Daily Show Takes on Rick Santelli

5 Mar

This is simply incredible. Watch the first 10 minutes of last night’s Daily Show. While Rick Santelli uses CNBC to promote faux-populist astroturf, the banks and companies promoted by people on CNBC have taken tens of billions of dollars in taxpayer money as a result of their irresponsibility. Yet Santelli went after responsible homeowners who are underwater on their mortgages because of the housing meltdown? Stewart’s statement to “Sir Allen Stanford” near the end of the clip is right on.


25 Responses to “Daily Show Takes on Rick Santelli”

  1. Ike March 5, 2009 at 8:50 am #

    You are aware that Playboy pulled that article within days, because it was completely unsourced, and likely libelous?

  2. pirate's code March 5, 2009 at 10:30 am #

    Jon Stewart — “I find cheap populism oddly arousing.”


    Sad that the some of the best political/financial commentary has to come from the Comedy Channel. But it does. And it’s mostly funny. If Olberman or any of the nitwits on Fox would, from time to time, stick tongue-in-cheek, they might not come across as such gas bags.

  3. Facts Plz March 5, 2009 at 10:36 am #

    Hah. Sounds like the Dems manufactured counterpunch to the revelation that pol operatives Emmanuel, Stephanopoulus and McCarville have a targeted program to “take down limbaugh”…

    This is just “operatives being operatives”….

  4. hank March 5, 2009 at 10:37 am #

    Yet Santelli went after responsible homeowners who are underwater on their mortgages because of the housing meltdown?

    Alan, your misguided liberal heart beateth for the wrong people.

    There ARE NO “RESPONSIBLE HOMEOWNERS” who are underwater on their mortgages. Ever Hear of PMI? People with poor or questionable credit who got mortgages since the beginning of the decade at least, have paid PMI (primary mortgage Insurance) in case they defaulted, built into their payment This was designed to keep the lenders from getting into trouble.

    Yes, the lenders are to blame too, and shouldn’t have gotten the money that was given to them. And now some banks are sending the money back to the government.

    The Housing meltdown was caused by a conspiracy between activist groups like ACORN, the Banks, and IR-REPONSIBLE PEOPLE. Fannie/Freddie and acorn pushed banks to give loans to people with poor credit payment histories, and qualified them for more house than they could afford.

    If you’re RESPONSIBLE—and the bank qualifies you for a 250,000 loan, does that mean you can pay the note? Or do you buy what you can afford?

    Irresponsible people, with eyes bigger than their stomachs, bought more house than they could afford at prices that weren’t in line with reality. Now that the house is worth less than the note, YOU feel sorry for them. I don’t.

    If I bought you a “Pig’s Dinner” from the old Alcobar ice cream shop on Delaware near Tacoma, with 50 scoops of Ice cream in it, does that mean you have to eat the whole damn thing? And if you do and get sick, am I supposed to feel sorry for you, or question your common sense?

    One of my in-laws, with both of children ready to leave home in less than 2 years, bought a 3000 Sq ft. “Mc Mansion” in northern Maryland. They needed that house like they needed an extra asshole. They had a 1800 sq ft house that met their needs, and they only moved about a mile to get into this executive crib.

    Mike will like this–Their COMBINED military retirement checks (about 2500/mo) doesn’t cover their mortgage payment. I don’t know the exact price, but they paid somewhere around 800K for this joint, and now it’s likely not worth 500K. They didn’t NEED that house, but she WANTED it. And now she gets to pay the intrinsic price. She can’t unload it, they’re buried upside down on it, and that’s just tough tittie.

    You lefties need to give up on that “Class Warfare” bullshit. WTF?

    Big banks that make dumbass loans—BAD—DUMBASS PEOPLE—VICTIMS……

    I don’t think so.

  5. lulu March 5, 2009 at 10:41 am #

    I watched it too and was laughing out loud. Hilarious!

  6. Igor March 5, 2009 at 11:16 am #

    Have to agree with Hank on this one (scary though)

  7. Eric P. March 5, 2009 at 11:30 am #

    Hank Says “There ARE NO “RESPONSIBLE HOMEOWNERS” who are underwater on their mortgages. Ever Hear of PMI? ”

    PMI only covers that portion of a mortgage that exceeds 80% of the original balance. PMI, FNMA & FHLMC insure lenders in the event of mortgagor default. The fact that the lender may have a variety of insurance against default does not mean a “responsible” homeowner/mortgagor can’t be “under water” (negative equity) in a declining market area.

