Charlie Rose Science Series
Click here to watch previous episodes of the Charlie Rose Science Series
The Dark Side: The Inside Story of How The War on Terror Turned into a War on American Ideals
by Jane Mayer
Buy it
by Jane Mayer
Buy it
06/04/2007
Carl Bernstein
A conversation with Carl Bernstein
Keywords:
A conversation with author and journalist Carl Bernstein about his book "A Woman in Charge: The Life of Hillary Rodham Clinton".
DVD
Charlie Rose DVDs on Amazon.
Charlie Rose DVDs on Amazon.
Audio
Audio available through Audible.com.
Audio available through Audible.com.
Transcripts
Transcripts available through Voxant.
Transcripts available through Voxant.
Very frustrating interview.I hoped to learn more about Sen. Clinton,but found this impossible given Charlie Rose's almost constant talking. Mr. Rose, you present many interesting guests and have a breadth of knowledge yourself.The conversations have an intimcy that is rare on television.All this is a great pleasure to me as a viewer.But I wish you would allow your guests more space.
I liked this interview. I think you can tell that Charlie and Carl are good friends. This banter is typical of friends that are both very knowledgeable and passionate about the subject matter. Charlie, rightly so, expressed a exasperation with Carl for not really writing a current book, 20 pages on Hillary's senate record? Charlie knew that this book wasn't Bernstein's best and was not going to give him a free ride. Bravo!
Why does Charlie keep interrupting his guests? It's such bad form. If he is doing for a reason, to challenge them on a point or for some purpose, that's fine...but it often looks like he's trying to show off what he knows. I could really care less what he knows. Compare this to Charlie's performance when he has lying politicians on- he interrupts them- but does he ever ask the REALLY HARD questions- no....but he has to ruin interviews like this by chatting away...
The commentary generated by Hillary Clinton's candidacy is as much about us as it is about her: exactly how inauthentic will we be in this yet-becoming American experiment in democracy in denying her a chance to show us what the first woman presidency will look like? She is charting a new course,making her way,sometimes stumbling, but learning and moving on, with courage and brilliance and flaws and forgiveness and determination. In the history of American presidents, she's going to look so good that we'll look back on 2008 and wonder what all the fuss was about. Watch her win!
Bernstein is leading his book tour with several claims that donâ??t seem to appear in his book. These themes may prime book sales among Clinton-haters, and they may endear Bernstein to some in the press. But their absence from the book itself raises an obvious question about Bernsteinâ??s â??authenticity.â?? Yes, thereâ??s a word for work like this, where a famous author sells a book with themes that donâ??t even appear in the volume. Or maybe there isnâ??t! After all, when have you seen a former icon sell a book in such an odd manner?
I thoroughly enjoyed the repartee supplied by you and Carl Bernstein. I was intrigued by Mr. Bernstein's conceptualization of Mrs. Clinton as needing to rise to the level of authenticity rather than inauthenticity. It brought to mind the parallel similarities of Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt and the Clinton team. Franklin rose from presenting an inauthentic level of political statesmanship to a very authentic level with the partnership that he shared with Eleanor. It seems very similar to the partnership of Bill Clinton and Hillary with the interesting aspect of Hillary and Bill extending their roles. The question is can Hillary and Bill rise to the level of statesmanship that is needed in these times of audacity and monstrous leadership under Mr Bush.
I thoroughly enjoyed the repartee supplied by you and Carl Bernstein. I was intrigued by Mr. Bernstein's conceptualization of Mrs. Clinton as needing to rise to the level of authenticity rather than inauthenticity. It brought to mind the parallel similarities of Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt and the Clinton team. Franklin rose from presenting an inauthentic level of political statesmanship to a very authentic level with the partnership that he shared with Eleanor. It seems very similar to the partnership of Bill Clinton and Hillary with the interesting aspect of Hillary and Bill extending their roles. The question is can Hillary and Bill rise to the level of statesmanship that is needed in these times of audacity and monstrous leadership under Mr Bush.
Charlie...I've been a fan and constant listener since 1985 (Nightwatch). You are developing some very bad habits. I don't know whether this is a nascent hubris or, like some other TV hosts, you think your ratings will rise if you become more combative and aggressive (as displayed most recently during the Bernstein interview.) Please! You (and Bill Moyers) are our last best hope for informative discourse. Don't blow it!
Molly Ivins wrote "Shrub".
Frankly, I was glad when Charlie began to give as good as Carl was giving. The first 15 minutes of the interview contained the most astoundingly subtle and nuanced character assasination I have ever witnessed. I kept asking, "what is Carl's motivation?" Then Carl plugged his son's CD, which was such a crass tangent to go off on. My mouth dropped open. He came across as disaffected and apathetic, as if he doesn't believe his words will have an impact on anyone anymore. I didn't get the feeling he took himself seriously. Maybe because the world has not changed for the better because of his years of journalism, he just doesn't care about anything but making money. It was a very sad and odd experience to listen to him.
