Spot on Michael….

Maybe she didn’t want to answer questions about the ridiculous headlines on her company’s website; for example:
http://www.cnbc.com/id/31609886

So, what am I supposed to take from this? If Madoff gets 125 years, that’s good for stocks? Or is it bad for stocks? Or, are they just dreaming up things to write?

While I don’t disagree about the media creating a demand, sounds a bit like sour grapes to me. What is this piece about with all the pre-ads and the info re Michael’s books. A bit self serving I say.

maria married to an extremely wealthy man. Plus she makes a huge
salary. So possibly she does not want to lose .

EVERYTHING in the USA is false and a scam. It’s got to the point where I trust no-one and nothing. The stockmarket is the world’s biggest scam. I don’t know anyone that has made anything from it – only losses.

Maria’s husband during the dot-com bubble was Jonathan Steinberg, editor in chief of a financial investing advice magazine. When the bubble burst this magazine folded. I guess this was very stressful on Ms. Bartiromo. Most financial advice people in the media are not experienced financial managers, they are journalists, media people, and amateurs. The expertise of investment pros is not comparable to MDs. The media are merely doing their traditional job of pimping to greed. Blame personal greediness and the lottery mentality.

She is one of the stupidest people I have ever seen on TV. Did you happen to catch her appearance on “celebrity” Jeopardy? She never rang in – she never answered, nor even attempted to answer, one single question. Her score at the end was $0.

CNBC isn’t the enemy.
Michael Covel isn’t the enemy.
Maria B-what’s-her-name isn’t the enemy.
In fact, I’m not really sure there IS an enemy.

Einstein said that the most import question we can ask is: Is the universe a friendly place? Is that the most important question we can ask of the market?

And if it were, what would your answer be? Do you think your answer would be different than Ed Seykota’s answer? Would it be different from Richard Dennis’ answer? Would it be different than the rookie retail trader’s answer as he tries his best to match his stochastic’s buy signal with his MACD sell signal and his Ichimoku Cloud Charts Momentum reading?

I remember moving to a new city when I was 10. At that time the second grade was the scariest, meanest thing I had ever been introduced to. After 5 minutes I was laughing and jumping around like nobody’s business. What had changed? Did the second grade change? Did the school change? Did people change?

Anyone who did not realize many years ago that CNBC is
a cross between Entertainment Tonight and a side show
at the circus, deserves to lose money taking their
recommendations. I had the pleasure of hearing the lead
economist for a major fund family many years ago during
the Russian ruble crisis. He was to go on that morning,
but told the story of before going on air Maria messed
up her hair to look rattled in doing the ruble piece.
Case in point. Second case in point, Cramer. Need I
say more.

It’s bad enough that media individuals are cheerleaders for one side, but it’s repulsive that they should be entitled to editorial control over what they say in an interview! To Maria and all the other members of the CNVC cheer squad: You deserve the credibility which your sister network MSNBC has rightly earned for their bogus journalism. I am not surprised anymore at your network’s dismal ratings. You all deserve it!

I agrree that everything said by these so calles “Financial Reporters” should be taken with a a grain of salt but what I really want to address is the credit card issuers. Month to month the due date changes and if you don’t catch it you can be royally screwed. When I receive my August my bill it should be just that. I have to pay it in the month of August period. Not the 5th or the 14th just August. Is that such a hard concept to understand?

CNBC has continuous market info on their screen crawlers, and that is valuable. Some of the young ladies (and not-so-young ones) are quite nice to look at, and that is valuable. Some of their guests (Schiff, etc) are fun to watch for the shock effect they have on the talking heads. And their absolute idiocy affords me opportunity to hone my economic rebuttals, if only to scream at the television while they pretend to actually know what they are talking about. Other than that, I keep the mute on and read the internet sites that have the real information I need.