    Hank, if your argument were to be consistent, you would posit that anyone who has PMI is, by definition, irresponsible. PMI is only paid by buyers who haven’t put 20% or more down on the purchase. In fact, Many “responsible” homeowners bought homes and saw the value diminish by far more than 20%.

    Is it irresponsible to have been laid-off or have otherwise lost the source of one’s income? Is it also irresponsible to live in a declining real estate market? That might be pretty easy to say when you’re cashing your government paychecks, Hank.

    Your premise is as flawed as your loudmouth, six-pack rhetoric.

  8. The Humanist March 5, 2009 at 12:17 pm #

    @Facts Plz – I don’t think there’s any organized conspiracy from the White House or Democratic operatives when they say that Rush Limbaugh is the unofficial leader of the Republican Party. It’s a sly move, an artful piece of political ju-jitsu to force the obstructionist Republicans in Congress to cast their lot with a drug addict/pedophile sex tourists who disgusts most of America or to distance themselves from this guttermouth clown and risk the wrath of his millions of lizard-brain followers who would rather see this country fail than see liberal and moderate policies succeed.

    No one is doing a better job of “taking down Limbaugh” than Limbaugh himself, every time he opens his big yap. Especially precious was his rant at CPAC against Obama for insulting the Consitution when he had just quoted from the Declaration of Independence and called it the “preamble to the Constitution”. Priceless.

    And the zombie 28 percenters at the conference cheered.

  9. mike March 5, 2009 at 12:58 pm #

    All this is way over my head, here in Niagara Falls houses are about the same price as a midsized car. Even crumbs like Hudson, whites only lady and me can afford them. We are just all very cheap, use coupons and even jew down the hookers. Life is good here in the Falls, hank you would fit right in with us.

  10. RaChaCha March 5, 2009 at 2:50 pm #

    Sir Alan: I’m not sure that Stewart’s parting shot was made *to* Sir Allen. Rather, he may have been inferring what Sir Allen’s attitude was toward the human race: several billion sheep created for him to fleece (and worse).

    Either way his statement was — as you say — spot on!

    Thank you for sharing this — I missed it last night.

  11. Facts Plz March 5, 2009 at 5:00 pm #

    @ Humanist…

    Sure, there’s no smoking gun but its pretty much being recognized here as accurate.


  12. The Humanist March 5, 2009 at 6:05 pm #

    @Facts Plz – Yeah….and? The White House and Democrats in general are having a laugh at the rapidly imploding national Republican party because there’s a gaping vacuum in the leadership? Well, excuuuuuuuuuuuuse. Me.

  13. Mike In WNY March 6, 2009 at 1:08 am #

    The banks wouldn’t have been able to take the money if the politicians weren’t lined up to hand it to them.

  14. Jim Ostrowski March 6, 2009 at 9:24 am #

    Great video but–

    1. he didn’t lay a glove on Santelli–he smeared him by associating him with bad guys, classic smear technique.

    2. No quotes from Santelli supporting the corporate bailouts.

    3. the three economists who called it right going back ten years are not mentioned, Peter Schiff, Jim Rogers and Ron Paul, are all libertarian Austrians.

  15. hank March 6, 2009 at 12:28 pm #

    Eric P–THIS
    Your premise is as flawed as your loudmouth, six-pack rhetoric

    Qualifies as an ad hominem attack—when you have no argument, attack the messenger, not the message. Good on you for that.

    Now–Back to PMI–

    The POOR, characterized by Alan in the OP as victims, don’t have 20% to put down on a mortgage. Or, PMI is required because of poor credit rating or performance on previous mortgages.

    Eric continues
    Is it irresponsible to have been laid-off or have otherwise lost the source of one’s income?

    All depends on what you do for a living. If you’re a unionized steel, auto, machinist or electrician, You have your union to blame.

    Is it also irresponsible to live in a declining real estate market?
    Well, Buffalo’s housing market has been in decline since people started voting with their feet in the mid 70’s, so you tell me.

