My open letter to CNBC about Melissa Francis and Larry Kudlow

If you don’t watch cable financial news channel CNBC, the following post will mean nothing to you.

I promise you won’t see this kind of post very often. In the morning, I often turn my television to CNBC. I don’t know how much longer I will continue this practice. I like to know what is going on in the world, especially in the world of money. I like to expose myself to differing thoughts and opinions. But sadly it seems that the recent financial crisis and the election of President Obama have had a negative effect on the broadcasting at CNBC.

The radicals and enemies of the middle class and American work have come to the forefront. With additional sadness, I’ve watched as these corporate SHILLS have started to dominate the discussion of American business on CNBC. A disturbing “point of view” has emerged that isn’t limited to Larry Kudlow and Melissa Francis, the shrill skreech of both Dennis Kneale and Michelle Caruso-Cabrera often shout down the more moderate voices of both their guests and their fellow “deskmates” Bill Griffeth and Sue Herera.  Perhaps, as I’ve said, I’ll just have to turn it off … but in the meantime I’ve written an open letter to the people at CNBC detailing my outrage.

THE CALL is the name of the morning program that features Melissa Francis and Larry Kudlow.

Two people who deserve (in my opinion) to be jobless and homeless.

Two people who deserve (in my opinion) to be jobless and homeless.

To whom it may concern at CNBC:

Why don’t Melissa Francis and Larry Kudlow just say, “We’re 100% behind f*&#ing the American worker and f*&#ing the American consumer. Rich people are smarter than poor people, that’s why they’re rich and why poor people are poor. Rich people deserve to be richer and poor people deserve to be poorer and the government should insure that this process continues. And we don’t really need a middle class as long as the crumbs effectively trickle down to the homeless and nearly homeless.”

Isn’t it time these two corporate STOOGES reveal their prejudices? C’mon, just be honest. Stop the pretense. You’ve sold out. You have no journalistic distance or credibility.

Do either of these fugitives from FOX NEWS belong to a broadcasters union?

I think CNBC could make a lot more money if they got rid of the horrible and unnecessary labor costs involved in THEIR salaries. Show these corporate SHILLS the door. In this economy CNBC can EASILY find someone who can do it cheaper and better. (Larry and Melissa would agree that it is CNBC’s corporate responsibility to do so.)

How much benefit could CNBC see in the long run if CNBC were to declare bankruptcy so that the broadcasters contracts could be voided. And while you’re at it, void everyone’s contract: producers, camera-men, technicians … there must be a HUGE opportunity here to improve the profit margins if CNBC could pay all these people minimum wage.

Hey, there are HUGE corporate benefits to high unemployment. It becomes a buyer’s market for all employees. It doesn’t matter that lives get destroyed. Ask Melissa and Larry, human lives don’t matter … only capital investment has any real value.

And given their expressed opinions, both Larry and Melissa would by HYPOCRITES if they objected to their own dismissals. Whatever is good for the “open” market is good for everyone … right?

If Larry Kudlow and Melissa Francis are not Anti-American middle class … I’d love to hear their philosophy. From what I hear, neither are more sophisticated than a very thinly veiled … “whatever is good for me and my rich friends is good for everyone.”

That isn’t really philosophy … that is myopic selfishness. If you can’t see more of the big picture than what is good for your friends, the people you meet as a business journalist and the end of your nose, then you don’t deserve your job.

Melissa Francis seems like a victim of brainwashing.

Larry Kudlow is delusional and the enemy of every working American.

Please replace both of them with voices of reason and common sense. We don’t need any more divisive radicals, we need people who can see the big picture, not just shill for their friends and themselves. We need people who are interested in eliminating the evils (and extremely high costs) of poverty, not supporting the continued and accelerated redistribution of wealth from the poor and middle class to the corporate raiders, rapers and strip miners.

That’s my version of the story.

– Dave Olbrich (DWO) Monday,  June 1, 2009

Come back next time for stuff about comic books, comic book creators, the comic book business and occasional “other” stuff.

