even implied. One wonders why you do that, but no matter. As you so skillfully stated, I have better things to do than try to figure it out.
Bless your heart for having to "sink to my level." That just screams elitism. LOL.
Good luck in your job search. And in dialing it back a notch. Perhaps we should leave the subject of illegal immigration...well what am I talking about. You left that after the first post. But, again...seriously. Good luck in your job search. Cya when you get back.
Whew - guess it's not a repeat then.
I don't always keep up with this board, but I thought this was interesting.
Whew!! Brown eyes here. (sm)
But ya know what they say about people with brown eyes, so we're not safe, either.
Whew! That kid's good, and so is the message.nm
x
You GOT to feel better gettin' all that out of your system. Whew doggies! ....
.
Whew....glad to see I am not the only long-winded poster here....
Did you actually see the tape of when Obama said what he said: He said "instead of worrying whether immigrants learn English, YOU (with great emphasis on the you) should be making sure YOUR (great emphasis on the word your) children learn to speak Spanish! Now you can throw all the multicultural high-brow rhetoric at me you like, that is basically saying we should require our children to learn Spanish to get along with those who are immigrating instead of "worrying about" the immigrants learning English because they would learn English. All this came about from the "national language" debate with immigration. Let's keep it in context here. Obama was NOT talking about multiculturalism. Yes, he said he was embarrassed that he himself could not speak another language and it was embarrassing to him that French people who come here are multilingual (not sure why he chose French people) and we go over there and can only say merci beaucoup. Well...frankly I don't know why he is embarrassed, and that is a ridiculous statement. Anyone who goes to France to do business on a regular basis does speak French. Most people who go there regularly as tourists learn the language as well. And if I went to France to live, to become a citizen of that country, I would expect to learn French and that would be my first language. That is understood. So there would be no need for France to establish a national language. And france, frankly, nor any other european country, have our particular immigration problem, now do they? NO.
I do not see the big deal in asking immigrants to this country to make English their first language. Does not mean I want to say you can never speak Spanish again (ridiculous), but to do business and in everyday life, you should learn English.
Frankly, it is thinking like this that will usher in what that little bald-headed Russian Kruschev said, banging his shoe on the table, basically saying "One day this country will be taken over without firing a shot." Open the door and hand them the keys, globetrotter. If you don't mind them having national pride, why does it chap you for Americans to have national pride, and why shouldn't we? France can be multicultural without giving up ther national pride...but again...they don't have the immigration problems we have. If they did...a VERY different story.
|