Yes it does, you moron. The situation is different, therefore the reaction will be different.

Jim Cramer has a history of bad calls, Buffett does not.
Jim Cramer called Obama a communist taking order from Lenin, Buffett did not.
Jim Cramer is a ranting moron who uses sound effect to sell his stock picks, Buffett does not.

What more do you need to see before you accept there are differences between the two men that explain their different reactions to what they said?

Congratulations!

Everyone invested in stocks lost their shirt due to the Bush Recession. The question is, who would you rather have investing your money now, Dartboard Cramer or Warren Buffett?

(I don’t need to answer that for you, do I?)

“What’s important when you are in that hedge fund mode is to not be doing anything that is remotely truthful, because the truth is so against your view – it is important to create a new truth to develop a fiction,” Cramer advises. “You can’t take any chances.”

So yeah…

I not positive, but I’m pretty sure it might have something to do with Teh Funny.

And they’re all wrong.

I love how you characterize criticism of a loudmouth on TV as “attacks.”

But still, no mention of Buffett’s 60% decline year-over-year after he criticized the Obama Administration. The guy Obama chose as one of his top guys to get economic advice from has seen his company’s value decline by a full 18% worse than the DOW average. That’s why they can’t attack him.

I’d still listen to Buffet over Cramer any day of the week, and so would you.

Marx had nothing to do with it. Neither did how much money one guy had versus the other. And certainly not because of some bad calls.

So enlighten me, Karnac.

Seriously, sometimes I think you just come here to say “Nu-uh!” to everything anyone says.

But still, no mention of Buffett’s 60% decline year-over-year after he criticized the Obama Administration. The guy Obama chose as one of his top guys to get economic advice from has seen his company’s value decline by a full 18% worse than the DOW average. That’s why they can’t attack him.

Marx had nothing to do with it. Neither did how much money one guy had versus the other. And certainly not because of some bad calls.

No, Denny, I think the big difference is buffet is right more times than Cramer. And more ethical. See here.

Yes, Buffet tanked $5B, and he’s still the richest guy on the continent. Cramer? Not so much.

Wait, did Cramer call Obama a Marxist? And that’s not an ad hominem attack?

I know Glen Beck has, but he’s fucking crazy anyway, so who cares.

It’s an ad hominem attack on him to discredit him, pure and simple.

Straight from the horse’s mouth.

Yes, but Buffet made made better calls than Cramer last week. I mean, why allow as broad a timespan as a whole year? Think how much more you could support you narrow view if we just look at who did better this morning!

Cramer never should’ve told people to hold on to Bear Stearns, but he’s not an insider and he had no clue that what the insiders were telling people was bullshit.

And nobody should expect self-declared “expert” Cramer to do anything other than just listen to what insiders were telling him. Reviewing financial statements, doing his own analysis, checking to see if the insiders claims hold up under examination. Who in their right mind would expect that? Ken Lay said everything was fine at Enron. What else could you possible need to know?

…

That’s because one has a history of making really bad calls.

Got it?

Or are you really that fucking stupid?

My argument never was who is richer, or who historically has made the more accurate calls. It’s that they both made very bad calls last year, and only one of them is being singled out for a silly cat-fight by the White House, Stewart and the left-wing echo chamber for bad market calls.

Berkshire Hathaway is down 60% in the last year while the DOW is off 42%. Cramer told people to get out last fall. Cramer never should’ve told people to hold on to Bear Stearns, but he’s not an insider and he had no clue that what the insiders were telling people was bullshit. It still has no bearing on the opinion he has Obama’s actions now and why he’s hurting the stock market. It’s an ad hominem attack on him to discredit him, pure and simple. And bad market calls have nothing to do with how each of them is analyzing Obama’s effect on the current stock market and the economy and the destruction of wealth that is occurring.

Dennis the Bigot: “Ha. You don’t look at the credibility at all. You look at a video clip on a comedy show. Warren Buffett lost $23 billion for Berkshire Hathaway in 2008.”

As much as I trust a prejudiced asshole like yourself, I’m going to have to trust my judgment on how I form my opinions more that yours.

Jaim: “Buffett has been right a lot more than Cramer ever has been. Jaims’

Dennis the Bigot: “How do you know?”

Because Buffett made himself the world’s richest man through his understanding of how the stock market works.

Jim Cramer, on the other hand, has a success rate that is worse than random chance.

Got that? WEAKER THAN RANDOM CHANCE!

Jim Cramer is the opposite of an expert. Doing the opposite of what he tells you to do will make you more money.

We’ve explained this a number of times to the point that you are either functionally retarded, or intentionally trying not to understand.

I truly don’t know which it is. Given what you’ve said in the past, it could be either. You could really be this stupid, or you could just be burying your head in the sand.

How do you know? Buffett was $50 billion wrong. WIth a B, Jaims. You’re criteria is not degree of being wrong, but the total number of times wrong, neither of which you have even the first clue about. They were both very wrong about the crisis. Cramer did tell people to get out several thousand points ago. Bufffett was agressively buying. I don’t fault either one, but it’s evident that the White House, Stewart and the Lefty blog echo chamber are being wholly inconsistent in the criteria they use to judge dissenters to Obama’s stimulus measures.

Ha. You don’t look at the credibility at all. You look at a video clip on a comedy show. Warren Buffett lost $23 billion for Berkshire Hathaway in 2008.

They both made bad calls, they both supported Obama in the campaign, and the both criticized what he is trying to do right now. The only difference, per Oliver, is that Buffett didn’t call Obama a Marxist. And per Southern Strategy, Buffett has credibility and Cramer doesn’t. Both laughable.

The difference is Buffett is much too important to the White House to give him the Cramer treatment. Just more of the same amateur hour tactics this president’s advisors use to demonize dissent.

Neither Jon Stewart, nor the nutroots, nor the White House degraded Warren Buffett for massive losses his company realized in this crisis, nor the purchases he made as the market was crumbling. Because they all most certainly do latch onto whoever supports their pre-approved conclusions.

The people who are most confident in their predictions are the ones you should trust the least. They are also the kind of people the average TV viewer trusts the most, because they are confident.

Strong but wrong… where have we seen that before.

This is literally true. You’d be better off picking stocks with a dart-board.

Jim Cramer should retire in shame, but I have a feeling that he won’t.

Jon Stewart, however, is a comedian who is funny. At least he’s good at his job.