Jackson Jambalaya

Nine times out of ten when CNBC has morning guest hosts a la the Friedman type I turn it off. Our local cup of arrogance and condescension has already runneth over from the likes of Hampton, Minor, Ladd and Stauffer. Life is too short.

Thomas Friedman is a fool. He is not nearly as intelligent nor as prescient as he thinks he is. Santelli's question was not idiotic and if Fatso Friedman can't see that then he's more ignorant than I thought.

Funny thing is liberals gripe about the focus conservatives put on Reagan, but who's the first name they trot out when trying to buy some bipartisan credibility? The only reason Chubby brought up the former president is for that reason, not to admit any admiration or approval for his policies.

And I agree with 11:28, that I get plenty of that arrogance from local know nothings who love to impale themselves upon their own delusional "moral high ground". I don't need to see Biscuits Friedman stare down his nose at everyone.

Funny clip of President Epic Fail tonight.

I don't like to listen to anyone who is well educated like Friedman either. Makes me feel bad about myself and I might have to question my knee jerk reactions.
I mean, Santelli was the manager of the derivatives product group of Gelderman , Inc, has a BS degree from the Univ. of Illinois Champaign/Urbana so he really gets my trust right away.
The only time Santelli would use those big words to try to sound smart would be when trying to sell derivatives.
I want people who have an education from a second rate school and who pulled the wool over investors to help me form my opinions. I know they'll be objective and know their stuff and really care about my economic future more than their own.

You're absolutely right, 12:38. The substance of the argument is completely and utterly meaningless. It's all about the pedigree, right? Let's just marginalize anyone who didn't attend Harvard, Yale, Oxford or some other such elite institution.

I'm with you. A school that has produced 21 Nobel laureates and 20 Pulitzer recipients is definitely second rate. That's why I'm so glad Obama is our president. It doesn't matter that he has no original ideas or that no one can point to a single document or writing that shows a whit of insight or unique intellect. The fact is that he went to Harvard, so anything out of his mouth is pure gold, correct?

Santelli asked a question and bolstered it with definition and logic, and Friedman responded with the incredibly astute and acerbic retort, "What makes Social Security work is fixing Social Security in terms of those who pay in." But Friedman writes for the NYT and Santelli went to Champaign Urbana, so Friedman wins, dammit!

I don't know about anyone else, but I sleep so much better at night knowing that people like you who employ such bulletproof logic to determine who will tell you how to think (and, consequently, how to vote) are out there. It's a shame more of us don't put a ring in our noses and follow those with a sheepskin from Oxford and an OBE rather than weigh and decide issues based on the merit of the arguments.

Reed, how nicely you skirted the comparison of careers and Santelli's role in the derivatives fraud and bolstered his educational background by associating him with University of Illinois / Chicago.
I was responding to you calling Friedman a fool and that you dismiss anything he would say out of hand. Apparently ,you think there is no difference in an education from JPS and Jackson Prep or St Andrews.
For me, it's not the institution but how the department in that institution is rated. Not all the well regarded economic departments and business schools are at Ivy League schools. I find the notion that somehow going to an Ivy League school is a negative absurb.
And, yes, someone who will independently study and broaden their knowledge at an underated school can have a good idea. But, Santelli has not demonstrated that he is one of those guys, and certainly not in this exchange.
But, using sarcasm isn't an argument. Social Security isn't a ponzi scheme because it worked until Congress started raiding it.
It would still be working if not drained of funds by SSI and Medicaid which were NOT part of the original plan. It's not a ponzi because it's not dependent on more workers but on investment of the funds over time. If social security is a ponzi scheme, then so is an annuity or a pension.
Santelli and Rick Succession Perry ( who forgot Texas exercised the right to succeed and then lost it when they were on the losing side in the Civil War) need to do their homework.