    That might be pretty easy to say when you’re cashing your government paychecks, Hank.

    I don’t cash a government paycheck. My WIFE does. She spent 20 years serving in the United States Navy to EARN that retirement stipend. And we planned our lives so that check would pay for our home. Have you served in the Military? Have you given up years of your life serving at sea away from your home and family? Put yourself in Harm’s way like she did in Desert Storm?

    Thought so—but nice liberal jab at someone who spent almost half their lives living and working in places they didn’t want to be so you could criticize them.

    I’ll be coming back for a visit soon, and will be setting up a place and time to meet some of you regulars,and would like to see you there.

    Once you see me, you might regret the name calling.

  16. The Humanist March 6, 2009 at 1:56 pm #

    @ Hank – “Once you see me, you might regret the name calling.

    Once I see you, I’m going to regret ever having gone to Wendy’s when I see the damage done to your waistline by the deep fryer.

  17. Eric P. March 6, 2009 at 3:52 pm #

    Hank has responded to a percieved “ad hominem attack” with his very own fucktard fatwa. I guess I must have been mistaken about the loudmouth, six-pack rhetoric.

    Sorry, I wasn’t bright enough to join the Marines, Henry. I had to settle for college, an interesting life, and thinking for myself.

  18. TheRover March 6, 2009 at 7:03 pm #

    And conservatives are having a laugh at the democrat induced economic implosion that’s beginning to resemble a run-away train since inauguration day. Maybe Obama get his economic news from the Comedy Channel too.

  19. Jim Ostrowski March 7, 2009 at 9:35 am #

    The corporate state, a joint project of both parties, is collapsing. It’s wonderful, frankly.

    Those who blame one party over the other, are deluded.

  20. Frieda March 7, 2009 at 10:41 am #

    Its going to ake a lot of work and more than 6 weeks to get us out of the Bush Depression.

  21. Ray March 7, 2009 at 2:27 pm #

    To the selectively ignorant:
    Santelli has been against the corporate bailouts from the beginning, unlike most of the so-called CNBC “experts”.
    Jon Steward’s researchers didn’t know that or chose not to bring it up since Santelli wasn’t there to defend himself.

    The Bush Depression is now the Obama Depression, and he’s doing everything wrong just like Bush.

  22. Frieda March 7, 2009 at 9:22 pm #

    @Ray. Sorry but 80% of the public think Obama Inherited the economic crises. AFA what Santelli said about the bank bailout was “Some people say… while others say … …I’m not making judgement call either way”.

  23. Jim Ostrowski March 7, 2009 at 11:51 pm #

    Obama inherited the recession and Hitler was defending Germany from Polish incursions on Sept. 1 39.

    It’s a gigantic lie!

    First of all, this is a crisis of the liberal corporate state that came in with Woody Wilson. Obama all his career has supported this system and in fact was the candidate of the corporate elite from start to finish.

    Second, he was a Senator who voted for the war spending that helped cause the recession.

    Third, he supported the bailout.

    Fourth, he continued these same insane policies and promises even more.

    Call it a Wilson FDR Johnson Nixon Bush Obama recession.

    BTW, the notion that he had to vote for war funding to support the troops is juvenile nonsense. When you de-fund a war, the troops come home. They are not left in the field without bullets or gas because generals who do that tend to get sent to prison after court criminally negligent homicide.

    That’s what happens when get lost in propaganda. You lose touch with reality and start saying stupid things.

    The real problem inow is the partisans, those who blame the other party when it is obvious both parties are to blame.

  24. Ray March 8, 2009 at 2:21 am #


    Then obviously 80% of the public have been living under a rock or are just plain idiots. I’ve never seen any valid reason to put any faith in what 80% of the people think anyway.
    Take this wisdom from Mark Twain and do what you will with it, “Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect.”

    As far as Santelli goes see this post here and my comment:

    Forget about what “Some people say” and learn the facts yourself.

  25. Jay March 8, 2009 at 1:37 pm #

    Would Hank please tell me where Citigroup, Washington Mutual, Indymac, and Washington Mutual fit under the conspiracy umbrella of taking orders from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac? How did ACORN push these industry giants around? Hank reminds me of the saying, “a little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing.”

Contribute To The Conversation

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: