Cramer Calls Market "Stupid, Rapacious, Arbitrary, Capricious And Downright Ridiculous", Tells Viewers To Stay Out

Tyler Durden's picture

After catching a few soundbites of Cramer's spiel today, we were stunned: for once theStreeter did not lose his marbles over an engineered, 20 handle, 200DMA breakout rally. Quite the opposite. In what is likely a first, the Mad Money host actually told his viewers it is time to get out of the market: "I am calling this a bad rally. This market has now become more depressing than Ethan Frome. Even the good days are now bad days. It's almost as if the whole market is caught between 1st base and 2nd base. So we get an endless rotating short squeeze in oil, in the banks, in tech, in discretionary.... But once the shorts are done getting picked off, we've got no more reason to run. It is a rally that stops that a blast of future selling comes in. It is a rally that stops the moment the buyers just walk away. We used to have fundamentally based rallies - that's not how this market works." The 10 minute rant against the market by the legendary permabull is simply shocking: he actually describes all the different dimensions in which the stock market is completely busted and discredited in a way that makes us jealous: "This market is stupid. And it is hated for a very good reason. The market seems rapacious, arbitrary, capricious and downright ridiculous. It is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing."


Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
-Michelle-'s picture

Is this reverse psychology?

Monkey Craig's picture

Perhaps. More likely it is say whatever you can to sell more ads and be as sensational as possible just to keep your job.


That is why I have slightly more faith in ZH than CNBS. You always have to think about the agenda.


Best of luck to everyone in the financial markets. Methinks they are rigged.

AnAnonymous's picture

Perhaps. More likely it is say whatever you can to sell more ads and be as sensational as possible just to keep your job.



Very likely. Cramer will probably backpedal in a side TV show, calling off his rants, telling that you shall stay in the markets etc...


Jim Cramer is a talented media worker. He manages to tell everything and its contrary in a short span and still keeps a sort of credibility. The man covers all possible outcomes and he is therefore always right.

George the baby crusher's picture

When Jim goes off like this on the down side, the end of the world must be neigh. 

RockyRacoon's picture

What's that saying about a broken clock?  And then there is the one about the blind hog.

Correct time and acorns aside, in the end you still have a busted clock and a useless hog.

hedgeless_horseman's picture

Every news item bad today, Jim?  True.  For a little spin just ride the WSJ and Bloomberg Tilt-A-Whirls. 

Fucking makes me want to puke how these formerly-much-better-journalism outlets have been converted into Ctrl-C .gov bullshit/Ctrl-V .gov bullshit Pravda-like peace of shit rags.

Reuters?  It's with content agreements.

Do they think EVERYONE is fucking stupid?

Gold...Bitches's picture

Do they think EVERYONE is fucking stupid?

Yes, they do.

lawrence1's picture

And, unfortunately, they have been largely right... I doubt that even close to 1% of the population understand what's really happening and it will be too late when that reaches, say, 5%.


jeff montanye's picture

it would be interesting to know the percentage of the population that understands even the general gist, forget the minute, granular details, of, for instance, the revelatory (to me) welling interview of the themis partners featured this morning on zerohedge.  and i was told in very cursory outline by a friend still in the business and managed to overlook it, even after the flashcrash, until it was set directly before me by the tylers.  thanks.

bonddude's picture

that's why herb douchebag greenberg is back

on the air. that fuck.

RockyRacoon's picture

I'll go ya one better: Ron Insana.

He really went off the deep end the other day calling Dr. Paul literally stupid about economics.  Insana says gold won't work in backing a currency....  Blah, blah.  Simply proving that RI knows diddly about how an economy really works -- one that is not manipulated into a bloody pulp.

Hansel's picture

+1, I can't read Bloomberg anymore.  Google news is just as bad, which I find incredible considering it only aggregates the newspeak.

jeb3's picture

If I were you I wouldn't trust google with anything. IMO the biggest NSA front by far.  Can't believe they got this far with this much market share while maintaining their reputation for being cutting edge, trendy, and concerned with privacy.

Ted K's picture

Max Keiser (if you trust him) was quoting a news story today that said British Petroleum had bought the rights to search terms like "oil spill" from Google so they could direct the traffic to favorable links to British Petroleum.

Careless Whisper's picture

I think Cramer meant "it's outrageous, egregious, preposterous".

This is a job for Jackie Chiles.



dnarby's picture


If you're using the CCI (Cramer Contrary Indicator), time to buy!

MsCreant's picture

Get Creamer to beat down the prices for ya?

Cpl Hicks's picture

You probably didn't mean it but that comment got me thinking of Paula Creamer.

Ira Fuse's picture

I was thinking the same thing. 

When Cramer says x, then it is time to do x^(-1)

rebeltraders's picture


This is true and is somewhat old news now. I would love to know how much they are paying for those keywords. I bet they are not cheap.

Problem Is's picture

That wasn't just Max. I read it in Reuters.

Arkadaba's picture

Any one can buy the phrase for search advertising if they are willing to bid up the price - nothing new here. Market prices and not a conspiracy.

Guess what was the most expensive phrase to buy in online search over the past ten years aside from some minor up or down swings - mesothelioma.

And again that is not a conspiracy but looking at what companies or individuals are willing pay for search ads is interesting.





myshadow's picture

Max is factual about this. It is multiple sources and BP said they did it to 'get the facts out' through their prism.

RockyRacoon's picture

Gary!  Love ya man....  Here is some of your best stuff:

MayIMommaDogFace2theBananaPatch's picture

Ctrl-C .gov bullshit/Ctrl-V .gov bullshit Pravda-like peace of shit rags

Very well said.

colorfulbliss's picture

Agreed! But I would much rather see a Ctrl-Alt-Delete of the whole corrupt system!

GeoffreyT's picture

+10000, Hedgeless... the media copypasta mentality is worse than Pravda because the sheeple of the USSA actually think they're free, whereas the denizens of the Soviet Union knew that their lives continued at the whim of their overlords.


Soviet citizens also knew that every second person was probably a stukach (and post-breakdown, a lot of shallow graves appeared in forests outside Russian cities... being a whip-kisser can bite you on the ass when the whip hand changes). That young military kiddie who shopped himself to that 'hacker' dude found out about stukachi the hard way... and I hear on the OrgA grapevine that the hacker will find out about shallow graves in due course.





Renfield's picture

OK, you sent me to Google (I love that about the comments on this site) and what I found chilled my bones.

From the common slang word stukachestvo, stukach was widely used in the Soviet period to describe "squealing," or informing on people to the government authorities. The word is evidently derived from stuk, Russian for the sound of a hammer blow.

The government, and especially the security police, in all communist-ruled or authoritarian countries, depended on informers in order to keep tabs on the loyalty of the populace. In the Politics, Aristotle had observed that tyrannical regimes must employ informers hidden within the population in order to keep their hold on absolute power.

In such countries as the USSR, Nazi Germany, Maoist China, Cuba, and so forth, informers were sometimes made heroes by the regime. Thus, in the Soviet Union, Pavlik Morozov, a twelve-year-old boy living in the Don farming region when Stalin was enforcing collectivization of the peasants' farms in the early 1930s, became a stukach. He informed on his parents when they allegedly concealed grain and other produce from the authorities. The boy was killed by vengeful farmers. He was thereupon iconized as a martyr by the communist authorities. Statues of Pavlik sprang up throughout the country.

The Soviet writer Maxim Gorky urged fellow writers to glorify the boy who had exposed his father as a kulak and who "had overcome blood kinship in discovering spiritual kinship." Another well-known Soviet novelist, Leonid Leonov, depicted a fictitious scientist of the old generation who as a stukach had nobly betrayed his son to the authorities.

Stukachestvo was expected of any and all family members, schoolchildren, concentration-camp prisoners, factory workers - in short, every Soviet citizen, all of whom were expected to place loyalty to the State above all other linkages.


Galler, Meyer. (1977). Soviet Prison Camp Speech: A Survivor's Glossary: Supplement. Hayward, CA: Soviet Studies.

Heller, Mikhail, and Nekrich, Aleksandr. (1986). Utopia in Power: The History of the Soviet Union from 1917 to the Present, tr. Phillis B. Carlos. London: Hutchinson.

Preobrazhensky, A. G. (1951). Etymological Dictionary of the Russian Language. New York: Columbia University Press.


I have pimped for awhile now, the comparison done in 2006 by Dmitry Orlov, "Closing the Collapse Gap: The USSR was better prepared for collapse than the US". Your stukach reference reminds me yet again of Orlov's prescience, and if anyone is interested, here is the link:

Apostate's picture

Yep. The US is full of state-worshipping bitches. If anyone had any delusions about the "tech community" being a bulwark against the predators, this Lamo slime has exposed not only himself but the culture that has grown up around Wired and websites like it.

I've pimped his books before, but James Bamford's A Pretext for War ( lays out how the regime over-rode its own spy agencies to invade Iraq and Afghanistan.

There's no way to be certain, but chances are that Manning was allowed to leak. If there's one leaker, there's liable to be more.

I know that the intelligence agencies have been rather diluted of talent over the years, but at least some of them must know that their paychecks will bounce. And that Putinism is unlikely to take hold in the US, leaving the "exit strategies" for spooks rather close to non-existent.

Renfield's picture

"The US is full of state-worshipping bitches."

I think many 'western' nations are. (Aus is, and Canada. Don't know about Europe or UK.)

It's testament to our media & educational propaganda, that it has successfully convinced so many of us that we are 'skeptics' and 'cynical' (to use Cramer's self-description), while we believe and trust the State much much more than the Soviets did. That scares me more than anything else - not the belief in state propaganda, but the trusting reliance we have on its information and protections. No wonder so few seriously oppose the expansion of government.

That said, Orlov points out several times how a bloated government in the USSR, with its waste and inefficiencies, actually cushioned the population from the worst effects of a private economy collapse. They trusted their government less, and had more services from it; we trust our government more, and rely more on private industry which, when it collapses, will leave us without recourse.

Interesting link re: the intelligence agencies. Will have a look about for any of Bamford's writing on the internet, to sample. Any articles of his that you recommend, that I could check out now?

Island_Dweller's picture

Those that "believe" the most are going to get hurt the most.....

Renfield's picture

To take a small example:

I took a look at the Huffington Post today - as I do from time to time, altho not very often as I don't find most of their stuff very useful. But just to sound out the general herd a bit - HuffPo & Bloomberg are my MSM. :-)

They had a post critical of Obama's oil spill speech. Didn't outline any solutions apparently. (Now there's a shock.)

But so many comments on there were along the lines of, "You need to show respect for your President!" and "What do you expect him to do, solve it? That's too much! You need to support him!"

Comments that were more in keeping, to me, of monarchy rather than democracy...I've noticed this many times, there and some other places. Here too, in the way people treat those (few) of us critical of the government or corporates. Here, it's more quiet suspicion, blank avoidance than outright rebuke.

Skepticism of goverment or corporate motives (or outcomes) does not tend to be welcome.

I find this the saddest characteristic of our serfdom. Not the poverty. Not the replacement of real wealth, and even fiat money, with debt. But the acceptance, and even encouragement, of our leadership to do this.

I would rather live in the Soviet Union described by Orlov, where it was common accepted knowledge that goverment and corporates are NOT on our side, than in this pretence.

'Belief' / 'faith' / trust is for religion-based monarchy, not for people who are supposed to be SERVED by their government.

StychoKiller's picture

Yup!  Just when did Amerika start electing "Kings?!"

AnAnonymous's picture

I find this the saddest characteristic of our serfdom. Not the poverty. Not the replacement of real wealth, and even fiat money, with debt. But the acceptance, and even encouragement, of our leadership to do this.



There are poor people on this board? Gimme a break. There are people who thought they would end much richer when they started to play the game (hence their frustration) That does not make them poor.

Renfield's picture

Sorry, Anon...I looked at my comment again and it was misleading.

By 'here' I meant Australia, where I live, not Zero Hedge.

By 'us' & 'our' poverty, I mean our general national population, not the posters & commentors here.

Apologies for being unclear.

Al Gorerhythm's picture

Americans still live the dream, believing that their President and government still walk the walk of Jefferson, Washington Lincoln and Adams. Unfortunately, the reality that they live is poles apart from the grade school plays and the history lessons, that are drummed into them about Constitutional Government and Liberty.

What ever happened to the ideal of small government, gold and silver as money to restrict its size, and let's not forget that barbarous relic; The Bill of Rights.

Smoke another bong and pump up the volume brothers and sisters. It drowns out that infernal noise, .............. and you know that you hear it.

It's the voice of your founders calling you to arms.

Renfield's picture

Yeah, you're right. I need to get that book. The NSA is horrifying to me. I'm actually surprised that the NY Times got away with reporting on it. I guess it's safely out of the public eye now, as it has been since 1952...Bamford is probably used to living very very carefully by now.

Two quotes from the interview stood out to me:

"The hardest thing to fix will be the reputation of the United States around the world. It'll probably take a generation before it gets back to where it was in the pre-Bush years. The US is now seen by a lot of people as the Soviet Union of the 21st century, and undoing that will be key. If we want to prevent terrorism in the future we've got to change the image of the US as a country that doesn't regard anybody else's views around the world and answers every question with evasion. If we get an Obama presidency, it might speed things up a bit."

"Our reputation, maybe. I think part of it is truly irreparable. There are people who never suspected the United States would engage in such things, and now until the day they die they'll have an opinion that will be cynical of the United States. No matter what the next president does, the person can think, "Well, who's going to be elected after him?" We had a Richard Nixon and we've still got a George Bush. And we're still going to have somebody after that. So there are aspects that are truly irreparable."

My view of the 'western' world is becoming more and more jaundiced, as I see a growing fascism although there are certainly comparisons to be made as well with the Soviet Union and its attempts to control and monitor its population, as well as our the growing gulag/prison populations.

I don't see fascism and Soviet cultures as opposites. I forget who said it (I think it was a commenter here), but I agree with the thought that BOTH Soviet and fascist cultures are 'left-wing', and the real 'right-wing' is an emphasis on individuality, and very limited government. To me, Soviet and fascist regimes are the same side, and I see the west as falling into this shadow more and more quickly. While the US is easy to identify as the leader of this shift, just as the USSR was in the last century, I do perceive that the whole 'western' world is passing into it. I think the 'free west' is behind us, in the 20th century.

Sorry if this comment rambles some. Just read the articles and still sorting out my response.

jeff montanye's picture

so the last right-wing u.s. government would be calvin coolidge's and, before that, one prior to lincoln.  rare as hen's teeth.  it is interesting to see the (now preposterously high) hopes that bamford had for the "new" administration of obama.  seems like it was just yesterday....

Renfield's picture

He wasn't the only one, jeff montanye.

I watched the election results and drank champagne, along with you guys in the US, on that November 2008 election day. I wasn't much for Hope but I really thought, with Bush gone, there would be some Change.

Such a naive little girl I was then.

MayIMommaDogFace2theBananaPatch's picture

Four seasons in one day -- every damn day!

magis00's picture

re: "fascism & communism are both left," I'm three chapters into Jonah Goldberg's Liberal Fascism, and while 80% of the book remains he's got me absolutely convinced of the same. 


All of this social upheaval and "state over individual" happened already in the 1910's and 20's (Russia, Italy, Germany, Coolidge's Progressive Party in 1918 [Podesta's Center for American Progress in 2010?]), only difference being that the Fed was infantile then, whereas today we're all drowning in debt and have 90 years of academic and media infiltration that's warped our views.  Losing battle I fear.  But a great read.

Renfield's picture

Thank you for another book recommendation. On my Find list.

bc0203's picture

So let me get this straight: Lamo is the slime, and not Manning?  Unless you're an anarchist, I'm having a hard time understanding your point of view...

Manning, who for all intents and purposes has been recruited as an agent to funnel top secret diplomatic and military information to Wikileaks, apparently has enough of a crisis of conscience to want to talk to a fellow "outlaw" about it, so he seeks out Lamo after reading an article about him in Wired.

Lamo, who is on parole and probably has to report this kind of encounter anyway, discloses the information to the FBI when he realizes the scope of what Manning has done.

He also, however, makes sure Wired gets a copy, to make sure the whole thing is made public, and his side of the story gets out.  Wired then publishes a series of articles about it on their Threat Level blog, which is an appropriate audience, given the subject matter:

Now I'm not saying that the FBI might have censored what Lamo could share with Wired after the story originally broke, but I'm having a hard time understanding how Wired is somehow "complicit" in all of this?  It seems to me that if they were part of "the establishment" they'd squash the story.

Just my two cents.

Apostate's picture

Threat Level and Poulsen are just paranoid propagandists.

If you're releasing an article and the only source that you spend any time with is Lamo, then you're just doing PR for the government and its stoolie. That's some bullshit journalism.

I have no idea how some people can boycott Coca-Cola when one of its managers in a foreign country puts a hit out on someone, but when it comes to the government, with a multi-century record of wanton murder and torture (often of its own citizens), they just zonk out and wrap themselves in the flag. 

If you read primary source documents from the 19th century, there's nothing like the craven statism that you have today. NYC rioted when the Union came up to draft people. 

jeff montanye's picture

i even remember a few riots from 1968-70.  some got shot and a few fires and bombs were set.  as i mentioned to a college senior recently, if more of you understood what the government's response to the "financial crisis" really meant for your generation, there'd be a million of you in washington getting tear-gassed.