About these ads

21 Comments

Filed under Fanatic General, Point-of-view, Uncategorized

21 responses to “My open letter to CNBC about Melissa Francis and Larry Kudlow

  1. Mak Herr

    But seriously, could they beat the Hulk in a fight?

  2. You have my vote, mister senator.

  3. Then you’ll really be annoyed when you find out that Melissa Francis will be played by Scarlett Johansson in “CNBC: The Movie I Won’t Watch.”

    But seriously, CNBC still thinks Jim Cramer has shreds of credibility left after his takedown by Jon Stewart, and when they run stories about how “you” can profit during the recession, you know exactly who their audience is: rich, puffy, white guys who think Panera Bread is slang for a South American currency.

  4. Somebody actually watches that channel? But seriously, it’s financially oriented, and those outlets are going to be inherently conservative and pro-corporate–see the Wall Street Journal, Forbes, Fortune, etc.

    If you can’t stand the bias, turn off the channel and subscribe to Business Week (which is slanted liberal about as much as Fortune is slanted conservative), or listen to Marketwatch on NPR (which very much touts the little guy).

  5. Alleen

    Melissa Francis just wondered aloud if the fact that Obama (and White House staff) won’t cross a picket line to attend a Mayor’s Conference means that people could just “put a picket line around the White House…Yeah! Anyone could just have a picket line and keep him from going anywhere!”

    Ahhh…right. Seriously. What a foolish person.

  6. Dave Olbrich

    Far too often, the entire channel feels like an extension of FOX NEWS, not NBC.

    I don’t understand it. It seems to me that you don’t have to be a right wing extremist to be a business reporter in this country. It simply is not necessary. It is even more mystifying from a management point of view. The only competition CNBC has is the extremely lame Fox Business Channel. So instead of creating a product in stark contrast from the conservo-nuts at Fox, they create one that tries to out-flank it on the right. Makes no sense to me.

    With Obama’s outrageously high approval ratings with everyday Americans, I’m surprised and shocked that these supposed news anchors go out of their way to alienate those people and trot out their own ignorance by airing their ill-advised and openly hostile opinions.

  7. brian

    Kudlow and Lenin would agree she is a useful idiot
    I suspect GE lets this nonsense continue to serve as a counter balance to MSNBC so they can think they are balanced
    If you want a better product watch Bloomberg although not as many money honies

  8. Jag

    I agree totally with this comment and I am tired of calling CNBC. The only thing left is to turn the channel, which I do a lot. Melissa Caruso Cabrera needs to go also.

  9. Becky

    You people really don’t understand what it would be like to live in a socialist vs. a capitalist country do you… Capitalism DOES work for everyone who works it… if you watch CNBC there are only a VERY few people like Melissa and Larry who support free market capitalism; there actually are a lot of libs on there. And I’m NOT a rich corporate snob…I come from a line of grocer and lumber company workers, some of whom then founded a bank back in the 1800s. They invested in the stock market of that bank back in the 1900’s twenties and thirties and didn’t live beyond their means and then passed on to my grandparents, parents and then to me (their descendant) stock that is now worth a lot of money. I also worked for 20 years as a social worker helping the poor, abused and mentally ill. So I am NOT a snob nor a high society person…but I do believe in working and investing for your own future, not in taking from one group and giving it to another group who didn’t do what they should have to make it in our FREE society. People have choices about education and what they do for a living and there is ALWAYS a critical point in their lives where they make a choice that takes them down one path vs. another and therefore determines the outcome of their lives. If you don’t finish high school or go to college you are automatically limiting your options economically. If you get married young and start having babies before you can afford them, then you limit your future. If you go to college and then go to medical school or become a business person and work your way up like all the people on CNBC do you would be in the same position you think they are. Instead of resenting those who are successful and then simply share how they believe they got there, be wiser in your financial life, invest in the stock market instead of putting in a pool or buying a motorcycle or RV or taking that vacation that uses up your savings. Don’t get into debt and don’t buy stuff if you don’t have the money. Pay your bills instead of buying cigarettes and alcohol. It isn’t that hard! In terms of what Obama wants to do with taxatation, why should the money MY family worked for and invested go to someone else who didn’t do what we did? Why should taxes be higher on us…to punish us for being smart and sacrificing and saving? Life may not seem fair, but everyone does make choices that determine the entire rest of their lives. So quit attacking TV capitalists and look in the mirror to see why you are dissatisfied with your own life! What choices did you make that took you down the road to what you perceive as NON-success?

