Rick Santelli’s Planted Rant ?
I was interviewed by several journalists last week about Rick Santelli’s Rant — my exact quote was it had a “Faux” feel to it. (I haven’t seen it in print yet)
What was so odd about this was that Santelli is usually on the ball; we usually agree more often than we disagree. He’s been responsible for some of the best moments on Squawk Box.
But his rant somehow felt wrong. After we’ve pissed through over $7 trillion dollars in Federal bailouts to banks, brokers, automakers, insurers, etc., this was a pittance, the least offensive of all the vast sums of wasted money spent on “losers” to use Santelli’s phrase. It seemed like a whole lot of noise over “just” $75 billion, or 1% of the rest of the total ne’er-do-well bailout monies.
It turns out that there may be more to the story then originally met the eye, according to (yes, really) Playboy magazine.
Excerpt:
“How did a minor-league TV figure, whose contract with CNBC is due this summer, get so quickly launched into a nationwide rightwing blog sensation? Why were there so many sites and organizations online and live within minutes or hours after his rant, leading to a nationwide protest just a week after his rant?
What hasn’t been reported until now is evidence linking Santelli’s “tea party” rant with some very familiar names in the Republican rightwing machine, from PR operatives who specialize in imitation-grassroots PR campaigns (called “astroturfing”) to bigwig politicians and notorious billionaire funders. As veteran Russia reporters, both of us spent years watching the Kremlin use fake grassroots movements to influence and control the political landscape. To us, the uncanny speed and direction the movement took and the players involved in promoting it had a strangely forced quality to it. If it seemed scripted, that’s because it was.
What we discovered is that Santelli’s “rant” was not at all spontaneous as his alleged fans claim, but rather it was a carefully-planned trigger for the anti-Obama campaign. In PR terms, his February 19th call for a “Chicago Tea Party” was the launch event of a carefully organized and sophisticated PR campaign, one in which Santelli served as a frontman, using the CNBC airwaves for publicity, for the some of the craziest and sleaziest rightwing oligarch clans this country has ever produced. Namely, the Koch family, the multibilllionaire owners of the largest private corporation in America, and funders of scores of rightwing thinktanks and advocacy groups, from the Cato Institute and Reason Magazine to FreedomWorks. The scion of the Koch family, Fred Koch, was a co-founder of the notorious extremist-rightwing John Birch Society.”
What is Playboy’s evidence of this?
“Within hours of Santelli’s rant, a website called ChicagoTeaParty.com sprang to life. Essentially inactive until that day, it now featured a YouTube video of Santelli’s “tea party” rant and billed itself as the official home of the Chicago Tea Party. The domain was registered in August, 2008 by Zack Christenson, a dweeby Twitter Republican and producer for a popular Chicago rightwing radio host Milt Rosenberg—a familiar name to Obama campaign people. Last August, Rosenberg, who looks like Martin Short’s Irving Cohen character, caused an outcry when he interviewed Stanley Kurtz, the conservative writer who first “exposed” a personal link between Obama and former Weather Undergound leader Bill Ayers. As a result of Rosenberg’s radio interview, the Ayers story was given a major push through the Republican media echo chamber, culminating in Sarah Palin’s accusation that Obama was “palling around with terrorists.” That Rosenberg’s producer owns the “chicagoteaparty.com” site is already weird—but what’s even stranger is that he first bought the domain last August, right around the time of Rosenburg’s launch of the “Obama is a terrorist” campaign. It’s as if they held this “Chicago tea party” campaign in reserve, like a sleeper-site. Which is exactly what it was.
This looks like more than a coincidence. This is now a very serious charge.
I have no insight as to whether this is true or not — but it certainly deserves a serious response from both Santelli and CNBC. If its false, then they should say so, and demand an apology from Playboy.
But if any of it is true, well then, Santelli may have to fall on his sword, and CNBC may owe the public an apology.
I am VERY curious if there is any truth to this.
>
UPDATE: March 1, 2009 5:43am
Wow, talk about link bait — that was a boatload of comments on a Saturday nite! Doesn’t anyone go out anymore? It must really be a recession . . .
UPDATE 2: March 1, 2009 7:45am
Steve at the Daily Bail writes:
I publish and write the Daily Bail. I have posted a response to the allegations by Playboy magazine made against our site. I am writing you personally so that you know their allegations about me are categorically untrue. It’s unfortunate because I believe that the article did some great investigative work and then at the end they threw me under the bus for no apparent reason. Apparently, the authors just assumed we were part of this conspiracy because of my own personal excitement about the prospect of a mid-summer tea party. They never bothered to contact me for explanation or comment of any sort.
My response to their article is here. Please read it so you know just how wrong they were about me and my politics.
>
Previously:
Santelli vs Cramer (January 2008)
http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2008/01/santelli-vs-cramer/
Rick Santelli Strikes Again (September 2008)
http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2008/09/rick-santelli-strikes-again/
Source:
Backstabber: Is Rick Santelli High On Koch?
Mark Ames and Yasha Levine
Playboy, 02.27.09 1:40 PM CST
http://www.playboy.com/blog/2009/02/backstabber.html
From the February 19 edition of CNBC’s Squawk Box:
REBECCA QUICK (co-anchor): We want to get to our task force right now. Rick Santelli and Jason Roney of Sharmac Capital are standing by at the CME Group in Chicago, and Rick, have you been listening to this conversation?
SANTELLI: Listening to it? I’ve been just glued to it because Mr. Ross has nailed it. You know, the government is promoting bad behavior. Because we certainly don’t want to put stimulus forth and give people a whopping $8 or $10 in their check and think that they ought to save it, and in terms of modifications — I’ll tell you what, I have an idea.
You know, the new administration’s big on computers and technology. How about this, president and new administration? Why don’t you put up a website to have people vote on the Internet as a referendum to see if we really want to subsidize the losers’ mortgages; or would we like to at least buy cars and buy houses in foreclosure and give them to people that might have a chance to actually prosper down the road, and reward people that could carry the water instead of drink the water?
JOE KERNEN (co-anchor): Hey, Rick, did –
TRADER: That’s a novel idea.
KERNEN: Hey, Rick, did you — oh, boy. They’re like putty — they’re like putty in your hands. Did you hear –
SANTELLI: No they’re not, Joe. They’re not like putty in our hands. This is America. How many of you people want to pay for your neighbor’s mortgage that has an extra bathroom and can’t pay their bills? Raise their hand.
President Obama, are you listening?
TRADER: How about we all stop paying our mortgage? It’s a moral hazard.
KERNEN: This is like mob rule here. I’m getting scared. I’m glad I’m — I’m glad I’m –
CARL QUINTANILLA (co-anchor): Get some bricks and bats –
SANTELLI: Don’t get scared, Joe. They’re already scaring you. You know, Cuba used to have mansions and a relatively decent economy. They moved from the individual to collective. Now, they’re driving ‘54 Chevys, maybe the last great car to come out of Detroit.
KERNEN: They’re driving them on water, too, which is a little strange to watch –
SANTELLI: There you go.
KERNEN: Hey, Rick, how about the notion that — Wilbur pointed out you can go down to 2 percent on the mortgage –
SANTELLI: You could go down to minus-2 percent. They can’t afford the house.
KERNEN: — and still have 40 percent — and still have 40 percent not be able to do it. So why are they in the house? Why are we trying to keep them in the house?
SANTELLI: I know Mr. Summers is a great economist, but boy, I’d love the answer to that one.
QUICK: Wow.
KERNEN: Jason –
QUICK: [unintelligible] you get people fired up.
KERNEN: Jason, you wanna –
SANTELLI: We’re thinking of having a Chicago tea party in July. All you capitalists that want to show up to Lake Michigan, I’m gonna start organizing.
QUICK: What are you dumping in — what are you dumping in this time? Housing? Cars?
SANTELLI: We’re going to be dumping in some derivative securities. What do you think about that?
QUINTANILLA: Mayor Daley is marshalling the police right now.
KERNEN: Rabble-rouser.
QUINTANILLA: The National Guard.
KERNEN: Jason, are you nearby? Can you hear the cheering over –
RONEY: I am, but I don’t have the gallery directly behind me, so it’s going to be tough to follow that act for sure.
KERNEN: Yeah, exactly. You agree?
RONEY: I’ll have to run down to the pit. Well, clearly, we’re going to debate the moral issues of what government is and is not doing for some years to come. I mean — it’s apparent, even for traders it’s — the market gaps up and down a significant amount each day just on what one government may or may not do. We’re up 10 points or so on the S&P on the idea that core Europe may have some bank stability plans, so — the traders market, the uncertainty of the market will continue until we get through this process of weekly government plans.
QUINTANILLA: You know, Rick, one of our producers says if Roland Burris steps down, man, Senator Santelli, the junior senator from Illinois. It’s a possibility. I’m just saying –
SANTELLI: Do you think I want to take a shower every hour? The last place I’m ever gonna live or work is D.C.
KERNEN: Have you raised any money for Blago?
SANTELLI: No, but I think that somebody’s gonna have to start raising money for us.
QUICK: Hey, Rick? Can you do that one more time, just get the mob behind you again? I love –
QUINATILLA: Have the camera pull way out.
QUICK: Yeah, pull way out. Everybody listen to Rick Santelli.
KERNEN: You can’t — I don’t think — you can’t just do it at will, can you, Rick? I mean, you have to say something.
QUICK: Yeah, do it at will. Let’s see.
SANTELLI: Listen, all’s I know is, is that there’s only about 5 percent of the floor population here right now, and I talk loud enough they can all hear me. So if you want to ask ‘em anything, let me know. These guys are pretty straightforward, and my guess is, a pretty good statistical cross-section of America, the silent majority.
QUICK: Not-so-silent majority today. So Rick, are they opposed to the housing thing, to the stimulus package, to everything out there?
SANTELLI: You know, they’re pretty much of the notion that you can’t buy your way into prosperity, and if the multiplier that all of these Washington economists are selling us is over 1, then we never have to worry about the economy again. The government should spend a trillion dollars an hour because we’ll get 1.5 trillion back.
QUICK: Wilbur?
WILBUR ROSS (chairman, W.L. Ross & Co.): Rick, I congratulate you on your new incarnation as a revolutionary leader.
SANTELLI: Somebody needs one. I’ll tell you what, if you read our Founding Fathers, people like Benjamin Franklin and Jefferson, what we’re doing in this country now is making them roll over in their graves.
February 28th, 2009 at 6:04 pm
If there’s any truth in it, then it’s definitely sword time….it wouldn’t surprise me.
February 28th, 2009 at 6:11 pm
Rick was a Swift Boat Veteran for justice wasn’t he?
This is trashy stuff.
February 28th, 2009 at 6:13 pm
Great stuff, Barry! TYVM for bringing it to our attention!
February 28th, 2009 at 6:21 pm
Who cares, it’s all fluff to begin with, and they are all selling hype anyhow, and Playboy could also use a little boost as they sink into the abyss, stock price wise. So everybody wins, except of course US taxpayers.
This is the world we live in, a constant bombardment of half truths, outright lies, partisan bullshit, you name it.
I’d rather have Santelli as president anyway.
February 28th, 2009 at 6:27 pm
“This is the world we live in, a constant bombardment of half truths, outright lies, partisan bullshit, you name it.”
’bout sums up all that needs to be said..
of course, the idea that the (D) claque isn’t behind the accusation that this is an (R) stunt should Never cross our minds..
let alone, the idea that the (D)’s & (R)’s Both win by continuing the ongoing polarization of the ‘Cained Peep..
February 28th, 2009 at 6:28 pm
NO ONE BELIEVED ME WHEN I USED TO SAY I READ IT FOR THE ARTICLES!
February 28th, 2009 at 6:28 pm
Lyon and Bucky,
Why don’t you guys read the article and then post?
Nahhhh, why bother? You know what you know because you know it in your gut. Gut thinking worked so well from 2001-2009, why change now, right?
~~~
EDITOR: I am under orders from the B man to “delete jackass comments” — and Lyon qualified
February 28th, 2009 at 6:30 pm
Great dig. Barry’s now beating the pants off the full-time bloggers (when do you sleep, dude?).
The “Trader” is the one they call Wolfman — first name is Eric. Santelli once told his full name but I don’t recall it. Wolfman is Rick’s ever-present sidekick in the daily screamfest from the CME.
Last summer during the meltdown Eric made a crack linking subprime borrowers to drivers of “Escalades with spinners.” No hint of racism…certainly not possible among Rick’s diverse posse.
February 28th, 2009 at 6:30 pm
Barry,
I’m sorry, but playboy girls are just plain nasty. If I bought a playboy I really would read the articles…When it comes to pictorials, I can do much better through google! =P
February 28th, 2009 at 6:31 pm
Sounds plausible to me.
Someone is paying CNBC a lot of money for those very frequent commercials alleging that the CBO said the stimulus was bad for America and concluding with a shot of Schumer wth a voiceover indicating that people like him are spending all our money: not just a Jews, but a New York Jews.
As far as I can tell right now from the rantings of a nutso brother in law, the party line for the Republicans is that things are really that bad and that Obama’s actions are pushing us into a depression. The perfect fix. I would hope that the advertising geniuses who got such an inexperienced guy elected have some plan to counter this as the should have been doing when the Republicans tried gridlocking the stimulus: call them out as obstructionists and blame any future declines on the Republicans. All this bipartisan stuff is bullshit.
February 28th, 2009 at 6:32 pm
Meant to say “that things really aren’t that bad”
February 28th, 2009 at 6:35 pm
First, it seems to me a struck a popular vein. Let’s face it, there are far more of us paying our mortgages and getting nothing out of Obamprah’s package. Loan mods will just prolong this deleveraging process. That, plus O’s tax-avoiding nominees, the non-stimulus package, etc. have pissed many people off of all political stripes.
Second, would this be viewed differently if it was left-wing propaganda vomited out by the MSM? Now that little O is facing some media scrutiny, he’s starting to show is inexperience and he (his minions) want to shut up the dissenters. Wasn’t this the type of thing that happened in Germany in the 1930’s? I think Bush’s camp has the same accusation thrown at them. (“Payback’s hell, bitches!” is I think the street’s response.)
Third, if Santelli was put up to it by some right-wing wacko, fine. However, it’s the limited transparency or disclosure of one’s bias that has people turning away from traditional TV and newspaper outlets. My local newspaper, the Strib, is Exhibit A of a traditional outlet not willing to admit its own bias. Therefore, I don’t subscribe beyond the Sunday coupons. Of course, now, paying for their intellectual dishonesty makes no sense when I can hit the internet outlets for “free”.
PS- What’s Soros and Gore up to these days?
February 28th, 2009 at 6:37 pm
DC – it sounds like you’re talking about Eric Bolling – the oil trader.
Barry – I LOVE this Santelli conspiracy theory! I’d feel like the little kid tugging on Shoeless Joe Jackson’s pantleg begging “Say it ain’t so, Joe,” if I found out Santelli was a shill.
but when do we get a thread to talk about the other conspiracy theory: the one where on the day that the S&P was sitting on a critical support level, and got enough bad news to potentially crush any chance of a rally (effective Citi nationalization, GE dvd cut for first time in 70 years or so, and GDP down over 6%) that should have sent the market into a vicious tailspin – the market still attempted a rally!
Are you telling me this wasn’t the Plunge Protection Team trying to get things rolling, before running out of ammo (hence the selloff into the close) ? someone remarked to me about month end trading – but my experience has been that month end trades are usually of the mark UP variety, not the mark DOWN variety…
Viva la PPT!
February 28th, 2009 at 6:39 pm
The Allegation:
1) Right wing cabal looks to “astroturf” Obama’s economic agenda.
2) The cabal hands Rick Santelli a script including the “Chicago Tea Party” meme.
3) Rick Santelli rants on air.
4) Cabal “astroturfs” Rick’s Rant on prepositioned URLs and DRUDGEREPORT, etc.
Assuming #2 is correct…
Question: is any of this illegal? Or is the right excluded from the First Amendment? I don’t see how this is different than Comedy Central or MSNBC’s non-spontaneous anti-Bush segments.
This is not a Smedly Butler moment.
February 28th, 2009 at 6:40 pm
It did seem kind of weird that the Drudge Report immediately had the rant as a headline item. Santelli had made other rants that no one paid attention to.
February 28th, 2009 at 6:41 pm
Ya know, damn it, I read this and I’m now thinking somewhere between maybe and probably. I caught the clip live and thought it was pretty powerful, but I agree, the buzz afterward was bigger than it should have been. Something from CNBC should never be youtube’s lead video (that struck me as odd too).
I must say that the content does strike a chord with me. I want the pretender’s kicked to the curb, and let house prices go where ever markets take them (the sooner the better).
But geez Louise, I just can’t bring myself to think Santelli’s another shill (even part time). But, damn it, there is something screwy about this….
And just for the record, I have NEVER believed Cramer’s famous “They know nothing!” rant was genuine. They needed to cut rates fast and wanted public support, so they cued Cramer. He’s saving that story for his memoir’s.
But all this is coming from someone drawn to conspiracy theories like a moth to flame.
