Skip to main content

Puritan witch-hunts (14 March 2009)

As Tucker Carlson pointed out in the famous "this'll be the end of Crossfire, episode of Crossfire," Jon Stewart has had his days of kissing noteworthy guests' asses, of being a bit too "I'm not worthy," too. But he's now King, takes no shit, but has become, also, something of an unempathic terror. If Cramer reforms, and starts hunting corporate heads' heads, to get him some of that "my opponent is so awful that self-criticism is now optional" heaven, that Stewart comports on, I'm fairly sure the world will not be the better for it. There is real goodness and strength in Cramer (as there is in Stewart), and it is a crime for Stewart to not have shown somewhere in his interview that he senses this in him, too. The way he did it, Cramer will be that much more inclined to pay it all back on some other appropriately set-up unfortunate.

He should have realized that something about the situation was making the normally feisty Cramer become readily contrite and shamed. "This is not a confessional--fight me, damn it! Would it help if we changed seats?" I wish he'd thought and maybe said.

Link: There's nothing unique about Jim Cramer


Popular posts from this blog

Full conversation about "Bringing Up Baby" at the NewYorker Movie Facebook Club

Richard Brody shared a link.Moderator · November 20 at 3:38pm I'm obsessed with Bringing Up Baby, which is on TCM at 6 PM (ET). It's the first film by Howard Hawks that I ever saw, and it opened up several universes to me, cinematic and otherwise. Here's the story. I was seventeen or eighteen; I had never heard of Hawks until I read Godard's enthusiastic mention of him in one of the early critical pieces in "Godard on Godard"—he called Hawks "the greatest American artist," and this piqued my curiosity. So, the next time I was in town (I… I was out of town at college for the most part), I went to see the first Hawks film playing in a revival house, which turned out to be "Bringing Up Baby." I certainly laughed a lot (and, at a few bits, uncontrollably), but that's not all there was to it. I had never read Freud, but I had heard of Freud, and when I saw "Bringing Up Baby," its realm of symbolism made instant sense; it was obviou…

"The Zookeeper's Wife" as historical romance

A Polish zoologist and his wife maintain a zoo which is utopia, realized. The people who work there are blissfully satisfied and happy. The caged animals aren't distraught but rather, very satisfied. These animals have been very well attended to, and have developed so healthily for it that they almost seem proud to display what is distinctively excellent about them for viewers to enjoy. But there is a shadow coming--Nazis! The Nazis literally blow apart much of this happy configuration. Many of the animals die. But the zookeeper's wife is a prize any Nazi officer would covet, and the Nazi's chief zoologist is interested in claiming her for his own. So if there can be some pretence that would allow for her and her husband to keep their zoo in piece rather than be destroyed for war supplies, he's willing to concede it.

The zookeeper and his wife want to try and use their zoo to house as many Jews as they can. They approach the stately quarters of Hitler's zoologist …