  10. Dave Olbrich

    Wow. Welcome to the party Becky.

    While I appreciate your comments and agree with a number of them, I am not at all sure how they were intended to comment on what I had written.

    To answer your comment with any degree of completeness would require tens of thousands of words, which seems overkill on a post that is several months old. There are a long list of side-issues and non-issues that you introduce that seem to want to argue with points that you imagined that I made … but didn’t.

    Let me add a couple of quick points.
    1) As the economy seems to have hit bottom and the stock market has been on a run up off its bottom the vitriol and lunacy that was evident on CNBC in June has been dialed back significantly. Maybe someone at their end realized how far off the tracks these “talking heads” had jumped … or maybe their panic ended when it became clear that the fortunes of their Wall Street cronies was no longer at risk.

    2) The “I got mine through hard work so everyone who isn’t getting theirs must not be working hard” argument is specious at its very core. Selfish and simplistic and wrong. Any level of capitalistic success has far more random factors built into it than most people realize. Read a book called “The Drunkard’s Walk” … it is completely and utterly apolitical … but addresses the mathmatical differences between subjective perception and scientific reality.

    3) There is no FREE market. If there was, it would bear no resemblance to the United States economy now … or in 1900 … or in 1800. Capitalism only works if it is bound on all sides by appropriate laws and regulations. Somalia has a free market economy, a weak non-intrusive government, extremely low taxes and a citizenry with no respect for the rule of law. Unfortunately that hasn’t produced a great country. Unfettered capitalism is anarchy. All you and I disagree about are the rules and laws needed to make capitalism work.

    4) Capitalism doesn’t work for everyone. Working hard is no guarantee of success. Making all the “right decisions” in life is no guarantee of success. Your statement that “Capitalism DOES work for everyone who works it.” makes for a nice simple bumper sticker, but reality is far more complex and filled with subtlety.

    Thanks for reading my blog.

  11. Dave Olbrich

    Just in case you were wondering about the difference between conservative fantasies about the evil and lack of opportunity in socialist countries and the reality.

    Turns out the facts are these. Socialist countries can be (and many are) more PROSPEROUS places to lives for their citizens than capitalist countries. Real FACTS are more than a match for ridiculous right-wing anecdotes and paranoia.

    Check it out:

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20091027/lf_nm_life/us_prosperity_index

  12. Terry Brewster

    What is all this whining about in regards to the CNBC on-air commentators? You all sound like a bunch of college freshman who never grew up. Sure most of the CNBC commentators have a point-of-view that is pro-capitialistic and free market. So what.

    Have the professors fed you so much propaganda, that you can’t even perceive or understand that there is at least some positive aspects of free markets and capitalism that has fueled America’s growth and our standard of living? Or do we actually think that if we just support a liberal agenda that minimizes capitalism, Wall Street, financial institutions, and most of our medium and large businesses and we increase the role of big government, political correctness, big unions, and general all around “nannyism” heaven on earth will begin? Come on, get real.

    All that I see that is going on here is a ridiculous debate between conservative ideologues at CNBC clashing with your liberal ideologies. But please don’t make it sound like something more than that. If somehow you think your quasi-ideologies are superior to theirs – please reread your sophomoronic written rants. I don’t see how any of the views expressed here would lead you to upgrade your own life, let alone the community you live in. Don’t delude yourselves that any of you have the keys to the kingdom of how to develop a better America. If you do it certainly hasn’t been expressed here yet.

    Furthermore, I don’t remember the most capitialistic ideologue ever saying that Capitialism will be “heaven on earth” for everyone. Can we improve what we have in America? Absolutely, I’m all for that. There is a lot of things we can all do in America to improve our life and the communities we live in. In fact, I would certainly support any new and creative point-of-view that actually had a coherent realistic plan attached to it that would take a step down the better road of improving the quality of life in America. However, as always the easy to do bitching and moaning is not a coherent plan that will lead to any improvements in your own life let alone societies.

    Instead of whining about everything wrong with capitialism, I would love to hear and would support any changes that would improve society without “big government” involved in every aspect of it. Personally, I would love to see a better partnership between business, American workers, capital markets. liberal ideals (those espoused by our founding fathers, not the incoherent kind expressed today) and politicians we can actually trust to help solve real problems.

    It starts with each of us to quit believing that there is one political ideology or party that is going to solve our problems for us. And then, through own fact gathering and common sense thinking begin to hold our political leaders to far better solutions to problems than the propaganda they feed us (both parties) to date.

  13. Dave Olbrich

    Thanks for writing Terry.

    I just got done re-reading the original post and all the comments after that post … and I’m not sure that you read the same thing that I read.

    I don’t see any connections between what was written previously and your comment except your first sentence (which completely missed the point).

    And frankly it hard to take you seriously when you contradict yourself all in one sentence. You wrote, “I would love to hear and support any changes that would improve society without ‘big government’ involved…”

    Besides being contradictory, it is also the single most naive statement I’ve read in many a year. Changes that would improve society? Seems to me that there are only two options … brainwashing to alter human nature (which I don’t recommend) or changes the rules by which we live. If you change the rules, who is going to enforce those rule changes? Do you want private business police? Church police? I don’t think so. So the only way to create new rules to improve society … and to make sure those rules are enforced you MUST involve the government.

  14. Terry Brewster

    Thank you for responding, Dave.

    To borrow a phrase from your response to me, you completely missed the point of my comments. Believe me far and away the main objective of my comments was to do nothing more than to try and let some air out of the over-inflated balloon of self-importance and righteousness that is so prevalent in your writings. Based on your response I had some success there.

    My comments were certainly not intended to be an end all defense rebuttal for Melissa Francis’s and Larry Kudlow’s point-of-views other than to say they have every right to make them, no matter how much you may disagree with them. Especially on a business-oriented show such as CNBC. Pat Curley sums up my point perfectly, CNBC has a conservative bias, why are you railing away and wasting your time trying to get them “kicked-off” the air for this offense? (my editorial comments). She rightly continues, “Don’t watch the channel, and tune into NPR or Marketwatch, and read the perfect world acccording to Business Week.”

    Another reason I didn’t want to get in a serious debate on any of your open-letter to CNBC points, was many of your arguments were either a little too vague such as “bring someone in who can see the big picture,” (first you don’t really define what big picture means other than the implied one that it is someone(s) who happens to agree with your big picture definition) or the very puzzling and incoherent statements such as your rant about Melissa and Larry shouldn’t object to their dismissals (based on I assume your open letter wish that they be dismissed and/or that CNBC could find someone to do their jobs better for less money?) because for them to object or believe otherwise would make them hypocrits of the “open markets” they espouse. Huh? CNBC, Melissa, and Larry know very well how the “open market” works and they all come to work every day knowing the brutal fact, that CNBC wants ratings, and Melissa and Larry will get handsomely paid if they produce the ratings CNBC desires. Thus, all parties in this business relationship, CNBC, Melissa, and Larry, are acting in a open market fashion – compete or you will not survive here. The only thing CNBC would take exception to in your open market plea, is they would disagree with your statement that you make the decision on whether someone could do their jobs better for cheaper. However, once CNBC does make that assessment that someone can in fact do Melissa and Larry’s job better and cheaper (sorry Dave this isn’t your call, but theirs), they will be dismissed. This is hardly a startling or debatable point, except apparently by you. Further, I predict that Larry and Melissa not only know this, but will not be crying over this “open market” fact if it does happen to them.

    And finally, you seem to be so sensitive to anyone who doesn’t agree exactly with your view of the world, that you immediately assume there is no room for consensus or possible agreement. Case in point, no where in my writing was I portraying a totally ant-government view point. While I definately have a pro-capitialism bias I will proudly admit to, as you have a pro-government bias (that you seem relunctant to admit to), there are points we could probably agree on.