February 28th, 2009 at 6:46 pm
Paul,
It’s not illegal for CNBC to conspire with a nutter like Koch, even if they were paid to do so. It’s VERY important if they were, though. It would be a scandal of the highest order that would totally eviscerate CNBC’s integrity as a news source. I know most of us don’t think highly of CNBC, but it’s one thing for CNBC to be an incompetent news source. It’s quite another for it to be a CORRUPT news source.
February 28th, 2009 at 6:46 pm
Many people (and not just political operatives) register and “park” domain names for use at some opportune time in the future. It could be that the Republicans saw a good bit of TV video and decided to use it to their advantage. Nothing in this proves that Rick Santelli, Larry Kudlow, or anyone at CNBC planned this all in advance, in collusion, with these guys.
Politicians are very good at fanning spontaneous bits of nothing into a big PR deal; witness Joe the Plumber.
February 28th, 2009 at 6:49 pm
Jesus, people! Drop the conspiracy theories! Look at this line:
SANTELLI: We’re thinking of having a Chicago tea party in July. All you capitalists that want to show up to Lake Michigan, I’m gonna start organizing.
He says right there this isn’t the first time he’s coming up with this. But that does NOT mean the rant was scripted. Hell, if it were scripted, it would’ve been a lot better. Pretty clearly, there was an idea for a “Chicago Tea Party” and I’m guessing he’d been told about the idea. Even the CTP is a purely partisan publicity stunt, it doesn’t mean Santelli’s rant was scripted. It sounds to me like something he just threw in.
Seriously, people, calm down. If you hear hooves, don’t assume right wing zebras.
February 28th, 2009 at 6:50 pm
Barry,
I think you should post more of the article. I found this evidence to be most damning:
“ChicagoTeaParty.com was just one part of a larger network of Republican sleeper-cell-blogs set up over the course of the past few months, all of them tied to a shady rightwing advocacy group coincidentally named the “Sam Adams Alliance,” whose backers have until now been kept hidden from public. Cached google records that we discovered show that the Sam Adams Alliance took pains to scrub its deep links to the Koch family money as well as the fake-grassroots “tea party” protests going on today. All of these roads ultimately lead back to a more notorious rightwing advocacy group, FreedomWorks, a powerful PR organization headed by former Republican House Majority leader Dick Armey and funded by Koch money.”
February 28th, 2009 at 6:51 pm
Of note, St. Louis Tea Party Protests Obama Stimulus Plan…
ST. LOUIS — Critics of President Barack Obama’s stimulus plan gathered beneath the Arch Friday to cheer speeches over a bullhorn and toss tea into the Mississippi River.
A few conservative activists organized and promoted the rally, with help from talk-radio hosts. Pleased with the turnout in 35-degree bluster, leaders said they had stolen a page from liberal tradition by taking to the streets with homemade signs.
“If I had known this many people would show up, I’d have charged admission,” said Bill Hennessy of Ballwin, the lead organizer. “We’ll do this every chance we get until Congress repeals the pork — or we retire them from public life.”
Hennessy estimated that more than 1,000 people showed up. There was no official count, but the crowd spilled across roughly one-fourth of the grand staircase from the Arch to Leonor K. Sullivan Boulevard. Former state Sen. John Loudon, R-Chesterfield, said, “We conservatives are usually pretty pathetic at making crowds. But this one’s good.”
Hennessy said he got the idea after Rick Santelli, a CNBC market commentator in Chicago, last week called for a tea party to protest Obama’s anti-recession plan. Santelli’s comments became a YouTube hit, and similar “tea parties” were planned in other cities.
The original took place on Dec. 16, 1773, when American patriots dumped imported tea from merchant ships into Boston harbor to protest British colonial taxes.
February 28th, 2009 at 6:58 pm
franklin411,
w/this: “It’s quite another for it to be a CORRUPT news source.”
for the edification of us young Grasshoppers, please, do, tell us of a ‘news source’ that isn’t..
February 28th, 2009 at 7:00 pm
franklin: >>>>>CNBC’s integrity as a news source
you gotta be kidding. pay a PR firm enough, and YOU could be on there 3 times a day saying whatever you want.
February 28th, 2009 at 7:03 pm
I know that this site leans left, and as a conservative, I find much to be learned from this site. I appreciate all of the graphs and observations. However, this is a stretch. I’m sure that Santelli hangs out in these circles where people talk about “”Chicago Tea Partyies”, but you need a clearer line connecting Santelli to some Koch-backed media campaign.
February 28th, 2009 at 7:08 pm
CNBC has been trying to get a youtube moment out of Santelli for months. They finally got one, and have to be loving it. I doubt they change a thing.
February 28th, 2009 at 7:09 pm
I’m pretty, centrist, and this site leans way right of me.
Ritholtz is much more of a free market guy than those who only pretend at having free-market-bonafides, and want to bailout the banks, autos etc.
February 28th, 2009 at 7:10 pm
tCA Says:
February 28th, 2009 at 6:35 pm
“Question: is any of this illegal? Or is the right excluded from the First Amendment? I don’t see how this is different than Comedy Central or MSNBC’s non-spontaneous anti-Bush segments.”
…….Sure it’s not illegal but it’s hardly ethical…..although ethics don’t seem a big deal in your lexicon…..neither apparently does a lot of secret string pulling by the notoriously kookie Koch family…some folks value systems are very screwed up…..if it turns out to have some substance then I’d day CNBC is in some hot water and in political terms its will be a huge own goal….now it’s out there the story is going to gain some traction because bloggers are going to be all over it so I guess we’ll see what happens over the next few days.
February 28th, 2009 at 7:11 pm
I wonder if franklin411 works for AKPD Message and Media aka Dave Axelrod?
February 28th, 2009 at 7:11 pm
Since this is now an issue: My views are pragmatic rather than ideological. I agree with Ron Paul about many issues — but I wouldn’t follow him off a cliff. I supported McCain in 2000, I did not in 2008 (I did not vote in 2004).
I am much more interested in Truth than Spin, getting to the underlying reality than politics. You will note I posed this as a question, and that I don’t know what the truth is — but I would like to find out. Those of you who are SO SURE about the reality of this — having performed exactly ZERO research — belie your obvious lack of knowledge and political bias.
If this turns out to be remotely true, then it confirms my worst suspicions about the negative impact of media on investing.
February 28th, 2009 at 7:14 pm
Brent,
Yes, yes…we all hate CNBC. But the fact is that there are different hats at any organization. Santelli can say whatever he wants to if CNBC chooses to give him a “commentator” hat. When he’s wearing his “reporter” hat, we expect neutrality. And if he is in any way, shape or form tied to a political movement on which he is commenting, then we expect disclosure the same as if he was commenting on a stock he personally owned.
February 28th, 2009 at 7:18 pm
Barry,
I agree. It was contrived. Anyone who didn’t watch and hear this massive visual and aural echo chamber in action during the last 17 years or so is the victim of that river in Egypt. The fun part is watching how fast the faux fizzles now a days. It’s the flip side of how all these lies and fabrications out of whole cloth became “accepted consensus” during the Bush and Clinton years. It’s really quite entertaining to watch these cretins fall on their falsehoods. I do believe we grasshoppers are getting the picture of how we are constantly being targeted for fun and games.
I might add that Santelli isn’t stupid. He knows the right answers to our economic woes. It’s just that he is, ahem, “well paid” for his services as a water carrier for “truth, justice and the pecuniary way”.
February 28th, 2009 at 7:20 pm
Barry Ritholtz Says:
February 28th, 2009 at 7:11 pm
……Basically agree with you Barry….this maybe fluff but if it’s not it doesn’t reflect at all well on CNBC’s cred…..on the political front it will be used to discredit everything he stands for…..whatever that is.
February 28th, 2009 at 7:20 pm
I like Santelli — his takedown of Cramer was priceless. But if it turns out this guys is shilling for the Right wing noise machine, or was part of any pre-planned planted phony news, well then his ass is out the door.
February 28th, 2009 at 7:22 pm
This is a crock of speculative BS. Tea party is a common anti-tax symbol.
Obama was “associated” with Ayers. They ran that education slush fund together and it was a miserable failure.
Anybody who thinks going into massive debt, throwing money blindly at every problem, is going to solve anything is an idiot. Why is losing money of a house due to speculating with a risky overleveraged mortagage any different than losing money on Wall Street?
Would that the posters on this site had any interest in lib conflicts of interest. For one thing, we’d have a different SecState.
February 28th, 2009 at 7:23 pm
buckykatt Says:
February 28th, 2009 at 7:11 pm
I wonder if franklin411 works for AKPD Message and Media aka Dave Axelrod?
…….and who do you work for…..I always start from the assumption that at least a third of blog postings come from boiler rooms of various sorts…..although this site seems largely free of them…..I think we should give you and franklin the benefit of the doubt
February 28th, 2009 at 7:23 pm
I would love if some of you smart guys / gals could fisk the actual Playboy article.
I want to know — is this accurate? Do their allegations hold water?
So far, I’ve only read I believe it/I don’t.
You people are pretty savvy — please prove/disprove this.
February 28th, 2009 at 7:24 pm
I’ve always considered Reason and Cato to be libertarian. When did Republicans start listening to their good ideas? I must have missed it.
February 28th, 2009 at 7:27 pm
franklin411,
other than being a walking proof for the disavowal of the “Rational Expectations Hypothesis”, thanks for dodging my Q:
for your edification: http://www.icerocket.com/search?tab=web&fr=h&q=Rational+Expectations+Hypothesis
February 28th, 2009 at 7:27 pm
now factor in the over the top bat crap crazy speech that limbaugh did at cpac today.
February 28th, 2009 at 7:27 pm
Barry,
How would you prove something like this? You’d need a confession, frankly. The article seems to prove all that can be proven from the outside, which is that the sites hosting this supposed-rant came online suspiciously rapidly. Also, these sites were organized through political operatives and shadowy organizations that tried very hard–though not hard enough–to scrub their connections to the right wing John Birch Society founding multibillionaire Koch family.
Beyond that, you’d need a leak from CNBC to actually prove this beyond a doubt.
~~~
BR: You find evidence that supports the hypothesis, or weighs against it.
We are looking for the preponderence of evidence
February 28th, 2009 at 7:29 pm
Mark,
I’m not saying CNBC can or should be impartial. I’m saying they can and should be transparent in how they operate.
February 28th, 2009 at 7:29 pm
I saw that live and was in the middle of posting on this site and mentioned it .. the fox and hedgehog thread (February 19th @ 8:59 am)
I got caught up in the seeming spontaneity of it .. I don’t log my CNBC airtime .. but I was most likely boucing between CNBC CNN MSNBC as they are in the lineup from wakeup
the air was building up that smell (unequality) for some time .. I fired an email off to MorngJoe talking on class warfare on the 17th .. I think it was with Zbigniew Brzezinski .. told em better late than never
do I sometimes think you are being played by what you’all term Shortsellers .. Ya
do I think the Financial Industry is allowed to print money in sorts .. Ya
do I think the blue collar labor world is being played by the white collar desk jocky world .. Ya
do I think there is enough work and commodities to go around .. not if we keep this up for sure
and
do the Dems & GOP need to battle for the media to cash in .. Ya
is the internet a threat to that election money stream .. Ya
this isn’t the thread but put me down for longtail tax increases the more you reap from the blue collar underclassman .. say enough is enough when the tax weight is enough .. leave some for somebody else .. this business of life isn’t football
February 28th, 2009 at 7:31 pm
KidDynamite –
Pretty sure it isn’t Eric Bolling. I watch CNBC a lot so I’m rather certain (no Bloomberg on my cable and I use my PC for my work [self-employed if you're concerned] so it’s not convenient to stream it).
Bolling is of course at Fox now — or at least last I heard since I don’t watch that either. The CME dude is a different Eric and he’s just this trader that Santelli always stands beside and who tends to chime in with his views rather often. As far as I know he’s never disagreed with Santelli on anything so he serves as the Ed McMahon go-to character.
February 28th, 2009 at 7:33 pm
franklin,
though, I was asking you to name a ‘news source’ that isn’t Corrupt..
February 28th, 2009 at 7:34 pm
The far right have been worried about Obama for a long time. Interestingly, they were also worried about Giuliani. Human Events was buying up both their names on Google AdWords as far back as Spring 2007.
February 28th, 2009 at 7:37 pm
This looks to me like an attempt to blacken the good name of the political philanthropists in the Koch family. The Cato Institute, FreedomWorks and other groups cited are well-respected conservative organizations offering a home to people who want to support conservative ideas.
Re: DC’s comment linking criticisms of people driving Escalades with racism – Racism? I don’t think so. I’m getting pretty fed up with the default to racism that leftists run to when they run out of nasty adjectives and adverbs. [note: sleazy, shady, notorious right-wing, fake-grassroots....]
Here in Oregon, Escalades are popular with Mexican-nationals running large quantities of various illegal substances. Hummers, on the other hand, are big with mortgage brokers and instant cash outlet owners.
Also, Portland, Oregon had its first Tea Party last Friday at noon and they, too, were surprised at the big turnout. Another one is planned for Vancouver, Wash, just across the river. And, yes, talk show hosts did provide crucial information for supporters and real-live grassroots organizers. I haven’t seen anything like this since Republicans demonstrated in downtown Portland for Bush/Cheney in 2000.
And just a reminder – the heavily-hyped Edsel was a huge failure. Even the most thoroughly planned spontaneous demonstration won’t take off unless it hits a real nerve.
February 28th, 2009 at 7:39 pm
Barry
they are cloaking the registration of that website (http://chicagoteaparty.com)
With 99.99% of websites, you can go to an online “Whois” directory and find out which paerson or entity’s name is listed as the registrar of the domain…in this case, somehow they’ve got it unregistered
on top of that, even the IP address they have listed is a fake, whois.net has it listed as 127.0.0.1, which is the notorious feedback loop address that webmasters use to trick newbies, when you attempt to connect to that IP address, you get looped right back to your own machine
someone went to great lengths to remain an anonymous owner of this domain, so the Playboy story could be legit
TRB
February 28th, 2009 at 7:40 pm
JoWriter,
You left out the part where Koch family patriarch John Koch helped found the John Birch Society, which supported segregation in the 1960s. I’m sure it was just an oversight.
February 28th, 2009 at 7:41 pm
The times that I hear Santelli he usually proves a good counterpoint to those two numbnuts, Liesman and Kneale. I had heard about the rant for a day or so before catching a replay of it on CNBC radio. Compared to some of his bouts with Liesman or Cramer I thought it was anticlimatic at the time. The most interesting thing about the Playboy article, I thought, was Kudlow’s involvement with Koch.
February 28th, 2009 at 7:41 pm
I love it, the liberals are all worked up now, Santelli really pointed out what a failure this administration is and how quickly the clowns like Obama and Summers are losing credibility with the American public. Protests in 40 cities, Obama promised change yet he brought the same shills along for the ride and move of the same big spending plans. I would be surprised if Obama makes it 4 years the way he is being exposed.
February 28th, 2009 at 7:45 pm
ps – on the chord tCA strikes at 6:35 pm
“First, it seems to me a struck a popular vein. Let’s face it, there are far more of us paying our mortgages and getting nothing out of Obamprah’s package”
I don’t need to see the scammers now full of cash from this WS Ponzi Game who have also knocked down the economy .. to begin cashing in via repossessions …. that just isn’t right .. maybe the rules as reworked and perceived now .. but not right
February 28th, 2009 at 7:47 pm
Barry, the site was registered on 3 Aug 2008 – just google “whois chicagoteaparty.com”
The entire site just seems to hold a clip of the video and an offer to register.
The whois record shows Zach Christenson as the owner. Not much google info on him.
February 28th, 2009 at 7:57 pm
It got worse. After the White House Press Secretary mentioned Santelli’s rant and recommended that he read the proposal before commenting, the CNBC anchors (particularly Kudlow) were outraged. How dare the White House attack a reporter! Of course, CNBC milked the White House “attack” by replaying it and feigning indignation. What a bunch of drama queens!
February 28th, 2009 at 8:00 pm
Barry:
Thank you. Now that the issue has been joined please keep us updated as things develop.
February 28th, 2009 at 8:00 pm
1. Rosenberg is a Classic Liberal – not a rightwing [sic]-er, who isn’t afraid of discussing complex issues on his program. It’s almost a graduate level seminar on many nights.
2. Ayers, by today’s definition, was a terrorist. One may want to forgive or ignore the fact, but it doesn’t make it go away.
3. Obama clearly did not provide all of the details about his relationship with Ayers. In hindsight that shouldn’t be so surprising based on his recent personnel judgment (Richardson, Daschle, Geithner, Holder, Freeman, etc.).
February 28th, 2009 at 8:01 pm
@ JoWriter,
“Here in Oregon, Escalades are popular with Mexican-nationals running large quantities of various illegal substances. Hummers, on the other hand, are big with mortgage brokers and instant cash outlet owners”
Awesome sentence! And I thought I was too sarcastic sometimes. Please post more nuggets of insight like this.
February 28th, 2009 at 8:02 pm
Barry’s now beating the pants off the full-time bloggers (when do you sleep, dude?).
I would have preferred that you make that choice of words about something other than a Playboy-based article.
But I do agree with the sentiment.
February 28th, 2009 at 8:04 pm
Lynn,
That was actually some really smart political theater there. Wall Street is in the pits right now WRT public opinion. A recent CNN poll put them at the bottom of the list of people the American people trust to fix the economy. So you have a wealthy Chicago trader like Santelli and a room full of wealthy bond traders who probably got very rich off of the tears and sorrow of the people saying that these American citizens are “losers” who deserve to die in a fire. It was smart PR for the White House to call attention to that and ask the American people whether they feel these ultra-wealthy traitors speak for them.
No, Mr. Santelli. You are not America.
February 28th, 2009 at 8:12 pm
Who cares what Santelli or CNBC does? They are a source of nothing. As for the previous poster worried about some far right-wing organization advertising on CNBC, they can take their place alongside pajamagram and cashforgold. Everyone, to a person, I work with who watches CNBC all day watches it in case there is breaking news. Unfortunately most of the time, the news is neither news nor breaking. Santelli is in the right job.
February 28th, 2009 at 8:13 pm
An article about Rick Santelli would not get interested in an issue of Playboy. Now an issue with the ladies of CNBC (and/or Fox Business), now that would get me to buy a a copy. Barry, you are entering dangerous waters here. The vast right-wing conspiracy ended with the discovery of a stained dress.
February 28th, 2009 at 8:14 pm
I guess if I was just a humble balanced budgets organizer, fighting the principled fight for fiscal discipline, and had started organizing my humble organization last August, picking out the “tea party” theme in advance and so forth, I would have probably rolled out my PR campaign when I had protesters lined up against the first 750 billion, rather than waiting around until some Democrat started trying to funnel the money to the banks through subsidized mortgage rates.
February 28th, 2009 at 8:15 pm
This past campaign, I made the mistake of donating $50 to Ron Paul. The campaign apparently sells your email to all and sundry.
Well, here’s what I got from Dick Armey last Monday. Apparently there’s already a site up named IAmWithRick.com. This doman was registered to FreedomWorks on 2/20, the day after the rant. Awfully quick, but not damning evidence:
From: Dick Armey
Subject: Join the National Taxpayer Tea Party Revolt
To: Moi
Date: Tuesday, February 24, 2009, 1:23 PM
Dear Brian,
Last week you may have seen or perhaps heard about CNBC’s Rick Santelli and his report from the floor of the Chicago Mercantile Exchange, ground zero for American capitalism and free market commerce, where he called for a “Taxpayer Tea Party” in the wake of efforts to enact a new, multi-billion dollar taxpayer funded housing bailout.
If you are like me, you stood up and cheered.
Rick was channeling what so many limited government advocates have been feeling now for a long time when it comes to out-of-control spending on the backs of hardworking U.S. taxpayers to reward the irresponsible and the corrupt: enough is enough!
Whether it’s this latest housing bailout bill (the second in less than six months), a bailout for the auto-industry or failed banks, the more than $1 trillion sham of a “stimulus” bill, or the $400 billion omnibus spending bill that Congress is now debating, Americans are sick and tired of their hard-earned money being thrown around. In just the last few weeks, FreedomWorks has been contacted by volunteers within the ranks of our own membership (a nationwide network of hundreds of thousands of activists) that want to take to the streets in mass protest to this big government bonanza.
And FreedomWorks is answering the call with a new website, IamWithRick.com. True to its name, the site features the video of Rick on the floor of the Chicago Exchange and seeks to enlist those concerned taxpayers who want to go to the Taxpayer Tea Party that he talked about this summer in Chicago. In addition, FreedomWorks is also helping to organize other tea party protests in cities around the country. Currently, we have events planned in Chicago, Washington, DC, Atlanta, Philadelphia, Fort Myers, Orlando, Greenville, SC and cities across North Carolina.
We need your help to make these events a success. Go to IamWithRick.com, sign up and select one or more of the tea parties that you would like to attend or help us to organize. Also, please consider making a generous contribution to our tea party effort. Your contribution will help us recruit more taxpayers to attend our tea party protests, making them more effective.
Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and the new Obama Administration are running the bailout train full steam ahead towards the destruction of our American capitalist system and ultimately to outright socialism. They must be stopped!
Join FreedomWorks at our taxpayer tea parties taking place all over the country. Visit IamWithRick.com today!
Sincerely,
Dick Armey
Chairman
February 28th, 2009 at 8:16 pm
Ease up on Santelli being a right wing shill, he was highly critical of the Bush bailouts and all the BS that the Bush administration did. The only time I have heard him cheer a politician is after Ron Paul taught Ben Bernanke a lesson in Austrian Economics.
PS: Barry I noticed you said you agreed with Paul alot…I thought you were a Keynesian not an Austrian.
~~~
BR: Any port in a storm . . .
February 28th, 2009 at 8:17 pm
You can always pay half the poor to kill the other half. Not quite there yet, it starts as a shouting match.
The most sucessful part of the “republican” machine in the past 20-30 years has been their ability to make people believe they are rich. The dems are supposedly the other side. They have much more in common, including bankers.
Santelli’s appearance in NYC a few months ago was also suspicious. He looks and sounds terrible in the studio.
I said this on the original post about this rant, where was the press when he was “arguing” against the Tarp in the fall? Of couse he did not use language that was nearly as strong. He merely accused the entire banking system of being BK, or as he put it insolvent. He was very careful to not say in words that he disagreed with the TARP. He said that was up to the people. Sure. Then came the trip to NYC.
I used to enjoy Rick, thought he was the only person on there that knew what he was talking about. He lost every bit of credibility with me.
Did anyone else catch Larry Kudlow when one of his “correspondents” had to explain to him that bond holders are above stock holders in the corporate capital structure? He doesn’t even qualify as a pundit.
Barry, I do like your blog, and I am beginning to check it more often. Your appearances on CNBC made me very nervous, and still do. CNBC has become the bond holders talking their own book network.
Just the way I see things.
February 28th, 2009 at 8:25 pm
I’ve always had a positive view of Santelli. He comes across as pretty straightforward and oftentimes makes a huge amount of sense. I do not think this was some sort or coordinated thing.
What I do believe is that there are groups sitting around to pounce, on both the right and left.
In terms of Charles Koch. I think he’s more a libertarian than anything. He funded the Libertarian party in 80’s and I think his brother even ran on a ticket? Charles Koch is an excellent businessman who runs a very successful and huge private business…probably the largest company most people have never heard of.
Whether or not he’s funding secret organizations on the right….I have only one thing to say….
It’s a free country (sort of) and he’s really rich. He can do whatever he wants to do as long as its within the limits of the law. The left has their sugar daddies as well….Soros.
Funny Barry….I’m a Ron Paul fan as well…I voted for McCain in 2000 but refused to go with him 2008…I think theres probably a lot of people with similar views politically….It astounds me there is not a legitimate third party in this country.
February 28th, 2009 at 8:26 pm
The cheerleaders of big government have been very effective at using the politics of envy to advance their agenda. The major media is saturated with their shills. Santelli’s rant aimed to use the politics of envy to attack the agenda of the big government cheerleaders. Turnabout is fair play. The question worth puzzling is whether or not it was good for CNBC ratings.
February 28th, 2009 at 8:30 pm
>> BR: You find evidence that supports the hypothesis, or weighs against it.
>>We are looking for the preponderence of evidence
Look for files that were created before the CNBC segment, then uploaded to websites after it. I looked at chicagoteaparty.com but there was nothing like that there. That site is so simple, it could have been created and uploaded in 20 minutes.
Officialchicagoteaparty.com was registered on 2/19, but there is nothing to show that it was registered before the TV segment. (It takes about 10 minutes to register a domain name). You could request that information from the registrar – but I doubt you’d receive it.
February 28th, 2009 at 8:31 pm
This is an interesting quote:
“In politics, nothing happens by accident. If it happens, you can bet it was planned that way.”
Franklin D. Roosevelt
February 28th, 2009 at 8:32 pm
Glad you raised the subject BR but I’m suspicious of the political conspiracy line of the Playboy article.
I too felt uneasy about the rant and I also believe it was contrived but for another reason: RATINGS.
It recently transpired that a big CNBC programming guy had left the network who had been responsible for encouraging on-air slugfests, mainly between Gaspirano and the likes of Kneale, Liesman, etc. I forget the guy’s name and source article. This was also a jack-of-the-ratings tactic.
The speed and scope of the follow-up reactions to Santelli’s rant was as suspicious as it was impressive. Same deal as Cramer’s rant last year.
I no longer regard CNBC USA as a business channel; it’s an entertainment channel masquerading as a business channel. Sadly CNBC Europe is now showing tendencies in this direction while CNBC Asia is holding back – so far.
Thankfully, we still have Bloomberg and BNN in Toronto.
February 28th, 2009 at 8:33 pm
Just another thought on how politics is very similar to economics. Dems vs republicans is very similar to Keynes vs. Freidman(austrians go here) Not that much difference, especially in practice.
All of Neo-Classical economics is at best an Art. Government policy should be about responsibilty to the citizens, not ideology. Just like trading. Believe what every you want, at the end of the day you have to look at the Books.
9.7 trillion in spending(bloomberg, february). 75 billion to homeowners. Seems a little off center.
February 28th, 2009 at 8:49 pm
It’s circumstantial, but the “are you listening President Obama!” tag at the end was unnecessary unless you want to associate the negativity.
And as for the first part of the rant, what’s so un-American about helping your neighbor? How many of those floor trader’s have neighbors with conforming loans that qualify under the plan? Not in their neighborhoods.
As for hard data, all you need is find out who got the URL, when, and what it’s been doing since.
February 28th, 2009 at 8:51 pm
“On Thursday, December 16, 1773, the evening before the tea was due to be landed, Captain Roach appealed to Governor Hutchinson to allow his ship to leave without unloading its tea. When Roach returned and reported Hutchinson’s refusal to a massive protest meeting, Samuel Adams said to the assembly “This meeting can do nothing more to save the country”. As though on cue, the Sons of Liberty thinly disguised as either Mohawk[7][8] or Narragansett[9] Indians and armed with small hatchets and clubs, headed toward Griffin’s Wharf (in Boston Harbor), where lay Dartmouth and the newly-arrived Beaver and Eleanor. Swiftly and efficiently, casks of tea were brought up from the hold to the deck, reasonable proof that some of the “Indians” were, in fact, longshoremen. ”
That whole American revolution thing…”as though on cue”…sounds fishy to me…
February 28th, 2009 at 8:55 pm
BR –
Been reading this site daily for about as long as you have been around. And, been watching the ONLY sane person on CNBC – Santelli – for longer than that amount of time. Gotta say – he has been making the same points over and over again – for years. He was the first to warn about the explosion in derivatives – 3 years ago… Back when no one could say Tier 1 2 or 3 ratios… Rick is about as mild mannered and well spoken as they come – and those that watch videos like the below obviously haven’t watched CNBC much when he gives reports if they think this is normal for Rick. These “rants” are out-of-character, but if you listen to this 8 minutes to what he says – in Sept of 08 during the middle of the crash – everything he said has come true concerning the bailout. Liesman, who is an english major, and Bouradjian, permabull, were on the wrong side then. I might add – government intervention did not prevent the downfall in the market…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I-1g0OZJIdk
After reading alot of the comments here – I am pretty much disgusted because about the only people I have agreed with during this whole mess of the last several years (starting at the bust in the housing market), has been Ritholtz, Tim Knight, Calculated Risk, Nouriel Roubini, Mike Shedlock and Rick Santelli. Sorry – BR – gotta say that Rick knows more about the markets than the entire list above combined.
For those that have only read or have seen Santelli only recently – you are clueless if you think this is a PR stunt by CNBC. CNBC tries to find ways to prop the market with idiots like Kneale and Griffiths, et al. These guys are shills and continually get everything wrong. I thought Santelli would get kicked off the station years ago for ranting against the ultimate market shill – Cramer. The whole Chicago Tea Party garnered attention for what it was – the truth. 92% of us are pissed off because some neighbor who bought a house with no credit, no downpayment, and has a bigger house is getting bailed out. Thank goodness someone with balls is saying it.
I can’t stand the thought of bailing any of these yahoos out, the “losers,” the financial institutions, the wall street investment banks, autos, the whole lot of them. In the end, I have saved money and inflation is eating that alive, I put a down payment on a house, I have excellent credit and a low mortgage rate. I have lived within my means while the government, banks, and a small proportion of “id” generations have lived above their means – with leverage.
BR – I catch just about every TV appearance you make – and just too bad Dylan R doesn’t give you much time on Fast Money… Don’t lower yourself into thinking Santelli is any more than just an honest guy speaking his mind and the media picking up on it because he said “losers.” And for those making comments about Santelli being a rich wealthy bond trader – you need to get a life and facts straight before you comment…
February 28th, 2009 at 8:55 pm
First, is this any different that what the Dem’s did with Soros and the Moveon.org crowd last year?
I’d say the Dem’s response is interesting too. It didn’t take a full news cycle before Obama was taking his am at CNBC and Santelli and firing his cannons. It took about just as long as that video to make it the air and the Internet.
February 28th, 2009 at 8:59 pm
The “Vast Right Wing Conspiracy” lives!!
I wonder if Barry’s “libertarian” left wing ever gets tired from flapping so much?
February 28th, 2009 at 9:03 pm
franklin411 Says: February 28th, 2009 at 7:40 pm
this: ” JoWriter,
You left out the part where…………………………………………………… I’m sure it was just an oversight.”
is a True Classic, coming from one who was, Twice, asked to name a ‘news source’ that isn’t Corrupt..
Does Axelrod pay well? Will he pay in Coin, if so asked? Please, give the ‘info’ “franklin”, edify us, O knowing One, and, grace us, be frank about it.
February 28th, 2009 at 9:04 pm
Barry,
You are to be commended for posting this thoughtful reflexion on the manipulation of public opinion. Perhaps you might think of carrying the sense of responsiblity you’ve shown here further and challenging the likes of Larry Kudlow, Denis Neal, Rick Santelli and others on CNBC when they mouth such non-sequiturs. Larry is even noted in the Playboy article as being a stalwart of far right organizations of which they site several. Yet your repeated appearance on these shows without any direct challenge to them serves to lend their tendentious airings of cant an air of legitimacy. I understand how difficult it may be to challenge them but I believe you have reached a point in your career where responsibility can triumph self-interest narrowly viewed. It would be well appreciated and make Rick’s rant look like “small potatoes.” Best and Thanks!
SS
February 28th, 2009 at 9:11 pm
The question is: was Santelli a willing dupe, or an ignorant dupe?
February 28th, 2009 at 9:19 pm
Still waiting for one of the limp wristed liberals on this board to challenge the multiplier effect of the stimulus that Santelli spoke of.
February 28th, 2009 at 9:25 pm
What, did your Saturday night checkers tourney get cancelled and this muck raking was was your way of venting. Yeah, Playboy is noted for its hard hitting journalism. Barry, did you fall and hit your head? Your blog site is so much better than this. You blew it on this one.
~~~
BR: Go read what I wrote (not what you were expecting to read).
I state clearly I have no idea if this is true, but that I believe someone (either Playboy or CNBC) owes an apology.
February 28th, 2009 at 9:29 pm
BR, I totally disagree with you. Santelli has been pissed off about the socialization of losses for the last year and a half. Clearly, the fact that we are now, as taxpayers, paying monthly mortgage payments DIRECTLY sent Santelli over the edge.
I really don’t think it’s fair of you at all to call him out like you’ve done. Why? Everything he said was true. Not only that, but Santelli is clearly not a politician. His insight goes so much deeper than everyone else’s combined on CNBC. People like that are not politicians, they’re outsiders. Strangely enough, he’s been able to hang on to his job while idiots all around him jabber non-stop about the merits of bailouts and why “the market sure seems to be holding up well today despite all the bad news.”
You might want to get in touch with him and ask him yourself about the allegations you quote. That’s the right thing to do.
“He’s a witch, he’s a witch, burn him, burn him!” Come on, gimme a break.
~~~
BR: Like I said, I find that Santelli is usually on the ball; On most of the bailout related issues, we actually agree much more often than we disagree.
And, he’s been responsible for some of the best moments on Squawk Box. But this one simply felt wrong, and the Playboy allegations were serious enough they were worth posting.
What is fascinating is how many of the comments are all heat no light. Pure emotion, no thought process — on both sides.
February 28th, 2009 at 9:30 pm
From the article:
…..If you look at the scores of blogs and fake-commenters on blogs (for example, Daily Blog, a slick new blog launched in January which is also based in Chicago) all puff up Santelli like he’s the greatest journalist in America, and the greatest hero known to mankind….
Here’s something weird. On Thursday 02/19 (the day of the rant) we had an open thread here at TBP. The name “Santelli” appears 43 times in that thread (I used it myself).
http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2009/02/dow-closes-under-7500/#comments
I do remember being a little disappointed that Rick was the dominant theme, but most of the comments seemed to be from folks I recognize as regulars, not “fake commenters”.
Unless……..We’re all unconsciously programmed operatives of some right wing sleeper cell astroturfing program (that means you too, Barry) and don’t look now, but we’ve been activated!
I’d discuss this further, but I have to go buy a copy of “Catcher in the Rye”.
February 28th, 2009 at 9:30 pm
will profit Says:
February 28th, 2009 at 9:25 pm
What, did your Saturday night checkers tourney get cancelled and this muck raking was was your way of venting. Yeah, Playboy is noted for its hard hitting journalism. Barry, did you fall and hit your head? Your blog site is so much better than this. You blew it on this one.
Okay – so will profit said it more succintly than me, but it needed repeated!
February 28th, 2009 at 9:32 pm
WOW! I supported McCain in 2000, too! I voted for Perot 2 times before that and Ron Paul this time. I had to write him in because he wasn’t on the Ohio ballot. I want a 3rd party and a 4th party!
I find it hard to believe the Santelli rant was contrived because lots of websites had been talking about tea parties for months. I think things have just reached the boiling point, and this latest mortgage bailout plan must have been the straw that broke the camel’s back.
I also think Santelli is one of the best people on CNBC.
February 28th, 2009 at 9:38 pm
It never ceases to amaze. What exactly is the goal of Koch/Rush et al.? These “leaders” are the biggest consumers of government services ever seen. Services for them are good, services for the majority are bad. I’m inclined to give them what they want — they get to pay no taxes and in return they give up all recourse to the legal system, security, water, electricity, phones, etc. etc.; banks have no legal obligation to process their transactions accurately. Perfect freedom for them, right?
Santelli claims he is pissed now. Wait until his assets zero out, then we will see some true anger.
It is sad. I’ve been watching Rick for several years and always thought of him as a straight shooter, not a slanter or a ranter.
Barry has always warned that every source should be double checked, but it is always discomforting to implicitly trust someone and then have to give it up.
February 28th, 2009 at 9:45 pm
I’m a lot like you … try to be politically neutral and pragmatic rather than ideological. After all, markets don’t care who’s in power. They react to the factual state of things. Unfortunately, it’s seemed to me in recent years that the truth no longer matters to a great many otherwise sharp people. I work with a lot of guys I really respect but who allow ideology to trump intellectual honesty. This is really sad.
February 28th, 2009 at 9:46 pm
And all along I thought that GE employee Santelli had his tantrum because GE nuked their divy. That hadn’t happened yet you say? Oh, never mind.
February 28th, 2009 at 9:50 pm
guru:
It is pretty hard for Obama to ignore it when it leads Brian Williams newscast the very night of Santelli’s rant. CNBC is owned by GE. GE used to be run(and probably still is in some ways) by Jack Welch. Welch is a known hardcore Republican. It is no surprise that CNBC does what is best for GE.
February 28th, 2009 at 9:53 pm
All this crap about Santelli representing America is totally false. I am from Chicago and worked at the CME long time ago. The people that work there are the same as me — white ethnic Chicago natives — Italians, Polish, Irish, Czechs, Lithuanians, etc. (no Blacks or Hispanics allowed) who would never, ever would be positive about Obama, since he’s a n***** and a lib****. I firmly believe these traders are the sources of the most racist and sexist jokes that go around the world among traders. After his remark about bad behavior by home buyers with an extra bathroom, Santelli should have asked “WHO HERE WANTS OBAMA TO FAIL?” The roar would have been even louder.
February 28th, 2009 at 9:58 pm
For those that disagree with the Santelli rant, I would be interested to know specifically what part you disagree with.
Many of you appear to be quite emotional about this issue, yet other than Santelli using the harsh term “losers,” or calling out Obama, I don’t see what there is to be disgruntled about. Santelli has been against the bailouts from day 1, as stated above by “Maj Tom.” I am willing to bet that most of you generally agreed with Santelli’s opinions right up until the point where he called out your massiah. After that he was just a political shill in your minds.
February 28th, 2009 at 10:00 pm
BT,
This is not about Santelli’s beliefs. He’s free to think whatever he wants. This is about Santelli’s perversion as a journalist. If the article is correct, then Santelli lied to the viewers by pretending that he was “ranting” when actually this whole thing was a pre-arranged scheme paid for by an extremely wealthy right wing billionaire.
This is about propaganda, not politics.
February 28th, 2009 at 10:11 pm
“This is about propaganda, not politics.”
take your pick:
either: “You would know.”
or, “What’s the difference?”
and, last anyone knew, Santelli was Never a “Journalist”.
franklin,
how ’bout I make it easier for you? do us a fave, name a Journalist that’s employed in America: _________________
February 28th, 2009 at 10:12 pm
Franklin411,
Really – he is not a “journalist.” Just the fact you make that comment means you don’t watch or know anything about him… He reports the numbers at 7:30 CT from the pit. That is it, he isn’t an investigative reporter, he doesn’t cover other news. Occasionally, Kernen asks an opinion when the news comes out. As of late – the Liesman/Santelli debate has been comical. This rant from Rick wasn’t even his best. But I will say, these are rare, very rare.
Go youtube Santelli and watch the better ones – and I might add – when he was bashing the bush administration. Regardless – do some research before you make a post – that way you won’t embarass yourself in front of these other posters…
February 28th, 2009 at 10:15 pm
Ventura2012 Says:
February 28th, 2009 at 9:19 pm
Still waiting for one of the limp wristed liberals on this board to challenge the multiplier effect of the stimulus that Santelli spoke of.
________
Ahhh . . . the squawking of a chickenhawk blowhard.
What if the liberal’s wrists aren’t limp? What if the liberal would get right up in your face? Bet you wouldn’t like it much. Bet you’d back down.
You can find your multiplier in the unemployment/consumer confidence/credit collapse caused by the Republican deregulation echo chamber and it’s self-sodomized middle class adherents.
February 28th, 2009 at 10:25 pm
MT,
Actually I watch CNBC every day (less so lately, though…I find they spend more time trying to out-Fox Fox News than actually reporting on the economy) and have for years. Santelli’s job is to do the Bond Report, not comment on public policy. Occasionally they interview him for his own opinions, but his job is to cover the bond markets.
I find it amusing that you think that just because he reports numbers, he’s not a “real journalist.”
February 28th, 2009 at 10:29 pm
Marcus Aurelius,
Uhhh…it was Bill Clinton who signed the legislation repealing Glass-Steagall. It’s fools such as yourself that try to make this economic collapse a one party issue. There is more than enough blame and shame for parties to share. Get off your dumb ass and do a little reading. You might discover you can be something other than a one dimensional MORON.
February 28th, 2009 at 10:31 pm
@ Zodiac: “All this crap about Santelli representing America is totally false. I am from Chicago and worked at the CME long time ago. The people that work there are the same as me — white ethnic Chicago natives — Italians, Polish, Irish, Czechs, Lithuanians, etc….”
What????? They aren’t America? Isn’t Santelli Italian?
And, to those who pointed out the Libertarian leanings of Charles Koch, I forgot about that. I was actually in the Libertarian Party when the Kochs were supporting the national party. All that money from them wrecked the party. How? Just the way the stimulus will cause a lot of trouble in the American economy. I’m hoping Soros’ money will do the same thing to the Dems.
))
For the LP, lots of ‘free money’ floating around removed incentives to do any political work and encouraged party members to line up at the trough. It was pitiful.
Cheer up, those of you who wish there was a third party out there! The LP still lives! There are plenty of elected Libertarians around the country, usually in nonpartisan positions. I have been able to vote Libertarian for the past 20 years and have never felt guilty about my vote. When people complained, I always said, “Don’t blame me, I voted Libertarian.”
@ MajTom – I watched that Santelli YouTube clip inserted. It was awesome and thoroughly backs up you and the other commenters here who have said he is knowledgeable and consistent. Wish I’d known about him earlier.
BR – you are doing a good job in a very, very difficult, emotional environment and I, too, read this blog religiously. Oops! Can I say that?
February 28th, 2009 at 10:33 pm
Off topic, but the United States is down for the count, and I am not sure she is getting up.
Friends, both political parties are organized crime syndicates that provide protection for loot. They run a protection racket, and this credit crisis underscores my point. The little guy will get left holding the bag while the crooks ride off into the Hampton’s sunset. While we argue amongst ourselves, they steal us blind!
Until we can get the majority to agree with the above statement, I am not sure our country can enact fundamental change to steer the ship in the right direction. Sad really…..
February 28th, 2009 at 10:35 pm
It smacks of typical GOP propoganda, consistant with Rove and Rush – specifically, the blame the victim technique. While the question is academically interesting, the so what of it eludes me. So some CNBC sells out – not news. The particular hyporcracy of his rant is vaugely amusing, but spending any time at all on this loser is far too much.
February 28th, 2009 at 10:38 pm
I’m way late to the party here (though I did read the article at first when there was only 1 comment — but I was on the train to the city and viewing on my G1 so commenting wasn’t convenient, but I digress). It’s possible that whatever right-wing propaganda machine everyone refers to has grabbed this thing and run with it but I think what really catapulted it was the WH Press Sec responding directly to it. More specifically, the way he responded. I watched video of the speech he gave — mostly in response to that white-haired correspondent that SquawkBox always has on when they are covering White House stuff — and I have to say, Gibbs (WH Press Sec) is a bumbling idiot. Watch and listen to his response and it is so oddly reminiscent of W’s many speeches with the same mannerisms and voice inflections. It’s like he’s pleading with everyone to come down to his level of intelligence.
I hated W and am somewhat neutral on O at this point so don’t take this as flamebait for either side. All’s I’m saying is: if it was a conspiracy, then WH Press Sec Gibbs played right into it (wittingly or unwittingly) and if it wasn’t a conspiracy, well, who cares?
-Mike J
February 28th, 2009 at 10:41 pm
The difference between the liberals and us republicans – we are just as torqued off at our party for socializing everything and not capping spending. The liberals are still living in fantasy land.
But, blaming only the republicans when your heroes like Barney Frank, et al. are just as much to blame
February 28th, 2009 at 10:43 pm
gnomic Says:
“It smacks of typical GOP propoganda, consistant with Rove and Rush – specifically, the blame the victim technique.”
How about:
“It smacks of typical Democratic propoganda, consistant with Clinton – specifically, the blame the English language and its subtle nuances technique.”
Nice try at appearing uninterested in the subject matter but not being able to resist a poke at the GOP.
P.S. hyporcracy? Ya dems do have trouble with the native tongue.
February 28th, 2009 at 10:44 pm
If the John Birch Society is a right-wing extremist group, I guess Obama is a left-wing extremist. BTW, i am NOT a member.
From Wikipedia:
The John Birch Society says it is anti-totalitarian, particularly anti-socialist and anti-communist, and leans to libertarian. It seeks to limit the powers of government and defends what it sees as the original intention of the U.S. Constitution, based on Judeo-Christian principles. It opposes collectivism, including wealth redistribution, economic interventionism, socialism, communism, and fascism. In a 1983 edition of Crossfire, Congressman Larry McDonald (D-Georgia), then its newly appointed chairman, characterized the Society as belonging to the Old Right, rather than the new right.[9]
The John Birch Society opposed aspects of the Civil Rights Movement in the 1960s because of its concerns that the movement had communists in important positions. The Society opposed the 1964 Civil Rights Act, saying it was in violation of the Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution and overstepped the rights of individual states to enact laws regarding civil rights.
The Society is against a unified “one world government”, and has an immigration reduction view on immigration reform. It opposes the United Nations, the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), the Central America Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA), the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA), and other free trade agreements.
The Society argues that there is a devaluing of the US Constitution in favor of international government, and that this is not an accident. It cites David Rockefeller’s 2002 autobiography Memoirs in which Rockefeller writes, “Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as ‘internationalists’ and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure — one world, if you will. If that’s the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.”
February 28th, 2009 at 10:47 pm
In the times I’ve watched Santelli, I’ve always been impressed by his smarts and his no BS, South Side-Chicago delivery. He is certainly much smarter than the rest of them.
Something about his rant did seem a little bit off though — I’ve never pegged him as an activist. And Santelli had to know that his diatribe was going to catapult him into a hyper-political arena that was going to call his opinions into question going forward. With that at stake, I’m sure there was forethought that went into what he was saying and doing. It may not have been nefarious, but it wasn’t extemporaneous. And if he started out standing on principle, it’s going to be very hard for him to keep his feet there. Who knows, maybe he’s sick of CNBC and figured this would be a good stepping stone to bigger and better things.
February 28th, 2009 at 10:54 pm
Big Tony is right – BOTH parties are a screw job right now. My two sons and I watched the last parts of a 1972 musical called “1776.” The boys, 10 and 8, wanted to see more about the declaration of independence. Thank goodness for the internet, because I got to have them on my lap and we read it aloud. This part really hit home:
That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.
Don’t read that as anti-government – but a proper role of government. Jefferson carefully crafted these words – funny how you can make them apply to today.
February 28th, 2009 at 10:59 pm
Lols. “I’m mad as hell and I’m not going to take it anymore!”
I’ve looked at television news as a farce ever since Network…
February 28th, 2009 at 10:59 pm
I am surprised BR that you found the rant so out of character for Santelli. I did not find it particularly so.
To me, the playboy article seems speculative at best. The logic is that his rant was picked up by a site that had been registered (previously) to a republican talk-show producer, and that other sites sprang up quickly and carried the rant as well. (Really, the clip was carried by a number of outlets, both liberal and conservative.) The name of the previously-registered domain apparently proves Santelli’s rant was scripted? Perhaps those sites were opportunistic, but I fail to see the direct connection to Santelli. The article seems to lack any evidence of such a link. “What’s a little less obvious is Santelli’s link to all of this…”
Should where Santelli’s comments re-air alone impact his credibility to the extent being suggested?
February 28th, 2009 at 10:59 pm
Maj Tom,
not only are you correct that Big Tony identified the Important topic in all this, but, also, you are correct that Jefferson’s Declaration of Independence is as applicable Today, as it was when his Quill hit the Parchment.
you may like: http://www.nccs.net as you know, there are more than two young ones about..
February 28th, 2009 at 11:00 pm
Hey, Will Profit –
___
Uhhh… Yeah I’m a moron.
_________
Since you brought it up (from Wikipedia):
Gramm-Leach-Bliley: all Republicans
On May 6, 1999, the Senate passed the bills by a 54-44 vote along party lines (53 Republicans and one Democrat in favor; 44 Democrats opposed). On July 20, the House passed a different version of the bill on an uncontested and uncounted voice vote.
__________
The final bill – after negotions to reduce “redlining” by the lending institutions – was passed with 7 (D) and 1 (R) “No” votes in the Senate and 51 (D), 5 (R), and 1 (I) “No” votes in the house
So, I guess Clinton did it.
Since you read so much, maybe you can tell me exactly where the Glass-Stegal act requires, condones, or encourages loans to unquailfied borrowers.
When you get done with that, maybe you can explain why we have such a high default rate among prime borrowers.
Lets not forget who passed Glass-Steagall Act, and why.
Finally, explain this away:
Goal: Increase Minority Homeowners by 5.5 Million in a Decade
Posted by Barry Ritholtz on Tuesday, October 14, 2008 | 10:00 AM
in Politics | Taxes and Policy | UnScience
Guess who’s goal this was? You might be surprised:
“More and more people own their homes in America today. Two-thirds of all Americans own their homes, yet we have a problem here in America because few than half of the Hispanics and half the African Americans own the home. That’s a home ownership gap.
It’s a — it’s a gap that we’ve got to work together to close for the good of our country, for the sake of a more hopeful future. We’ve got to work to knock down the barriers that have created a home ownership gap. I set an ambitious goal. It’s one that I believe we can achieve. It’s a clear goal, that by the end of this decade we’ll increase the number of minority homeowners by at least 5.5 million families . . .
Home ownership is also an important part of our economic vitality. If — when we meet this project, this goal, according to our Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, we will have added an additional $256 billion to the economy by encouraging 5.5 million new home owners in America; the activity — the economic activity stimulated with the additional purchasers, the additional buyers, the additional demand will be upwards of $256 billion. And that’s important because it will help people find work.”
- George W. Bush, U.S. President, October 15, 2002 1:55 P.M.
This economic collapse is due to a lack of law enforcement by the Bush Administration. Feckless boobs one and all.
I’ll agree to read more if you agree to pull your head out of your ass.
February 28th, 2009 at 11:01 pm
I just amazed that Barry would fall for such a thing and allow himself to be used by the Obama mafia. I saw Santelli’s original rant and a lot of replays. Nothing was phony about it. If someone had told him they were planning a teaparty, so what if he hyped it? Conspiracy? Silly.
I think Barry has elevated his status with the lefties and ruined his reputation for objectivity. He’s the same guy who said there was no speculation in oil futures, that the politicians weren’t to blame for Fannie and Freddie.
Who’s paying Barry to post this crap?
~~~
BR: I have “fallen” for nothing. I wrote:
Your false assumptions betray you, sir . . .
February 28th, 2009 at 11:04 pm
Corrction “Glass-Stegal act requires, condones, or encourages loans to unquailfied borrowers”
should be Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act. . . .
February 28th, 2009 at 11:04 pm
Barry Ritholtz Says:
February 28th, 2009 at 7:23 pm
I would love if some of you smart guys / gals could fisk the actual Playboy article.
I want to know — is this accurate? Do their allegations hold water?
So far, I’ve only read I believe it/I don’t.
You people are pretty savvy — please prove/disprove this.
…..Oh boy the kids have had a field day with this one…….I knew they would……For all you who think Santelli is a hero/pure as the driven snow etc. believe me he’s in a bit of trouble as are CNBC if this proves accurate whatever you think……CNBC has to preserve the illusion of having some integrity…..Remember Dan Rather…….Who knows whether it’s true….. No doubt we’ll find out……
February 28th, 2009 at 11:10 pm
Hey Barry, Can’t believe that you thought the Rant was faux.. I had a strange feeling about when I saw he. And Rick does rant a lot, for sure.
Even more, the last few weeks many of the CNBC hosts have become more and more shrill regarding the Obama administration. I have watched them for years, having it on in the background during the day. I don’t remember anything like these kinds of coverage when Bush was president and things were falling apart fiscally. I do believe that they have lost their integrity and that many of them have gone the way of Kudlow, who was and is and always will be a Republican shill.
I have switched to Bloomberg. Don’t intend to go back.
February 28th, 2009 at 11:13 pm
Since you read so much, maybe you can tell me exactly where the Glass-Stegal act requires, condones, or encourages loans to unquailfied borrowers.
When you get done with that, maybe you can explain why we have such a high default rate among prime borrowers.
Good to see that you can read!
“Home ownership is also an important part of our economic vitality’ True.
A right guaranteed by the Constitution. No
Marcus Aurelius said:
“Since you read so much, maybe you can tell me exactly where the Glass-Stegal act requires, condones, or encourages loans to unquailfied borrowers.
When you get done with that, maybe you can explain why we have such a high default rate among prime borrowers.”
Marcus, if you can’t connect the dots yourself, please don’t expect the grown ups to explain it. You are a dolt.
“
February 28th, 2009 at 11:16 pm
P.S. Marcus, What do you care any ways. It’s those of us with jobs who are getting screwed.
February 28th, 2009 at 11:16 pm
I have to agree with Mike J. I’m a big supporter of Obama and have been very under-impressed with Gibbs.
And I agree with Will Profit as well. This isn’t about GOP versus the Dems —
It’s about Americans over 40 versus everyone under 40.
The Boomers have underpaid their taxes for decades, creating giant structural imbalances that precipitated many of our current problems (which have only just begun). As a result, Gen Xers were sold overpriced college tuitions, overpriced health care, overpriced houses to keep it all spinning — only to find stagnant wages and outsourcing. The solution was taking on too much debt and too much risk to maintain the lifestyle they were told they were entitled to.
Now that the system has melted down, it’s the top earning Gen-Xers who will be tasked (and taxed) with the clean-up in their prime earning years, while Boomers try to build a fortress around what’s left of their 401Ks. The Gen Xers who lean right — and who have short memories — will paint themselves as fiscal conservatives and rail at the inequity of it all. But the mistakes were made long ago. Rather than being mad at congress, at Paulson and Bernanke, they should really storming the gates of their parents’ gated communities.
February 28th, 2009 at 11:17 pm
Yeh I was very surprised by Santelli’s remarks even though it never surprises me when someone says something that seems so purposefully antagonistic. The other thing that blows me away is how simple minded some of these “bright” people seem to be regarding the economy or the state of housing. The plan Obama put out was a complete PR Stunt and if saving a few dollars a month will be the deciding factor for a family to stay in a home that is 150,000 under water so be it. The reality is that we have people that are now in trouble with their mortgages because of job loss or other significant factors that may or may not include being a loser. This was never a subprime crisis regardless of how dizzy cnbc was from spinning so hard last year. It was an issue deeply rooted in the financial paper and credit default swap markets. There is no way a minute number of foreclosures could bring down the entire world financial system if these derivative products were not involved. I am sick and tired of hearing anyone try, including santelli, to blame this crisis on a few homeowners who tried to scam the system. It will happen again and people will try to flip homes and get short term mortgages etc etc in order to get ahead but it could never take down the world economy without the crafting of Wall Street. By blanketing the entire group of people who may be having trouble keeping their homes as losers santelli is being foolish to say the least. He would be more accurate to call the Wall Street bankers and financial “geniuses” losers. They are the ones that have been leeching and sucking off the government now for two years as if they have the right to claim tax payer money as their own. It is idiotic to think this PR stunt by the government will really help anyone without significant principal write downs. By the time someone jumps through all the guidelines and hoops required they could be another 20 or 30 k in the hole. I am all for free markets and personal responsibility and think there are people that have tried to game the system. However, the vast majority of homeowners are not losers. Mortgages are still being paid on time by well over 90% of the people in the country. The individual homeowner has been used as a whipping post in order to let the banks and brokers milk the system for 2 more years while try to keep people from realizing they have to make a very important financial decision with their real estate. When values were down 15% the case could be made that is it much more valuable to keep the home and your credit in tact rather than walk away. However, the story is not the same when people are 35-45% or more underwater. The home can become an albatross around someone’s neck and the financially prudent thing to do would be to walk away if something drastic isn’t done with the principal. I would imagine there are many bright, successful, hardworking winners out there that may have to make just such a decision if we continue to see falling prices. (Which is not out of the question if we keep letting the big banks yank the chain of government whenever they need capital)? Can any financial adviser actually look a homeowner straight in the eye and say although your home is 50% underwater, you will be paying mostly interest over the next 10 years with little principal reduction, your 20% down payment is wiped out, and the economy is crap, and the government seems set on bailing out big banks while housing prices tank, but all that being said, you should go right no paying your mortgage and hope your home goes up 150% in the next 10 years in order to get you back to even? I highly doubt anyone with integrity could tell their clients that this sounds like a good idea. Santelli says some great things on air but this wasn’t one of them.
February 28th, 2009 at 11:21 pm
Selected Flame Bait:
“Still waiting for one of the limp wristed liberals on this board to challenge the multiplier effect of the stimulus that Santelli spoke of.”
“Many of you appear to be quite emotional about this issue, yet other than Santelli using the harsh term “losers,” or calling out Obama, I don’t see what there is to be disgruntled about. Santelli has been against the bailouts from day 1, as stated above by “Maj Tom.” I am willing to bet that most of you generally agreed with Santelli’s opinions right up until the point where he called out your massiah. After that he was just a political shill in your minds.”
Really – he is not a “journalist.” Just the fact you make that comment means you don’t watch or know anything about him… He reports the numbers at 7:30 CT from the pit. That is it, he isn’t an investigative reporter, he doesn’t cover other news. Occasionally, Kernen asks an opinion when the news comes out. As of late – the Liesman/Santelli debate has been comical. This rant from Rick wasn’t even his best. But I will say, these are rare, very rare.
Go youtube Santelli and watch the better ones – and I might add – when he was bashing the bush administration. Regardless – do some research before you make a post – that way you won’t embarass yourself in front of these other posters”
“The difference between the liberals and us republicans – we are just as torqued off at our party for socializing everything and not capping spending. The liberals are still living in fantasy land.
But, blaming only the republicans when your heroes like Barney Frank, et al. are just as much to blame:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MsureGT_cSi7Rs&feature=related
If you want to hang your hat on these idiots – go for it. These videos are priceless and gee – in their own words.”
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++=
You really have be kidding. “Now we can all agree that you are a bunch of cocksucing assholes, so who can claim that the sky is not Blue?”
Santelli is clearly not a journalist now is the whole crux of the argument. There is a difference between editorial and reporting. There used to be at least. If you don’t understand that, you are correct. You are redefining journalism.
And to the one point above on Santelli and Bush. He piled on just like everyone else when it was safe, and even then he had a hard time actually using NAMES.
Where do you people live? Do you ever leave the house?
The numbers on this mess speak for themselves. In a supposed housing crisis, we have spent or guaranteed 9.7 Billion Dollars, or enough to pay off 90% of all home mortgages. The math is clearly not adding up with the narrative that you espose. Again, numbers over ideology. I’ll give you the stimulus, so here is the score card. Banks-8.4 Billion People- 1.5 Billion. There is of course some wiggle room on the numbers, but there is a clear favor to the Banks/Wall st.
If you don’t understand how Guarantees and Spending are the same thing, please read up on it before you try and “add” anything more.
And shove that limp wristed multiplier straight up your ass, I think you have a boogger hanging.
February 28th, 2009 at 11:23 pm
Thanks Mark,
Good site for the boys. Also, we talked about what happened to each of the signers and the costs associated with signing the declaration.
For Marcus,
This economic collapse is due to a lack of law enforcement by the Bush Administration. Feckless boobs one and all.
This kind of proves your inability to determine fault among your party. At this point, your credibility is gone and your rhetoric meaningless. The collapse occurred due to easy credit and failed Central Bank policies.
February 28th, 2009 at 11:39 pm
Barry,
This has been picked up by multiple blogs in just a few hours, so I would hope we’ll hear much more about this investigation.
Thanks for catching this one early!
February 28th, 2009 at 11:43 pm
this: ” The individual homeowner has been used as a whipping post in order to let the banks and brokers milk the system for 2 more years while try to keep people from realizing they have to make a very important financial decision with their real estate.”–workedlate
is a key insight that most miss, while the udder is being sucked dry..
Maj Tom,
de nada, they also make good fund-raisers–better than over-priced ‘hoagies’, or, worse, tins of flavored popcorn.. )
and, with this: “we talked about what happened to each of the signers and the costs associated with signing the declaration.” is good, they Knew there were, but, two choices–as Patrick Henry gave rise to.
They were Men, and, surely, even the Women, strong enough to rally to, rather than shirk, their responsibilities. For they knew well, even if we’ve forgotten, the alternative.
February 28th, 2009 at 11:58 pm
I have mixed thoughts on Santelli…I have heard him say things that I totally agree with…then he’ll be in studio and be a total limp noodle, agreeing with vapid analysis…makes me think maybe some of his spiels are pre-meditated and he can’t really think on his feet. That would support the conspiracy theory along with the incredible outsized attention he got this week.
March 1st, 2009 at 12:01 am
It definitely seemed premeditated.
March 1st, 2009 at 12:14 am
BR, it looks like you hit a nerve.
“You can tell who is hurtin’ by who is doin’ all the yellin’” (sounds like something Mark Twain would say….)
March 1st, 2009 at 12:25 am
CNBC is like a bad television drama about a financial news network.
The dubious advice, the ubiquitous bottom talk, the ranting, the political 2 cents… it’s one big Look At Me! – fest and it mirrors the overactive, erratic and impulsive behavior of our markets. It gets the big news first by virtue of its stature and some of the reporting is vital stuff, it has to be one of many options in times like these. Plus it’s purdy.
@ Peter Davies 8:32 pm
http://tbm.thebigmoney.com/articles/impressions/2009/02/05/fighting-over-money
March 1st, 2009 at 12:57 am
Maj Tom Says:
February 28th, 2009 at 11:23 pm
“This kind of proves your inability to determine fault among your party. At this point, your credibility is gone and your rhetoric meaningless. The collapse occurred due to easy credit and failed Central Bank policies.”
___________
What about the SEC looking the other way as all of the fraud was turned into toxic securities and distributed around the world? What about the FED and low interest rates (admittedly not law enforcement, but still). What about the DoJ and FBI – they didn’t see anything wrong while all of this was going on? All under the control of the Executive Branch. Meaningless. Right.
I don’t have a party, but I know a criminal enterprise when I see it. Defend it if you want, sucker.
March 1st, 2009 at 1:02 am
will profit Says:
February 28th, 2009 at 11:16 pm
P.S. Marcus, What do you care any ways. It’s those of us with jobs who are getting screwed.
________
Wow. I’m crushed. You can’t even answer a straight question. As for getting screwed, why don’t you stop making excuses for the folks who are putting it to your worn out ass.
March 1st, 2009 at 1:24 am
For another take on the rant, check out
”
They used to hang you for sleeping at your post”
http://daddywhatsarepublican.blogspot.com/2009/02/they-used-to-hang-you-for-sleeping-at.html
March 1st, 2009 at 1:27 am
If somebody can find out the identity of the “trader”/cheerleader in the foreground of the “Santelli Rant,” I would be curious to know who he is.
March 1st, 2009 at 1:27 am
Seems there are a lot of conspiracy theorists (including Barry) who didn’t like the ‘rant’ but have little evidence that is was contrived. Here’s a nutty idea… argue about the rant on it merits or shortcomings. Regardless of whether this was another “right-winged conspiracy” the Santelli rant was motivating to a lot off people. Who cares if he thought about it beforehand or it was spur-of-the-moment? Many people, including myself, think he was dead-on and those that disagree just want to obfuscate.
March 1st, 2009 at 1:58 am
Barry,
Typically I am 100% on board with you. However, this time I think you have gone off the reservation.
Santelli was railing against ALL of the bail outs ALL year long. Go do a little homework and see for yourself. He was practically the ONLY sane voice on CNBC most days … well except for the days when you were on too Barry.
March 1st, 2009 at 2:08 am
In case any of you missed it, the reality is this country is well along the way to an all out depression and NOTHING Obama has done in his very short time in office could be considered a direct credible cause for that situation.
Not by anyone sane, rational and honest anyway.
Unfortunately, these days that criteria that seems to exclude about 95% of the righties I read on the various blogs I visit. Including this one.
March 1st, 2009 at 2:14 am
spigzone says: that link deserves to be posted. soooo true.
“How could those borrowers have been so stupid?” It’s a question you hear a lot these days. How could they have thought it was a good idea to buy houses at ridiculously inflated prices, to take out adjusted rate and interest only mortgages, to commit to payments that left almost nothing in monthly household budgets?
How could they have believed all these obviously idiotic notions? Well, for one thing, they watched CNBC and other financial programming on cable (check here for an amusing example). A few years ago the dial was filled with experts dismissing doomsayers like Roubini and Krugman, assuring us that there was no housing bubble, that the financial markets were fine, that things were great in the Bush boom and with less regulation and a few more tax cuts the would be even better.
Rick Santelli started at CNBC in 1999, just in time to be a part of the worst and most irresponsible journalism of the past eighty years and you will have to look hard to find anything he said before the crisis that was prescient or even useful. In the old days, they would execute a soldier for sleeping on his watch. Now he bitches about coddling the survivors of the ambush and we give him a half million hits on YouTube. ?
March 1st, 2009 at 2:33 am
Santelli’s rant was nothing new. He’s been harping on this forever. Its the same when Ron Paul gets hits when asks questions of the Fed Chair – HE ALWAYS ASKS THE SAME QUESTIONS. Rick has been on this forever. Its kind of boring actually, but I’m glad the movement has caught fire.
Oooooooohhhhhhhhhhhhhh
A website popped up the same day.
What is this? 1994? Is it that hard to create a website in a day?
As soon as it was on…………the traders i follow on twitter were going nuts about it – not stocktwits.
What’s the matter barry? This organic grassroots movement isn’t on your side of the ideological divide?
And, if CNBC wanted to pimp something of this nature what the hell took em so long?
You’ve now ventured in to Donald Luskin land.
March 1st, 2009 at 3:36 am
Take a moment to consider the glorious irony of Playboy magazine accusing someone else of being fake. Thank you for that collective moment, as you just became me for a second.
I am the publisher of The Daily Bail. I have been alternating between laughter and anger all evening as I consider their accusations Their charges about us are categorically untrue. My full rsponse is below.
http://dailybail.com/home/2009/3/1/the-mother-of-all-irony-playboy-magazine-targets-the-daily-b.html
Neither of the writers made any attempt to contact me prior to posting their article. We are a completely independent news site focused exclusively on the bailouts. We have no absolutely no affiliation with or funding from any right-wing political groups. We have no relationships with any centrist or liberal groups either. Did I mention that we are independent.
Thank you for having an open mind until you have read my response. I extend the same invitation to the Playboy writers Mark Ames and Yahsa Levine. I wish you had offerred me the courtesy of contacting me before you dragged our name through the mud.
As you read in my response, outside of their backhanded slap at our site, I believe the writers did some excellent investigative work for the piece. I believe they are correct that Eric Odom and his cohorts have gotten a hold of this issue. And they don’t seem to be hiding the fact that they orgainzed the facebook pages for all the tea parties this weekend. In my view, there is no scandal here, unless it is shown that Santelli was in cahoots with these groups.
I personally hope like Barry that the allegations are untrue. I am a big fan of Santelli personally and I will be disappointed if we learn that his rant was somehow staged. However, if all we hear is that Odom got involved after the Santelli rant, then there’s nothing here to chew on.
Just my 2 cents.
Thanks,
The Daily Bail
March 1st, 2009 at 4:58 am
Barry,
It is interestingly surprising that someone as rational as you is falling for this.
The quote and article offers only innuendo and coincidence without any evidence.
Rick Santelli has been hitting on these themes for months, and is, in his own way, as usual, quite tenacious (if not emotional), even if one questions whether his Nixonian “silent majority” reference isn’t a bit out of day – and Santelli is especially quick to defend when egged on by Joe Kernan and other colleagues, as they enjoy doing.
A Boston Tea Party analogue is no new invention – that’s been going on for decades, whether against Republicans or Democrats in office, and there are many who make use of it, whether individually or with financial backing of one sort or another.
What pushed this viral on a big scale was simply the Drudge Report headline played in big red letters all day – hey, it’s an entertaining clip, whichever view on takes on the subject, rational or emotional. And the fact that everyone today is now linked in and linked up. Sort of a flash mob if you will – that’s the “news” of this story, if there is any.
That some websites that have used the Tea Party analogue in past months have jumped on this (the site you reference is not the only one), is of course to be expected. I would too, had I been using the meme.
Barry, do stay classy. And stay coolly rational. You really ought not to be peddling innuendo and conspiracy.
The “news” here is perhaps that everyone, rational and reasonable types like Barry included, do start to believe anything in an environment that is uncertain, a time of troubles, and severely pressuring all kinds of people in all kinds of ways.
If guys like Barry start adding to the irrationality, that doesn’t portend well for the rest in the upcoming months – truly the makings of some upsetting discontinuities in the months to come, if not here in America, certainly around the world.
Best regards in commentary that doesn’t cast such unnecessary dispersion.
~~~
BR: Your reading comprehension skills need some work. I wrote:
I have fallen for nothing. You good sir, are suffering from selective perception.
March 1st, 2009 at 5:09 am
I think everyone may be getting extremely frustrating with the state of the economy and a horrible start to the new year. Maybe Santelli was just showing some general frustration about everything and went a little over the top. I just don’t understand why he thought this was the most egregious thing to rant about over the past month.
I have read a lot of great commments on here today….I appreciate the post people
http://financialrealityrevisited.blogspot.com/
March 1st, 2009 at 6:46 am
spigzone:
while you make some good points here: March 1st, 2009 at 2:14 am
this: “just in time to be a part of the worst and most irresponsible journalism of the past eighty years”, seems to me to be tenuous, at best.
Our ‘jounalistic’ Establishment has been spurious for many moon, what should make one think that the period you are referring to is/was any worse than any other?
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/spurious
~~
btw, The Daily Bail is a worthwhile read. It is outlets like TDB, y TBP, that make it easier to understand why the MSM is losing readership and hemorrhaging cash and influence..
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/hemorrhaging
March 1st, 2009 at 6:47 am
CNBC’s line has been money, money, money for big banks; Chapter 11/7/13 for everyone else.
They have been remarkably consistent in their inconsistency. Early on, Santelli started a rant against TARP that was not nearly so well publicized, then toed the line.
Yes, his current rant is fake–see first sentence–but ratings drove it.
The Playboy excerpt sounds sordid enough to be believable, but ignores the simpler explanation of rating $. To paraphrase a famous quote, never attribute to conspiracy that which is due to mere confluence of greed.
March 1st, 2009 at 7:04 am
This: “February 23, 2009
The Abyss Stares Back
The public perception of the ongoing fiasco in governance has moved from sheer, mute incomprehension to goggle-eyed panic as the scrims of unreality peel away revealing something like a national death-watch scene in history’s intensive care unit. Is the USA in recession, depression, or collapse? People are at least beginning to ask. Nature’s way of hinting that something truly creepy may be up is when both Paul Volcker and George Soros both declare on the same day that the economic landscape is looking darker than the Great Depression.
Those tuned into the media-waves were enchanted, in a related instance, by Rick Santelli’s grand moment of theater in the Chicago trader’s pit last week when he seemed to ignite the first spark of revolution by demonstrating that bail-out fatigue had morphed into high emotion — and that the emotion could be marshaled against public policy. The traders in the pit on-screen seemed to color up and buzz loudly, like ordinary grasshoppers turning into angry locusts preparing to ravage a waiting valley. “Are you listening, President Obama?” Mr. Santelli asked portentously.
In the broad blogging margins of the web that orbit the mainstream media like the rings of Saturn, an awful lot of reasonable people have begun to ask whether President Obama is a stooge of whatever remains of Wall Street, with Citigroup and Goldman Sachs’s puppeteer, Robert Rubin, pulling strings behind an arras in the Oval Office. Personally, I doubt it, but it is still a little hard to understand what the President is up to. For one thing, the stimulus package, so-called, looks more and more like national sub-prime mortgage itself, a bad bargain made under less-than-realistic terms, with future obligations fobbed onto whoever inhabits this corner of the world for the next seven hundred years — and all to pay for a bunch of granite counter-tops and flat-screen TVs.
I suppose Mr. Obama is burdened with the knowledge that the economic truth is so much worse than he imagined back in November that there is simply nothing to do at this point except pretend to serve up a “tasting menu” of rescue plans in the hope that markets and mechanisms might be conned back into compliance with our wish keep getting something-for-nothing forever. FDR already used the fear of fear itself trope, so Mr. O is left with little more than displaying pluck and confidence in the face of overwhelming bad news….”
from: http://www.kunstler.com/ is part of his Cluster**** Nation Chronicles series..
his= James Howard Kunstler
provides a different take on Santelli’s piece, and from a different thread, more background for the “President Joe Cool”-appellation for the O-one..
March 1st, 2009 at 7:33 am
Hi Barry,
I’m surprised that the Playboy article didn’t reference this website:
http://www.surgeusa.org/actions/tea_party.htm
“Thank you Rick Santelli”
I think Santelli’s rant coincided with their google advertising campaign. Someone needs to ask Santelli about that.
March 1st, 2009 at 7:34 am
Just go to http://www.register.com, hit the WhoIs link at top, type in ChicagoTeaParty.com and do the captcha. It returns the DNS entry for the domain name. You’ll get this:
Registrant:
Zachary Christenson
849 N. Franklin
Chicago, Illinois 60610
United States
Registered through: GoDaddy.com, Inc. (http://www.godaddy.com)
Domain Name: CHICAGOTEAPARTY.COM
Created on: 03-Aug-08
Expires on: 03-Aug-09
Last Updated on: 03-Aug-08
Administrative Contact:
Christenson, Zachary zackchristenson@mac.com
849 N. Franklin
Chicago, Illinois 60610
United States
(248) 219-8215 Fax —
Technical Contact:
Christenson, Zachary zackchristenson@mac.com
849 N. Franklin
Chicago, Illinois 60610
United States
(248) 219-8215 Fax –
March 1st, 2009 at 7:34 am
I publish and write the Daily Bail. I have posted a response to the allegations by Playboy magazine made against our site. I am writing you personally so that you know their allegations about me are categorically untrue. It’s unfortunate because I believe that the article did some great investigative work and then at the end they threw me under the bus for no apparent reason. Apparently, the authors just assumed we were part of this conspiracy because of my own personal excitement about the prospect of a mid-summer tea party. They never bothered to contact me for explanation or comment of any sort.
My response to their article is here. Please read it so you know just how wrong they were about me and my politics.
http://dailybail.com/home/2009/3/1/the-mother-of-all-irony-playboy-magazine-targets-the-daily-b.html
March 1st, 2009 at 7:40 am
Playboy said “How did a minor-league TV figure, whose contract with CNBC is due this summer….”
Sounds to me like he’s got a really good agent(with a fabulous PR arm) that is renegotiating his contract. I bet he gets a new contract, better terms than the last one. (how mainstream were the markets he covered when he signed his last contract)?
Santelli was never used as much as he is now on CNBC. He struck a chord and provided a huge interest in CNBC shows. What is peculiar is that, if anything, CNBC leans toward bullish, happy talk.
Santelli used to speak in tongues. Answering questions with questions…most of his reports were/are incomprehensible to the occasional viewer, savvy on markets or not.
March 1st, 2009 at 8:26 am
Why does the publisher of dailybail, include both Steve and Castrosomething? [BR: I added Steve, not seeing the first one] Reminds me of the multiple mentions of dailybail on CR’s comment pages, by supposed multiple blog posters. Pick an identity if you’re gonna post that much. You do have a nice site.
On this tea party thing, the original tea party was not a bunch of pansies running to the corner market to grab a 100 pack of Luzinanne. It was a real insurrection. I don’t know what the modern day counterpart to that would be, but running the the grocery store to buy something with your own money so you can dump it into the harbor in front of Grant Park is not it. Its a pseudo-re-enactment that accomplishes nothing.
Leading a estimated payments or withholding protest that actually takes off may be a better use of your time Santelli. But this was just a stunt and not real anyway, no one will really stand up for themselves anymore.
That stuff in the Declaration of Independence? Yeah Right, I ain’t going to Gitmo to defend Jeffersonian ideals for America. As Bush said, its a GD piece of paper. I don’t even know what country I live in anymore. Lies my teacher told me, indeed.
March 1st, 2009 at 8:42 am
I did go out Barry, so just got to read you question this morning..and I have one for you…
Why does whether it was planted on not concern you?
And no, I don’t mean it THAT way, I mean, who cares? The question is: Was the point under contention valid, and if it was, what was the response?
How the sausage was made doesn’t concern me in the least…
March 1st, 2009 at 9:14 am
If the man who threw shoes at Bush planned it for a couple of days or whether it was spontaneous doesn’t matter, the point of contention, whether it was a valid point, is ALL that really matters…
Whether an individual or an organization, doesn’t detract from its validity…
If you marched against the Vietnam War in Washington, but didn’t have a permit…less valid, more valid…or in my opinion, inconsequential in the scope of the question…
March 1st, 2009 at 9:45 am
CESPNBC is supposed to provide rapid, in-depth and trustworthy information. I want insight into the markets, I don’t want self-indulgent political ranting and spewing. I could give a shit about the ideological bent of someone who is supposed to provide numbers and trends. A constructive market related opinion or a different viewpoint on how the government should handle things is fine, but this grandstanding is nothing but public masturbation, it reeks of trying to make a mark, believing that YOU and YOUR biases are as vital as the numbers that fluctuate above your head and crawl by below your ass (your chin if you’re seated).
All I know is that a number of pundits on this channel started to become more politically vocal since O came in. Their frantic compulsion to focus ideologically on current policy exhibits the desire to make all of this someone else’s fault as quickly as possible, it neglects how we got here and trivializes where we’re going. Spitting out political or ideological slants when you are supposed be reporting betrays the purity of providing comprehensive and truthful information.
Consider, the folks at CESPNBC obviously think that they move the market. I recall someone on the network saying that the market dropped when Gasparino reported that there was a meeting convened at Goldman to discuss the dismay over Geithner’s detail deficient episode. They know and relish their influence in the financial sphere but they seem to disregard their influence on the confidence of the markets. Knowledge is power. This pseudo-revolutionary class warfare sopaboxin’ is opportunistic and counterproductive garbage. Don’t be part of the problem, don’t be part of the solution… just give us the facts, damn it!
And while you’re at it, fire that Kneale guy. He’s a fuckin’ idiot.
March 1st, 2009 at 9:51 am
I got to say it seems weird. It could be they heard it said sometime before. I would have wondered if they registered other city names with tea party in them? I aslo have to wonder if both sides are smearing each other trying to stop or help the story. In short I dont really trust much on CNBC or Drudge or most of the MSM. Everything I hear I alwasy ask the question what was the point of the story? As for this yes it is possible it was setup, but the story moved beyond this to ask the fundamental question is this the right way to do things? I would say no. I am happy to hear other people think so. as well.
March 1st, 2009 at 9:58 am
You Obama/Clinton queens really make me nauseous! Go take your fiat currencies, managed economies, bleeding hearts, government subsides, political correctness and run off to Boys Town and read Keynesian erotica….
LOL! Seriously, stop manipulating the truth, free markets didn’t cause this mess it was your Keynesian tinkering that did!!!!
~~~
BR: Thats your argument? Keynesian tinkering?
You must have missed the class where they taught Never play rugby without a helmet…
March 1st, 2009 at 10:13 am
ronin:
Here’s your “free markets”
http://counterpunch.org/hudson02232009.html
BTW: You seem to gravitate toward homoerotica in your comment. Is that you, Senator Craig?
March 1st, 2009 at 10:14 am
Bob the unemployed posts “You can tell who is hurtin’ by who is doin’ all the yellin’” (sounds like something Mark Twain would say….)”
I’ve learned there are 2 sides to the trade .. how about this spin ..
You can tell who is worried by who is doin’ all the subversion
___
Hit a nerve .. ya.. interesting pile of comments … I give alot of High 5s
….. and some wake ups before it’s to late .. then again maybe those are just playing their book like a pro
March 1st, 2009 at 10:16 am
I’m I the only one shocked at the number of replies to this thread? 150+?!?!?
I think Barry has struck a nerve.
March 1st, 2009 at 10:20 am
Barry,
I understand why you gave the Daily Bail fellow some space to deny the allegations, but frankly his denials leave me cold. All he really says in them is that he’s innocent. I can find you a few dozen convicted killers on Death Row who claim to be in the same boat. He’s just another right-winger who says he loves President Obama but hates the Democratic Party. Who else goes on that list?
John Boehner
John McCain
Mitch McConnell
Eric Cantor
Not terribly convincing.
March 1st, 2009 at 10:20 am
@Andrew Shaw
The reason there were 2 posts under 2 different names is Barry did the 2nd post. I emailed him this morning personally and he wanted to make sure people saw my response to the Playboy article. My name is given in my private emails and he used my first name when he made the post. It’s perfectly fine with me and I appreciate greatly that he stood up for me.
I promise there is no conspiracy with The Daily Bail. I am one person trying to do something. I am supported by no one but myself in this endeavor. And every single opinion you read is my own.
I flail on people from both sides of the aisle with equal venom. Here is a short excerpt from today’s post illustrating some of my focus:
I believe the bailouts are nothing short of generational rape. Particularly the bank bailouts, plus Fannie, Freddie and AIG. I believe Henry Paulson is a criminal. Both for his role in creating this crisis in 2004 with the SEC rule change that allowed leverage to expand, as well as his decision to bailout AIG so that Goldman Sachs (his former firm from whom he received a $600 million tax-free severance in 2006) would be protected.
Read the following story for more on Paulson’s role in this crisis.
http://dailybail.com/home/2009/2/23/the-bank-bailout-verdict-we-are-a-nation-led-by-idiots.html
Thanks for your comment and again thanks Barry.
Steve
March 1st, 2009 at 10:24 am
….Just came back to see how the bunfight was going. This guy’
Steve Says:
March 1st, 2009 at 7:34 am
…… says the whole thing is incorrect but when you actually read his piece he actually says only part of it is incorrect as far as he knows……The blogosphere as usual filled with its own self importance is clearly going to have fun with this for days but what really matters is if the story is proved correct and gains wider currency….if it doesn’t it will be gone in 24 hours…..if it does Santelli and CNBC are in some difficulty…..not the end of the world but not good for a financial cable channel that has to concern itself with its perceived probity……the problem in the wider political context which all my conservative friends here are missing is that it’s going to reinforce the general public perception that the Republican are just engaging in more rather sleazy political tactics…..that’s not to say the Democrats don’t resort to similar tactics at times……but the there’s no doubt the the GOP are perceived to be the boys when it comes to dirty pool…….None of the Republican fans here (and I’ve voted both ways) are going to agree but there’s a growing view their party is under the direction of a bunch of nut cases like Limbaugh and co….and this sort of stuff just reinforces that impression……the long term effects of tainting your brand with this sort of stuff are not good however much they believe otherwise.
March 1st, 2009 at 10:27 am
Right after I saw the Santelli rant I mentioned to a friend that it was not true Santelli. Something seemed off. He is the only one on that show that ever makes any sense so it will be interesting how this plays out.
Back in 2006 I registered Wallstreetcorruption.com… Too bad I can’t write worth crap or might of been a hit. Who wouldn’t want to hit that link in the last year. Maybe I should just link it to CNBC so people can experience it first hand.
March 1st, 2009 at 10:35 am
What has a “Faux feel to it” is the way many here are trying to discredit a very authentic feeling that is emerging quickly among the people who make this country work. Frightening, is it?
March 1st, 2009 at 10:38 am
BR,
Thanks for posting the transcript. I love when Santelli says this:
SANTELLI: Listen, all’s I know is, is that there’s only about 5 percent of the floor population here right now, and I talk loud enough they can all hear me. So if you want to ask ‘em anything, let me know. These guys are pretty straightforward, and my guess is, a pretty good statistical cross-section of America, the silent majority.
Uh….yeah…the majority of Americans are fat, middle-aged white multi-millionaires.
March 1st, 2009 at 10:54 am
@franklin411
I wish I knew what it would take to convince people who doubt me and the only way I know how is to be share who I am. If you read what I write on a daily basis, you would have no question that I loathe both parties with an equal venom. There is no political bent to the site whatsoever.
It would probably not surprise you to know that the last presidential candidate that excited me was Ross Perot. Again, please read my stuff if you have lingering doubts. I have been nervously obsessing about federal bankruptcy and debt default for 20 years.
It really is just me in an office in Bloomington, Indiana with no support from any groups, political or otherwise, trying to fight these friggin’ bailouts.
I’m sorry there’s no conspiracy, but sometimes people just do things because they are pissed off and tired of taking the shaft. I’m that guy.
Thanks for your comments.
March 1st, 2009 at 11:21 am
Castro,
Rereading the article, I noted that it doesn’t really allege much of anything against your blog. It really just says that you’re based in Chicago, which you can easily disprove to the authors. I hope they take it out, but it doesn’t prove or disprove the article’s overall claim that the rant was staged and disseminated through a network of shill websites. Yours just seems to be tossed in to the mix by virtue of its anti-bailout stance and the idea that it’s located in Chicago, but it’s not listed as one of the main culprits. They could delete all references to your site and it wouldn’t detract from the case for a staged rant in the least, so I hope they do.
Mainly, I wanted to make the point that politics makes plenty of strange and not-so-strange bedfellows.
Good luck.
March 1st, 2009 at 11:23 am
I’m curious as to how many people Santelli actually resonates with. I mean I must have clicked that video 30 or 40 times, it circulated no doubt. Don’t think I watched it all the way through once though, that dude just comes off as a major league frathole d-bag. And I actually agree with some of what he’s saying. Since when has smug rich white douche been the recipe for a populist leader? Come on people the reason the southern charm thing works is cause of the *charm* bit not the white asshole bit…. Translating to Chicago or NY (or Joe the Plumber Ohio for that matter) just doesn’t work.
March 1st, 2009 at 11:31 am
AndrewShaw Says @ 8:26 am “On this tea party thing, the original tea party was not a bunch of pansies running to the corner market to grab a 100 pack of Luzinanne. It was a real insurrection. I don’t know what the modern day counterpart to that would be …. ”
and they can’t buy the tea with a credit card that gets defaulted on … it’ll ricochet back at us all
March 1st, 2009 at 11:33 am
The original Boston Tea Party was planned, too.
Meanwhile, Playboy = Bimbo Eruptions
March 1st, 2009 at 11:48 am
The thing that hit me as “odd” with the Santelli rant is that I heard about it on a conservative talk radio program on the way home from work that same day. I heard it on the radio before I even saw it on TV. I have never encountered that before.
As You all know, Rick rants about stuff all the time. Why did this particular one have wings? The fact that the ChicagoTeaParty website address was secured last August convinces me as someone here said, this was probably a GOP sleeper site that had not yet been played. Sounds about right to me.
March 1st, 2009 at 12:06 pm
Just logging back in – funny how this strikes such a chord.
Lurkers like me make all of 2 comments for a year or so – and make numerous comments on one post.
Here is the deal for all the non-Santelli watchers. If you haven’t watched him – and the only thing you have seen is the video, you would be off-put by the rant. For those that have watched him for years – it was classic.
Marcus says,
“What about the SEC looking the other way as all of the fraud was turned into toxic securities and distributed around the world? What about the FED and low interest rates (admittedly not law enforcement, but still). What about the DoJ and FBI – they didn’t see anything wrong while all of this was going on? All under the control of the Executive Branch. Meaningless. Right.
I don’t have a party, but I know a criminal enterprise when I see it. Defend it if you want, sucker.”
Finally – we agree. The whole lot of them – republicans included – have completely fallen out of touch and have screwed this situation bad. Even though I vote republican – I am completely disgusted at them. Not only will I not defend them, I want to see them replaced.
That being said, I am torqued because they went the way of big government, bailouts, and corporate wall street (yes, failure of oversight, failure of reduced spending, succumbing to corporate cronyism-read GS H. Paulson and all his cronies in the administration). Their failure is not their policies – it is the lack of incorporation of their policies. C’mon, a highway bill under Republicans with 6500 pork projects… Just criminal.
Back to Santelli though – I turn down the volume on most all the commentators on CheerleaderNBC – because they are punishing the little guy with fraudalent knowledge. Santelli has been the ONLY voice of reason – well David Faber and Dylan Ratigan do a fair job also.
As for who is doing the “cryin” – my accounts are doing awesome – 401K been in bonds since April 06 and am up 17% (like S&P would be at 1526) while equities have fallen 50% (S&P @ 735). Trading account (I manage an LLC) had a banner year (trading options on futures for S&P 500) – up 258% last year. The performance is due in part to listening to Santelli warn YEARS ago about the dangers of derivatives.
March 1st, 2009 at 12:15 pm
I love conservatives and their good old fashioned American Values:
Porn in the USA: Conservatives are biggest consumers
New Scientist
16:18 27 February 2009 by Ewen Callaway
Americans may paint themselves in increasingly bright shades of red and blue, but new research finds one thing that varies little across the nation: the liking for online pornography.
A new nationwide study (pdf) of anonymised credit-card receipts from a major online adult entertainment provider finds little variation in consumption between states.
“When it comes to adult entertainment, it seems people are more the same than different,” says Benjamin Edelman at Harvard Business School.
However, there are some trends to be seen in the data. Those states that do consume the most porn tend to be more conservative and religious than states with lower levels of consumption, the study finds.
“Some of the people who are most outraged turn out to be consumers of the very things they claimed to be outraged by,” Edelman says.
Political divide
Edelman spends part of his time helping companies such as Microsoft and AOL detect advertising fraud. Another consulting client runs dozens of adult websites, though he says he is not at liberty to identify the firm.
That company did, however, provide Edelman with roughly two years of credit card data from 2006 to 2008 that included a purchase date and each customer’s postal code.
After controlling for differences in broadband internet access between states – online porn tends to be a bandwidth hog – and adjusting for population, he found a relatively small difference between states with the most adult purchases and those with the fewest.
The biggest consumer, Utah, averaged 5.47 adult content subscriptions per 1000 home broadband users; Montana bought the least with 1.92 per 1000. “The differences here are not so stark,” Edelman says.
Number 10 on the list was West Virginia at 2.94 subscriptions per 1000, while number 41, Michigan, averaged 2.32.
Eight of the top 10 pornography consuming states gave their electoral votes to John McCain in last year’s presidential election – Florida and Hawaii were the exceptions. While six out of the lowest 10 favoured Barack Obama.
Old-fashioned values
Church-goers bought less online porn on Sundays – a 1% increase in a postal code’s religious attendance was associated with a 0.1% drop in subscriptions that day. However, expenditures on other days of the week brought them in line with the rest of the country, Edelman finds.
Residents of 27 states that passed laws banning gay marriages boasted 11% more porn subscribers than states that don’t explicitly restrict gay marriage.
To get a better handle on other associations between social attitudes and pornography consumption, Edelman melded his data with a previous study on public attitudes toward religion.
States where a majority of residents agreed with the statement “I have old-fashioned values about family and marriage,” bought 3.6 more subscriptions per thousand people than states where a majority disagreed. A similar difference emerged for the statement “AIDS might be God’s punishment for immoral sexual behaviour.”
“One natural hypothesis is something like repression: if you’re told you can’t have this, then you want it more,” Edelman says.
Journal reference: Journal of Economic Perspectives
Volume 23, p 209 (pdf)
March 1st, 2009 at 12:31 pm
Barry R and his editor are DOUCHE BAGS…
Like I said in the comment you deleted ( typical commie lib you are with the censorship) I quit reading your blog for about a year because of stupid sh%t like this.
The BP is as f$cking lame as you are…………
This is my last comment you loser and I will never be back.
…….Is this a promise?…….And
Scott F Says:
March 1st, 2009 at 12:15 pm
……..OK now you’ve proved they like to spend a lot of time in the bathroom in Utah….now give it a rest.
March 1st, 2009 at 1:13 pm
“NO ONE BELIEVED ME WHEN I USED TO SAY I READ IT FOR THE ARTICLES!”
There are ARTICLES in Playboy??!!
I read the reply on DailyBail and it sounds sincere, but for the part about the Zach Christenson name not ringing a bell and then just skipping it. Sorry, but with Google at your fingertips, it’s not a big deal to pull up some hits and scan through a bit of history. That was a little lame. I agree with the part about Paulson’s culpability in the crises.
I don’t like the size of the spending coming our way, but Socialism started in the Bush administration. The Congressional dealings with the banks vs their attitude toward Detroit is a constant reminder of the two-tier class warfare. It shows itself again in the Justice system with Madoff and Stanford not cooling their heels in jail while anyone else would be.
March 1st, 2009 at 1:36 pm
Barry, Barry, Barry.
You said “If this turns out to be remotely true, then it confirms my worst suspicions about the negative impact of media on investing.”
What your don’t say is “If this turns out to be FALSE, then it confirms my worst suspicions about the negative impact of media on POLITICS.”
It’s funny to witness so much interest in a conspiracy theory involving a next to unknown CNBC guy based on the flimsiest of evidence, but one would be hard pressed to find any analysis or skepticism of Obama’s Stimulus bill or budget anywhere on the BP.
~~~
BR: Sorry to disappoint you but no one gets a free pass around here.
From Friday’s post on Nationalization:
From February 18th:
Magic 8 Ball says Try again later.
March 1st, 2009 at 1:52 pm
Oh, c’mon. Santelli has been doing this for years.
Santelli takes on Liesman.
Santelli takes on Jim Cramer.
Next thing you know, some conspiracy nut will place Santelli blowing up the levees around New Orleans during Katrina or planting explosives in the twin towers in NY for 9/11 and selling the scrap metal to Canada.
March 1st, 2009 at 1:53 pm
some very interesting chunks amongst the bile….
under 40 vs over 40….dude….that’s pretty good….very thought provoking.
Going to Gitmo for Jefferson…hilarious…but oh so true.
GenX vs Boomers….inevitable friction….they got cocaine and Vegas….we got 911 and Detroit….
Sorry fucks many of them.
When the hell is Alan Greenspan going to be held accountable??…..or are we waiting for the deathbed confessional??
Paulson is a crook. Fuck yes he’s a crook. He is the Crook of Crooks in this mess.
O is scaring me badly. Too much too fast. There’s a lot more deleveraging left to do and he hasn’t really even begun to address that.
Maybe it’s time to move to Cali and start growing weed.
March 1st, 2009 at 2:06 pm
Fuck John Birch and the assholes who invented him
March 1st, 2009 at 2:11 pm
Judging by some of these comments we’re stuck in Step 2. It’s so easy to create spin when folks are this angry.
March 1st, 2009 at 2:15 pm
In the recent scheme of things, it’s a pretty spectacularly calculated bit of showmanship. I was also amazed at the rapidity with which the Tea Parties got online. Don’t know if you follow all the #tcots on twitter but twitter kept going down last week with their flood of messages. Pajamas Media, Michelle Malkin’s brand, is somehow deeply involved in all of this too.
Thanks so much for posting that.
March 1st, 2009 at 2:29 pm
This article IMHO is a response from the Obama camp to try to discredit Santelli’s motives. No doubt propaganda at it’s best. Obama’s army of damage control are really afraid of the American peoples’ backlash to his spending money that we don’t have. It’s amusing how quickly they got onto Santelli to sway people away from doing the right thing. Santelli’s tea party isn’t going away. Obama needs Plan B….waiting to see what that is.
March 1st, 2009 at 2:32 pm
P.S. My how the government fears losing control of the people.
March 1st, 2009 at 2:37 pm
Glad to see someone else felt that this was a staged show. I couldn’t put my finger on it at the time, but something felt scripted. The timing and use of buzz words, etc. Even more so for me is the irony in Santelli, who has made his name at CNBC, the bullish of the bulls all the way down to down 7K, admonishing anyone.
For those interested, more at @ http://roadbehind.blogspot.com/2009/02/rick-santellis-perspective.html
March 1st, 2009 at 2:43 pm
Re: the conspiracy theorists,
Soros vs Koch
You might find it informative to search both names on the website below (opensecrets.org)
to see how little each gave directly but we assume that via controlled organizations so much more was given.
http://www.opensecrets.org
the totals for all the campaigns is to be found at
http://www.opensecrets.org/overview/index.php
(OpenSecrets.org is your nonpartisan guide to money’s influence on U.S. elections and public policy. Whether you’re a voter, journalist, activist, student or interested citizen, use our free site to shine light on your government. Count cash and make change.)
Why is so much money spent to get specific candidates elected?
A recent book:
So Damn Much Money: The Triumph of Lobbying and the Corrosion of American Government by Robert G. Kaiser (Hardcover – Jan 20, 2009)
is quite informative and non-partisan-
An interview with the author can be found at
http://www.booktv.org/program.aspx?ProgramId=10196&SectionName=Politics
About the Program
The book examines the connection between the rise of lobbying and the decline of American politics. The author argues that the system could easily be changed by Congress if they were motivated, but they’re not likely to bite the hand that feeds them.
About the Author
Robert Kaiser has been a Washington Post reporter since 1963. He’s a former foreign correspondent who covered Saigon in the late Sixties and Moscow in the early Seventies. Upon returning to the national staff, he covered the U.S. Senate, then the presidential election of 1980. Kaiser served as managing editor until 1998, and is now an associate editor.
As to AIG, C, Subprime mortgages,GS and all the other causes and recipients of the bailout
an interesting explanation of the monetary relationships and interactions between the global credit creation of the shadow banking system and the real banking system can be found in a very short book (98 pages) with lots of charts.
New Monetarism New Edition by David Roche and Bob McKee (Paperback – Jul 18, 2008)
the authors put a 13 page summary on their website (page 6 is the core idea)
http://www.instrategy.com/docs/products/New_Monetarism260406.pdf
It’s really interesting that after the change in administrations- money is still being pumped into
AIG.
I wonder who is the winning counterparty of AIG’s trades?
and which company is ultimately (daisy-chain?) receiving the money pumped into AIG
March 1st, 2009 at 2:44 pm
Hey, what’s the big deal? The NY Times and Washington Post shill for Obama all the time. Their coverage all last fall was pretty much a coronation in print. So, what’s the big deal about CNBC? If you’re going to complain about biased and influenced media, it goes all the way around the block.
~~~
BR: The Times shilled for W also — read Judy Miller’s war time reporting, it was laughable.
Listen, when I put on Fox news, I know they get their talking points from the GOP. I know which way the OpEd pages of the NYT and WSJ lean.
Its that I simply don’t expect to see that on CNBC . . . because its a MONEY LOSING BIAS.
March 1st, 2009 at 3:56 pm
whats the daily bail guy gonna do with all his time when america starts getting it’s shit together again?
not that this is a near-term problem
he’s gonna have to find some different muck to rake once we’re through bailing out everything that breathes
March 1st, 2009 at 4:05 pm
jayesouthworth Says:
March 1st, 2009 at 2:29 pm
Still at it……..and jaye, if you can’t see the O man has got control of the board at present you need new glasses……Yesterday’s Dr Cool versus the Big Fat Red Faced Bullfrog who went on longer than Castro was an interesting contrast is style and message……Don’t know if it will last…. but as of today…..
March 1st, 2009 at 4:18 pm
Sounds like Limbaughs’ call-to-arms to dittoheads yesterday caught fire. Their biggest fear is that Obama will succeed. Ad-hominem is their stock in trade.
March 1st, 2009 at 4:26 pm
I think that there are 2 very intriguing facts that need to be explained:
1) Why would Rosenberg purchase the domain “chicagoteaparty.com” in August and then suddenly spring it to life within hours of the Santelli “rant”?
2) Reading the dialogue, why does Santelli say this : “SANTELLI: No, but I think that somebody’s gonna have to start raising money for us”?
The host actually congradulates Santelli on being a “revolutionary leader” moments later. The elite like to foment fake populist revolts, and will use the communications mediums they control to promote them. Surprise. Surprise.
Of course just because politically connected insiders have “planted” stories in the “press” in the past doesn’t meet they will do so in the future.
yeah, right.
Keep drinking that Kool-aid, monsieur Paul Jones.
March 1st, 2009 at 5:06 pm
Another explanation could be that the GOP machine was waiting for something, anything to jump on from anyone and when Santelli ranted in the right direction they jumped on it. Sort of like the Joe the plumber thing. I don’t think Joe planned what he was doing at the time.
In this day and technology the responses are lightning fast. Obviously the Republicans were looking for something to jump on and had it coordinated in advance. Probably Kudlow set the wheels in motion.
The Dems have their own machine at work and Playboy etc. have fronted this effort to discredit Santelli.
March 1st, 2009 at 5:39 pm
The definition of “astrotuf” is a grassroots movement, backed by big money, from a political perspective you disagree with. To leftists, there’s no such thing as left-wing astroturf, and vice-versa for those on the right.
The Playboy article itself, to which Barry somewhat credulously links (“Oh, I’m not *saying* it’s true, but it did *feel* like Santelli’s rant was manufactured”) is a great example of the “more heat than light” phenomenon Barry himself is complaining about. Witness the hysterical characterization of the Kochs, whose “scion” and “patriarch” (i.e. a guy who’s been six feet under for decades now) founded the John Birch Society in the 50s. My GOD! Everyone, quick, make the sign of the cross!
This whole discussion is a great demonstration of the reason the Kochs go to great lengths to hide their funding of political organizations, because people focus on the fact that they’re Koch-backed instead of the ideas being offered up for debate. Which is not to say that the Kochs are not controversial, even within the libertarian movement, for other reasons (Brian Doherty wrote some great stuff on this in “Radicals for Capitalism”), but the idea that they’re out to establish an evil conspiracy of thought control and propaganda, well, it’s just as silly as it sounds.
~~~
BR: Here’s a much better definition than yours:
March 1st, 2009 at 6:16 pm
Damn straight people should be concerned with what extremist billionaires are doing with thier powerr and influence.
Its not about “thought control and propaganda” — its about pushing a far right wing agenda, subverting democracy through the use of concentrated wealth, and framing the debate as to what is important to the country.
March 1st, 2009 at 6:38 pm
Mr. Ritholtz:
I’ve been reading “The Big Picture” for a long time, but have never before read any of the comments much less contributed one. I must say that, given the informative nature of your writing and presentation, I expected to see a very high quality readership.
Instead, I find people who apparently can’t read or think clearly. Of over 180 comments, only handful (less than ten by my reckoning) appear to get it. The rest of the comments seem to be knee-jerk reactions based on ideology akin to religious fervor. It’s absolutely amazing.
At the end of your post you said, “I have no insight as to whether this is true or not — but it certainly deserves a serious response from both Santelli and CNBC. If it’s false, then they should say so, and demand an apology from Playboy.
“But if any of it is true, well then, Santelli may have to fall on his sword, and CNBC may owe the public an apology.
“I am VERY curious if there is any truth to this.”
Nowhere do I read you saying the accusations are true, nor do I read you saying they are false. Unless I’ve lost my ability to read, it seems you don’t know one way or the other: and, would appreciate any light your readers can shed on the issue. Could it be that you’re asking your readers to supply some FACTS?
Sorry, but judging from the comments I’ve read, I have to say you’re out of luck.
Lastly, let me extend to you my deepest sympathies on the quality of your readership. I fear you are casting pearls…
March 1st, 2009 at 6:52 pm
Hey 45ACP,
Thanks for getting it.
I thought I made it clear that I had no idea if this was true, but found it very interesting. The allegations of a major business channel doing something not kosher was worth exploring.
That’s the risk you take with anything remotely political — it attracts the loons and ‘tards in large numbers. Thank goodness for the registration requirement, as it weeds out the real numbskulls.
On the old site, the signal-to-noise-ratio would be even worse. As is, there were less than a dozen comments deleted. On typepad, it would have been closer to 50 — and the total would have been 2 -3 X.
March 1st, 2009 at 6:52 pm
The rant “felt wrong” when Santelli started asking Obama to listen to him. He talked “hate thy neighbor” as a means to pretend that Obama would reconsider changing his campaign issue, because of HIM, and his floor trading buddies. Everybody could tell watching it live that he and is stock trading floor buddies would never succeed in telling the president what to do. After I saw it, I immediately sent an email to trader@cnbc.com requesting Santelli apologize for using Obama’s name or be removed. Neither has happened, and I now dislike their entire operation whenever I see more of Santelli and is anti-Obama campaign. Please inform how I may assist in freely helping investigate this matter, to get some answers from these people. We must stop politicians in america from trillion dollar taxpayer scams called bailouts, stimulus, toxic assets, and crisis acting economic condition giveaways to the very tiny few that is not America, like AIG, Citi, BAC, 5th3rd, HSBC All these TV ridden commercials on bloomberg, cnbc, fox news play forever because they control the news journalism and get bailout scam cash to waste unlike donald trump on their failing bankrupt company that will and is planned in advance to fail anyway! This proves that America loses and is heading for depression because of the scams, which accerlerate worsening conditions, not slow them down. Good luck on your crusade.
March 1st, 2009 at 7:04 pm
Scott F: “Damn straight people should be concerned with what extremist billionaires are doing with thier powerr and influence.”
I assume you’re including Soros, correct?
BR — to me, all big media is influenced one way or the other. I’m not surprised if this were true from CNBC, and I wouldn’t be surprised if the Disney Channel did something tomorrow.
In any case, the correct explanation is often the simplest. I’m surprised someone hasn’t brought up the Illuminati yet.
March 1st, 2009 at 7:25 pm
Barry Ritholtz Says: March 1st, 2009 at 6:52 pm
Hey 45ACP,
Thanks for getting it.
BR,
some did learn R.I.F. Reading Is Fundamental
certainly, better than none..
March 1st, 2009 at 7:40 pm
Here’s a good example of the NEFARIOUS SCHEMES being pursued by the Sam Adams Alliance:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2CB9Q1zo-Qo
An award for “Fighting Big Government”?! The nerve!
March 1st, 2009 at 8:08 pm
45ACP AND BP, I hope it makes you feel intellectually superior to make what is very simple seem complicated. Fear the Fed Up.
March 1st, 2009 at 8:33 pm
It is notable that this whole “Tea Party” theme has become a meme of sorts. Next we will hear the resurrection of “peasants with pitchforks” that Pat Buchanan spewed. Santelli’s rant, staged or genuine, does fit with gathering opposition theme. Oui or non? By the by, this is GREAT site!
March 1st, 2009 at 8:40 pm
Given all the media attention, I have no difficulty believing that Santelli’s rant was pre-planned and fabricated. If Santelli’s “enablers” are able to persuade a few people to oppose Obama’s bailout plan, then for me at least, the ends justify the means. Obama want to extort money out of taxpayers for the benefit of people who made bad financial decisions, and anything that can be done to minimize the extent to which this happens is fine with me.
March 1st, 2009 at 8:45 pm
I’m sorry Barry, but you can’t link to something like that hysterical Playboy blog post, and then go, “hmmmm, yes, Santelli’s broadcast was indeed very interesting, it indeed did feel fake” and not be seen as coming down on one side or another, because frankly, you are, by lending your own intuition (not to mention your blog audience) to a lot of left-wing character assassination.
The Playboy blog post is filled with absurd references to “notorious rightwing think-tanks and publications” like (gasp!) Reason Magazine. With straight faces they describe the Insitute for Humane Studies as “a Koch-funded rightwing institute designed to scout and nurture future leaders of corporate libertarian ideology. ” Give me an effing break.
They go on to suggest that Santelli risked his journalistic credibility because “his contract’s up” and his “10 years with the network haven’t been remarkable.” So which is it? Is Santelli a rich evil trader who doesn’t have to care about money, or someone desperately trying to save his broadcasting job? Uhhhhhh ….
Are right-wing “astroturfers” trying to take advantage of Santelli’s momentum? Without a doubt, just look at Michelle Malkin and Kathryn Jean Lopez. But that’s no reason to go after Santelli himself. The Playboy post comes across as being written by Obama True Believers who see any opposition to The Sainted One’s policies as driven by venal motives, and shoehorn every observation and conclusion into that thesis.
By way of full disclosure, I’m a libertarian, but it does seem to me that there’s a big desire by some on the left to make populism their own, exclusive domain. So that, if a grassroots movement attracts a large amount of public support (as Santelli’s tea party most assuredly has), it *MUST* be because all those rubes are being played by evil billionaires.
March 1st, 2009 at 8:55 pm
It won’t be a story until Drudge links it to the story he created.
March 1st, 2009 at 8:59 pm
Nice try Barry, but repectfully, me thinks it’s you that needs to try again.
Every BP reader knows exactly how you feel about TARP 1.0, TARP 2.0, bank privatization, Paulson, Geithner, Madoff, etc. The post references you cited as evidence were both in regards to TARP 2.0, not the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 or Obama’s budget proposal unveiled on Thursday.
Now maybe you don’t think either is very important in the grand scheme, or maybe you just haven’t had time to think about them, but it’s totally bogus for you to suggest you’ve provided your readers with an analysis or opinion of either the stimulus bill or Obama’s budget.
I’ll gladly concede if proven wrong.
~~~
BR: Your exact quote was “one would be hard pressed to find any analysis or skepticism of Obama’s Stimulus bill or budget anywhere on the BP.”
Also, nothing on Sino Soviet relations, lesbian historical literature, and modern catfish farming. You didn’t see ANYTHING on those subjects because I don’t cover them. Not my area, hence no analysis or coverage on them.
However, your implication was that I was giving Obama a pass – which is incorrect. THATS why I provided examples of skepticism of what I do cover — the housing rescue, and the bank bailouts. How you could misunderstand the point of that reference is beyond me.
March 1st, 2009 at 10:07 pm
Hey People, Get a Grip:
All this shrill, churlish, dogmatic ranting is absurd. You’re yelling past each other. My neocon priest says your neoliberal pastor is a heretic and there can be only one outcome and…blah, blah, blah, blah. If you can’t be rational, then try, at the very least, to be civil.
Assertion is NOT argument!
If you think as I do that we are entering uncharted waters because the financial masters-of-the-universe brought the world to its knees, then you damn well better do everything in your power to help the President of The United States succeed.
Let me help you visualize failure. The Feb-27 Bloomberg article, “Arsonists Torch Berlin Porsches, BMWs as Recession Fuels Attacks on Wealth” is as good a place as any to start.
Unemployment in Berlin is 14.1% and people are angry, really angry, because they see their futures have been flushed away. Some are going to upscale parts of the city and torching any luxury car they find. The trend is growing. Use your imagination to see what comes next. It progresses from parked vehicles to occupied vehicles by means of Molotov cocktails (you know; a glass bottle, a cotton rag, several pints of gasoline, and a very small quantity of Tide granular laundry detergent). Then come homes, banks, businesses, government buildings, etc. Got the picture?
If something like this starts, it rages and spreads like a contagion, a forest fire fanned by gale force winds. It jumps from area to area sporadically, and the neither the army nor the police can keep up or gain even a semblance of control until its force is self-expended.
Now, look at the United States. Unemployment as measured using the depression era equations (U6) is over 15%. (Think 1937 when FDR brought depression unemployment DOWN to 15% from 25% in 1933.) Nominal unemployment (U3) is 8.5%. (These data can be found at bls.gov: search for U6.) Retirements and savings of millions have been wiped out. And, to make matters even worse, our economy is in a negative feedback loop. The numbers ARE getting worse, rapidly it seems.
Ever seen a food riot? Well, I’m a 69-year-old retired former U.S. Army paratrooper – and I have. Trust me, you don’t want to see one much less be in proximity to one. There’s a significant probability that it can happen here, I think on the order of 10% to 15%.
Want to take that chance? Neither do I. So stop pissing inside the tent and start pissing outside of it.
Help each other, and the President, so we can get out of this deep hole. There will be plenty of time for you to beat the shit out of each other later (if you must), after we’re back on solid ground.
March 1st, 2009 at 10:29 pm
I liked it better when BR used to utterly flame trolls like Tom K.
Are you getting mellow in your old age?
March 1st, 2009 at 10:33 pm
First time poster here, long time reader. I don’t understand why you think Rick’s rant was so out of character. I’ve been watching CNBC for a long time and it didn’t seem out of character at all. He has gotten frustrated to the point of walking off camera before (during TARP I), called out Cramer, and he gets the pit traders to rally around his points all the time. The only thing different about this rant was drudge picking up on it and CNBC replaying 15 times an hour for the rest of the day. FWIW, I checked chicagoteaparty.com that day and was surprised to see that it was already registered (I was going to if it was not), but there was nothing there that morning. The playboy article goes into great detail to the connections between the sites that picked up the story, but any link to Santelli is extremely limited. They imply that because they were able to create websites so quickly that there is a conspiracy. I have no links to any underground vast right wing conspiracies, but I intended to register that site and put something up that day. The fact that someone else put sites up the same day is no great revelation and far from proof of a conspiracy. Finally, the reason I am convinced Rick was NOT put up to it is that if he had planned his comments, I am sure that they would have been worded much better. If it was planned, he would have never used the words “loser” and “these guys are a cross-section of america”. You can think what you want of Santelli, but he is obviously intelligent and far too smart to leave himself so open to attacks if his “rant” was a premeditated event.
March 1st, 2009 at 11:59 pm
I will be more attune to political overtones in the future. When I posted all the Santelli stuff originally, there were no politics involved on my part, on my honor.
The call for general revolution is what I heard and was responding to, not a call against the mortgage bailout.
People hear what they need to hear I suppose, and I fell into that trap. But it has become obvious to me that for many people Santelli is political before anything else. And to me he is a financial reporter before anything else.
I think part of my dis-connect in this area is due to the fact that I don’t watch political shows, of any sort. I gave up on following politics closely 15 years ago in my mid 20s when I relaized both sides were similar failures. So I was not aware that Santelli is iidentified through Kudlow as an active conservative.
Simply put, I didn’t know he was such a lightning rod for some of you and so I should have presented him with more care.
Lesson learned.
March 2nd, 2009 at 1:52 am
Dumbasses,
Rick has ranted like this FOREVER.
How can such smart grown MEN/women fall for partisan poppycock.
The song remains the same, Divide and conquer – while pillaging in the shadows. Nothing new under the sun.
March 2nd, 2009 at 8:28 am
Castro Is Cool Again (thats some name sake)
I have 10 years on ya
(and back from a refresher on identity March 1st, 2009 at 10:20 am)
Are you kidding us that politics don’t seem to matter in everything going on. Everything but the weather .. on second thought scratch that.
Words shape reality .. from the beginning of ______.
(fill blank with … Time / City Planning / Religion / Business / War)
Foundation stuff.
Channel surfing this morning I heard the Soc’ism word and how it scares us. I think the followup sentence was “politicians in total control of our lives”. I am not worried of Soc’s in oversee mode, I want that, we need that. But the problem begins with unfair unfree nobid contracts let-out.
That brings me to my perceived inclinations.
Soc’s living with safety nets given by the populace, controled by themselves.
Cap’s in control of the economy, they sign the checks and control hire & fire.
Those 2 Big-ems can create an affiliation that becomes another ‘ism.
True Democracy scares me .. but Not Having Democracy scares me more.
We need a mechanism to vote on issues / and take People out of the mechanism.
(previous sentence) We = Populace 12 year old and above …. People = Politicians
All the ‘isms attempt to slant Nature in favor of itself. The power of the Words.
ps – some words are abreviated because a few words here @ TBP are automatic “place in hold que” for posting approval … will see if I out-thunk it .. be nice to know the total list tho.
March 2nd, 2009 at 8:48 am
and this is a good a place as any to present what I just yelled at the tv and Joe @ CNBC
Our Illinois State Treasurer is to guest appear .. on jump out to commercial break “is he corrupt enough” to get the job. A better statement maybe “does he play b-ball well enough”.
I myself have been on that rant. Can I say stuff like that to 100’s. Does it change when its millions?
When does a donation to a political candidate change from a gift to a bribe?
What amount of money changes a gift to expecting a direct return on investment?
March 2nd, 2009 at 9:16 am
45ACP wrote:
Ever seen a food riot? Well, I’m a 69-year-old retired former U.S. Army paratrooper – and I have. Trust me, you don’t want to see one much less be in proximity to one. There’s a significant probability that it can happen here, I think on the order of 10% to 15%.
Want to take that chance? Neither do I. So stop pissing inside the tent and start pissing outside of it.
Help each other, and the President, so we can get out of this deep hole. There will be plenty of time for you to beat the shit out of each other later (if you must), after we’re back on solid ground.
Best post ever.
As for your earlier comment regarding the quality of posts here: that’s just how the internet is. The best forums on the net (like Slashdot) let people downgrade idiotic posts so that the majority of people don’t have to read them. Unfortunately there’s no moderation system here, but the posts here are still roughly 1000x better than most websites.
March 2nd, 2009 at 9:43 am
“THE BIG PICTURE – Macro perspective on the capital markets, ECONOMY, technology & digital media.”
I suppose I deserved to be called a troll for believing the ECONOMIC stimulus bill and Obama’s budget proposal have as much to do with the ECONOMY as “lesbian historical literature” and “modern catfish farming”.
Maybe it’s just me, but I find it odd to draw the line between housing rescue+bank bailouts and stimulus bill + U.S. budget, especially given the enormous price tag and fanciful GDP projections of the later.
~~~
BR: Tom, I don’t think you are a troll (Scott, behave!).
But I am only one person, and you did use a questionable tactic — Its “guilt because you are not doing a post on ______” — that can be thrown at anyone.
March 2nd, 2009 at 9:43 am
Hey 45acp, You prefer slavery to violence? Besides, why would you want to keep the experience of riots all to yourself. It is part of the “bottoming process”
March 2nd, 2009 at 11:50 am
barry……
if you want to do a case study on how to destroy readership just keep going on the road you are on. pissing on rick santelli will destroy this site………
March 2nd, 2009 at 4:20 pm
so has anyone mentioned that Playboy removed the article?
http://meganmcardle.theatlantic.com/archives/2009/03/is_this_why_playboy_took_the_a.php
March 2nd, 2009 at 5:39 pm
Playboy has removed the story. They not only got it completely wrong about The Daily Bail but it seems they didn’t do their research about the Koch and FreedonWorks claims.
To all those who believed in me, thanks.
And to my critics who actually believed I was part of a nefarious network of right-wing astroturf sites, get your heads examined for tinfoil.
And thanks to Barry for posting my response yesterday. It means a lot that you stood up for me.
Steve,
The Daily Bail
Publisher and Writer
March 3rd, 2009 at 1:34 am
Oooooh, “craziest,” “sleaziest,” “notorious extremist”….
Can’t wait for the libel-case takedown of whoever this commie nutcracker is. Glad I linked to it from patrick.net. I assume Santelli’s, the Koch’s and several others’ lawyers have too.
Commie tool.
March 3rd, 2009 at 1:35 am
When the guillotines get sharpened, the first ones with their heads in on the block will be the socialist mouthpieces and doe-eyed morons like this guy.
March 11th, 2009 at 4:46 pm
Ok the dust has settled. Where is Rick Santelli? After he did not show up for his appearance on The Daily Show, he seems also to have disappeared from CNBC along with Pimco Ads. Then again I may just not be watching CNBC often enough.
45ACP should comment more often. I would love to hear his take on other issues. His two posts were perfect. If he would be so kind as to contact me, gotothomas@aol.com, I would enjoy making his acquaintance.