    I happen to believe that the government has an important role in our Capitalistic economy (reread my comments). In fact, I share your point (and thought I made it in my letter, but some times we only read the negative comments made by someone rather than the positive comments – our human condition I suppose) that the government must establish the rules and regulations that we all must play by in our free market capitialistic society. There is simply no other entity to fulfill that role as you rightly point out. I am sure we could argue on what the Government rules and regulations should be, but that could be not only a healthy debate between us, but should be one being made over and over again by all the media to the American people as well as our educational system to their students.

    Where I get off the government bus is not in it setting the rules, but when people start to espouse the pie-in-the sky virtues of government entity’s with the politicians running them vs. the nasty free market corporations and the robber barons running them. These type of general good vs. evil ideologic premises are not worth spending time debating. For all the negative things you can say about capitialism, and there are plenty, there are far more negatives (and I would certainly debate this if you like) with the government in complete control of the economy under of course the age-old vote getting propaganda of helping the “middle class and the poor.”

    My comments besides deflating the “balloon of sanctimony”, was to simply ask the question, isn’t there solutions to improve society other than big goverment (liberal view point) vs. totally unconstrained free markets (conservative point-of-view).

    My journey has been to try and find a better balance than we have now between government and free markets, rather than rant and rave about the virtues of big government or free markets. I have absolutely no interest in any further debate if it is shaped around trying to convince me that your ideology is superior to mine. If, however, you are open to finding a better balance (between government and free markets) that has not been discovered as yet, I would enjoy further discussions with you to try and find that path.

    Again, thanks for your response.

  15. Dave Olbrich

    “A better balance than we have now between government and free markets” is definitely something worth searching for. I know that is what I’m searching for. Nice to know that you’re searching for the same thing.

    So we aren’t arguing at all about the goals … just the path, method, technique and shape of the rules.

    Actions have consequences and media outlets thrive on feedback. I was providing feedback on the actions of CNBC on-air personalities … nothing more and nothing less. CNBC is obviously free to do whatever they please.

    As I have mentioned above, shortly after my post, both Melissa Francis and Larry Kudlow turned down their radical rhetoric. Did I (or any number of other critical audience members) have anything to do with it? Who knows? Maybe. Did their bosses take them aside and point out the divisive nature of what they were saying? Or did they realize on their own that their comments made them look foolish compared to their co-workers?

    I don’t think that the media is above criticism and I don’t think you think so either. Sounds to me (and correct me if you’re wrong) that your problem with what I wrote is that it was over-the-top, self-indulgent and loudly strident. For that, in the interests of brevity, I plead guilty.

    If your journey is to find a better balance between
    government and business, I could support that … except we’d have to agree on a starting point … and that I’m afraid may be a bigger challenge than either of us want to take on … and still keep our jobs.

  16. Coogan

    Melissa Francis & Larry Kudlow’s Concern for the “Little People”:

    Yesterday (Dec 9, 2009) on CNBC Larry Kudlow and Melissa Francis were having hissy fits over the topic of UK Bankers being subjected to a new one year 50% tax on bonuses over £ 25,000 (aprox $40,000). The clueless namby pamby tag team were in hysterics that the idea may catch on in the U.S., which will surely evaporate whatever’s left of their so-called the trickle down economy, and crying their crocodile tears opining that regular Joe’s will end up even worse off for it…

    Melissa Francis actually said such a tax hurts the “little people” (like doorman, cleaning staff, dry cleaners, etc ) more than anyone, to which Kudlow parroted the sentiment, even echoing her term “little people” in a non-sarcastic, non-ironic tone.

    Good god, where to begin?…. It’s ugly, it’s shockingly wrongheaded, it’s embarrassing. Sadly, that comment alone sums up their philosophy concisely. Larry should know better than fan the flames of class distinction, being paranoid to acknowledge that class war exists or could flare up again like the 70’s & 80’s. Curiously, class war is one topic he’ll squelch immediately, every time. Seems to be his sensitive spot. (I’d like to know why) Perhaps Mr. “Chronically Optimistic” doesn’t like reality pressing against his happy bubble of denial…

    My distrust for Kudlow and his cheerleader babes is why I dislike CNBC. For years I’ve only tolerated watching for it’s meaty content- which over the years has naturally been whittled down to maybe 10% on an average day. The remaining 90% is irritating fluff, dead end-false issues, and commercial padded filler so I toggle back and forth between it and Bloomberg. It’s night and day, a nice example of what Capitalisms extremes look like: the impatient, juvenile, gimme-more, responsibility-phobic, short term thinking narcissists and the truly conservative, responsible, long term planners, civil minded students of global economy that discuss ideas not just what pulls in immediate profits whatever it takes.

    Kudlow and Francis harp on endlessly about high taxes but loathe a simplified flat tax rate, weird. They like cutting taxes only on the rich, making the case it naturally leads to trickle down growth, a tired old unproven and illogical assertion. Lower to middle income earners receive income more often from peers, those below and slightly higher than you on the economic scale, not the very top. (Maybe if Francis and Kudlow moved out of their full-service upper east side buildings they’d get a taste of everyone elses reality) Not all millionaires start small businesses, nor do many even pay taxes when they can squirm out of it. Hedge fund Billionaires don’t seem to spread the wealth around much, haven’t they noticed? The new super rich hoard and sure some donate to philanthropies to offset taxes, but Philanthropies don’t hire a lot of regular folk though…

    Fact is wealth for the upper tier has grown exponentially to levels never seen in history just in the last 15 years (some based on artificial foundations and illegal schemes) yet it’s still not enough money… the bankers & the Kudlows need more and more but never seem to say when it’s ‘enough’ then retire like the ‘old timers’ did, happy to ease into another life where the cash nest egg they saved took care of the needs until death. Funny thing about the behavior of the ‘rich’, they really do live by a notion that hoarding money is best. I’ve known quite a few rich & famous people (worked for a few doing service work) and routinely see how they squeeze labor from the little people on the cheap, but rarely express gratitude nor tip very well if at all. I’ve found those the grow up with money see the world different, they have that safety net built in to their mentality where hard realities don’t seep in, which distorts the value of money. The lower to middle class are far more charitable when it comes to day to day economic matters, they tip better, cut deals, keep things moving, money gets spread around and people build relationships and life is good. In this equation the very poor are another matter, can be extremely giving or selfish depending, but that’s a whole other world, there’s little time to delve into that.

    But i digress… the bigger picture is today in this ‘new reality’, we the people (the “little people”) whatever country we reside in, are apparently expected to, and guilt tripped into bailing out irresponsible banks/ers, we’re told we should allow taxpayer funds to pay bonuses for those that work at these banks, that we shouldn’t cap bonuses AND shouldn’t allow extra taxation on said extra income. If we do it might hurt the little people! Put differently, if we discontinue pooling our meager funds into “their” banks where they misuse our precious capital and expect rewards for it, somehow we’re helping along global disaster that will collapse the entire system, thus destroying ourselves. Ok, right. Got it. That officially makes it an upside down economy, where it’s trickle UP not down. Backwards logic doesn’t last long though. I for one welcome the new new reality, where gravity kicks in and things are set right.

    Just a year after the financial meltdown those who remain standing are back to expecting normal bonuses, paid by using the “little peoples” money. Who needs who here? I think it’s quite clear what the game is, maybe always has been. Before it was catastrophe to not infuse banks with emergency capital, paid by the public taxpayer. We’re damned if we do, damned if we don’t, so fine, let the damn bloated, convoluted system implode! For those of us that never bought into the crooked mess, had a toe in the pool but never spent all day swimming in it, life goes on, we continue to value what’s real not admire or obsess over our bank balance(s). Can’t speak for everyone but the “little people” i know won’t devolve back into cavemen in a nasty dog eat dog world of primal cut-throat survival. Good people survive, adjust and move on. It’s evolution, a natural survival of the fittest. But i’m sure we’ll survive better when we focus more on ‘us’, not ‘me’. We must carry each other in small ways as best we can and built anew.

    I’ve pondered that this is hyper-capitalistic nightmare climaxed thanks to a generation that’s grown up being groomed more by the banking system and not responsible families. From youth they’ve been given easy money, endless access to credit, but have an inherent inability to judge the proper value of things or labour, to understand worth and when one is overpaying. They also lack basic knowledge that money isn’t an end game, it’s a tool to be used, and wealth is different than having “stuff”, being rich and powerful. Then again maybe for them it’s too late…

  17. MARK S

    I couldn’t agree more with you! These people could care less about the average american. Don’t forget Trish Reagan (another ex Goldan Sachs emp.) By the way, what stock do you like in the next 20 minutes?…..

  18. Karen

    OMG! I cannot believe that I have finally found someone who has expressed my exact sentiment when it comes to this ridiculous bunch of so-called journalists on CNBC! I used to watch and listen to the network all day, as I traded options, but they continued to go from bad to worse. It finally got to the point where I had to consistently change my channel to Bloomberg News from 11:00 A.M. – 2:00 P.M. everyday, as opposed to alternating between the two.

    I found your blog today after doing a search for Melissa Francis, because I suddenly realized I had not seen her face during the opening of “The Call.” I didn’t know she had been on maternity leave, with the possibility that she will be returning to the set one day…blah! I even sent an e-mail to the network about that particular show.

    I completely agree with you comments about Michelle Caruso-Cabrera and Dennis Kneale! I realized the negative venom that they constantly spewed at their guests wasn’t doing a thing for my psyche, or my options trading. Now I have my volume muted during the times that either of those two are on air, even if they are simply covering during another time-slot.

    Unfortunately, it seems that CNBC is trying to appeal to the same audience as Fox Business News. But alas, the network is changing its programming during the 12-1:00 P.M. time-slot, effective Monday, 6/7/2010…maybe there is some hope after all.

  19. Masi

    I searched several places today (6/8/2010) to write a scathing response to what Kudlow and Francis were saying about Obahma’s response to the BP oil disaster and the total denial that the regulations put in place by previous Republican administrations have nothing to do with it. They had a guest that was no more than 25 years old that said, (I’m paraphrasing) that Obama got all that money from BP and has sat down with them and now lets them do what ever they want. NEVER do they mention the 1990 oil drilling act that specifically states that the oil/drilling companies responsible for the spill must be the ones that clean it up. Thus restricting any Government involvement. They want the Government to take over. BUT, on every other issue such as the Government trying to handle the financial crisis that happened (YES, DURING BUSH’S DEREGULATION CATASTROPHE YEARS) these two kept yelling for the Government to stay out. That they were to intrusive and this was a Government takeover. If the Government is going to be in complete control of this cleanup, wouldn’t that have a direct effect on BP’s liability. BP would turn around on all of the law suites and blame the Government. Just as all the wealthy constantly due while they scream about taking personal responsibility and all that. They are constantly trying to have it both ways.

    To repeat what others here have said, Kudlow has absolutely NO respect for the working people. Saying things like, “they would rather stay on Unemployment than find a job”. Does he even know you have to send in several verified job applications/week to continue to be eligible and receive their benefits. Then this morning he insinuated The elderly would spend the $250 on booze! Doesn’t he care or know that 95% of the elderly are choosing between food and life saving medications? What a total a$$**ole. These statements have nothing to do with how to invest ones money. Just his opinion of people who earn less than $100,000/year. He is outrageous and has no compassion OR empathy for his fellow Americans.

    I too have had to turn the show off after hearing those comments. I watch to hear what CEO’s and other experts on the economy have to say but when those two commentators, Kudlow especially start spewing their anti middle class BS I am forced to turn it off. Their insulting of 200 million Americans is disgusting.

    Could some one post a more direct page or address so I can express my thoughts on this subject directly to CNBC and Kudlow? Thanx in advance.

  20. I recall Mozilla getting a platform for his schemes whenever he needed it. CNBC is nothing but a PR front for Wall St. huckstering. What other unsavory titans had and have a place to operate from at CNBC?

  21. Mark

    I can’t stand the Larry Kudlow show, send him to work for FOX News he will be happy there. Numerous people feel the same way. It is not about financial news anymore. CNBC wake up, you are loosing viewers.

Leave a Reply

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 )

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s