I'm glad for your curiosity, Charlie. Thought it was an interesting interview. I don't know your politics and I want to keep it that way. You're a great interviewer. One thing though, Bernstein never said, that the point of his book was about Hillary Clinton being inauthentic. He said it was a word, not mentioned in the book, but a word he used to discuss the book. I think it summed up the problem with Hillary Clinton, exactly. I couldn't put my finger on it, I thought of it as insincerity and all abmition. Your interview and the Democratic debate on CNN is slowly changing my mind about her, SLOWLY.
Most of the comments are complaints about Charlie interuppting Carl. I think Carl took advantage of the show to sell his book along with his son's CD. This was obviously a marketing strategy on the part of Carl's publishers-to convienently take 7+ years to write (or rehash old info)and put it on the market after Sen. Clinton decided to run for office. As for his comment that if we had this type of book on Bush, maybe he wouldn't have been elected. I don't know where all the investigative reporters have been for the last 8 years- yes I do- Peter Jennings was dying of cancer, Dan Rather got fired for doing his job along with anyone else trying to bring to light that Bush/Cheney was not a good idea. Where was Carl?
Charlie, Most of these comments have missed the point. True, you were unusually aggressive and interrupted Bernstein more than your usual guest. And even without your interruptions, Bernstein seemed incapable of expressing a coherent thought. Those issues alone made the show terribly difficult to watch. What really bothered me, though, was that you lost all credibility as an honest broker. The real reason you behaved so differently is that your admiration for the Clintons clouds your judgement. You're the interviewer, Charlie, not a partisan. Your behavior was pathetic. Bill Clinton "the most curious man in the world" - what kind of exaggerated superlative is that? I wasn't aware that you had met everybody in the world. Curiosity may be one of his traits, but a trait certainly overwhelmed by a lack of any conviction and a pathologic moral compass. The fact that Hillary would stay with him simply reveals her true, conniving motivation. Hardly the people you need to risk your reputation defending.
Charlie, I have written you so many times over the years about you constant interrupting..........however this was really over the top. You appeared to be actually hostile....and particularly unfair with extreme bias. I hung in to the end but this was a dreadful experience. I have always had hopes of you being an intelligent listener. You are not yet successful. I usually love your show, but you just cannot allow such sub standard inter action between you and your "guest". This was the worst display of rudeness and interrupting I have ever seen. Charlie, you must learn how to allow your guest to present a 'complete thought' without you breaking in and disrupting their thought processes. When you interviewed Al Gore there was a little insensitive ego showing also. I have read what the earlier responses have been and the majority were left with the same bad taste in their mouths. I can only hope you really pay attention to what they have said. Your constant interrupting is about to do you in, Charlie. Dorian.
I'm a huge appreciator of Charlie Rose and I couldn't be more grateful for his sense of fairness and propriety than last evening when he tried to control Carl Bernstein's gushing stream of blatant lies. If you want an interviewer who will happily join in the stone throwing , go the Chris Matthews, or those other millionaire beltway 'pundits.' First, with Bernstein as a friend, one wouldn't need an enemy. Second, every darn thing Bernstein regurgitated up to try and humiliate Sen. Clinton, I have already read in other books about her, Chatty Cathy came up with absolutely nothing new, the lazy old gone to seed gossip is just rehashing old history. And what's this "Authentic" garbaghe about? Is George Bush authentic now or was he authentic when he ran for pres. the first time and made all those claims about not being into nation building or meddling on other countrie"s affairs, referring of course, to Clinton's humanitarian intervention in Boznia which.....didn't kill one American. How the Republican warmongers howled about that about that "war". Is Bush authentic now. as a ranting, messianic warmonger? Is Berstein really the guy who has had flagrant affairs and cheated on HIS wife, Nora Effron, if true, does that make him an authentic ratfink? He just out to make a buck for himself and doing it on the back of Hillary Clinton because she is easy to pick on. What. a. looser! Why doesn't Mr. Bernstien write a book about George Bush's authentic military service, or the authentic histories and lives of the people he signed 152 death warrants for, or, 153, if you count Saddam - what sweet revenge! C'mon Carl, make yourself useful .... And no, I'm not a Hillary voter, I just know when someone is being persecuted by a bunch of perverted, rightwing men and that includes Mona, Laura and Ann.
I have difficulty comprehending the comments of viewers in regard to the interview with Carl Bernstein. Thank you Charlie for interrupting the psychobabble that kept pouring out of Bernstein's mouth. Carl was not about to be interviewed; he wanted a scacred platform where he could expound His interpretation of Hillary as the Gospel Truth. He reminded me of what my Mother used to refer to as "The Old Lady With Her Bag of Feathers". If Mr Rose had not interrupted he may as well not have been there.
Now comes Carl Bernstein and his book on last night's veiwing, claiming that Hilary Clinton is not authentic. Just look back to the previous night's interview with Mike Wallace and Vanessa Redgrave to see what happens to an authentic woman.
I watch Charlie on a regular basis, and yes, he did interrupt Bernstein frequently, maybe too frequently, but I think your correspondents overdid their points. I think Charlie, intelligent as he is, will modfify his MO in furure interviews. I don't think he was rude, or trying to be. If you want to hear rude, listen to Stephen Saffur of the BBC.
Carl Bernstein doesn't think Hillary Clinton is "authentic". Well I have news for Mr. B.: Authentic for all humans lies along a continuum. We are all hard put to know how authentic we are from moment to moment. Any psychiatrist will tell you how much we guard our egos very carefully - especially when we are showing the world our public personas. Thank you Charlie for vetting this highly subjective presentation from Mr. Bernstein. You have every right to get after an author who claims to be well researched and is hiding behind such a claim to throw mud on Hillary.
I concur with the majority of the comments posted below this broadcast. Was this program about Berstein or Charlie? I couldn't tell with all the interuptions. Let Berstein have his piece! And thanks Carl for the analysis of H. Clinton, well done.
I am a big fan of Charlie, but I have to agree with alot of the comments. It was clear to me in this interview that Charlie is a HUGE Clinton Fan. His inability to let Bernstein finish his thoughts was frustrating. I don't have a problem with him challenging him on points, but wait until he finishes his sentence. I don't want CR to become 60 minutes! I don't know how factual Carls book is, but it is worth trying to find out. His point is excellent, that we need to know more about the candidates, so we don't repeat the Bush error again.
I have long believed Charlie Rose (along with Tim Russert) to be the most objective, well-prepared, intelligent interviewer on television. He has a high level of professional integrity, and usually has outstanding guests from a wide variety of fields. I watch because I usually learn something of value. BUT CHARLIE, stop the interruptions!! Kudos for having this online feedback vehicle to let me say my piece. Step 2 is to listen and modify behaviour. We know you're intelligent; that's why we watch. Let your guests finish their sentences! I almost shut it off today, as many others have claimed.
I'd looked forward to last night's interview with Carl Bernstein. However, I found Charlie Rose to be rude and inappropriate as he constantly interupted and talked over his guest. Charlie seemed very comabtive and abrasive. . . .very disappointing.
The bar exam comment was priceless. Do any of you know if insurance plans cover Clinton fatigue?
Charlie seems completely whacked. Talking over the top, all the normal sensitivity gone. Is this the end of Charlie Rose. He seems drugged.
I am not the Judith from 1am - nor Judith Patton. I have been posting with this name for over a month. How do you protect posters from having the same posting name? Might want to check into that. In the meantime, I am opting out and as of this post, no further posts from "Judith" or any other name will be me. Clearly this is not functional yet.
I see there is someone else using Judith now. I am the first one. How amusing - I get irritated when Charlie doesnt interrupt or counter some people, and others get angry when he does. Anyhoo, I think Charlie wanted to make sure this show was not used as an anti-Hillary quotefest; even if Carl B meant well, he did make a number of misleading comments that Charlie was right to clarify. Charlie needs to keep up the appearance of evenhandedness going into the election season. I do think the conversation was edited around the part when Bernstein was quoting Molly Ivins on Bush. Shame on Charlie if I am right - the edit is sloppy.
Charlie: I have to agree with the others. You were badgering Carl Bernstein like he had to defend himself on a witness stand throughout most of the June 4 program. I would have liked to heard what Mr. Bernstein had to say about what his research uncovered without your constant interruptions. Judith
Charlie, I usually enjoy and look forward to your conversations. They are usually quality time spent with and learning about many interesting people and the things they do and write. They are usually civil. Your "conversation" with Carl Bernstein left me agitated,irritated and as if I had just witnessed an uncivil, angry interrogation of a cornered guest. Sorry, Charlie, but that's the way it looked. Still a fan though.
I was really interested in hearing Carl Bernstein talk about Hillary Clinton and did not appreciate Charlie Rose's constant, rude interruptions. He reminded me of a hyper Chris Matthews who also asks his guests a question and then cuts them off so that they can't finish a sentence no less a thought.
I really would have loved to have heard what Carl Bernstein had to say last night, yet Charlie your constant interruptions and aggressive talking over guest made it impossible. You should have been more aggressive with Warren Buffet, but he is your buddy and he supports Hillary and Barrack "Code" for candidates for the wealthy of America. I say we need you to have Mike Gravel on your show since they will not give him any time in the debates and he may enlighten you!!!!!! If you are willing to be enlightened.
Charlie, if "good conversation" is your goal, then someone should remind you that listening is a key ingredient of conversing... not constantly interrupting and talking over the other person. I estimate you cut off Carl Bernstein several dozen times in the course of that "conversation" - maybe even a hundred! I could hardly listen, my blood was boiling at your aggressive behaviour. You are doing a great disservice to your audience, who want to hear what your guests have to say, whether or not you agree with them. I'd never heard Bernstein before, but I have a lot of admiration for him for remaining civil in the face of your incredible rudeness. Guess I'll just have to read his book to find out what he thinks, since he hardly got a chance to say anything himself.
Watching the interview, I felt as though I was in a bar, eavesdropping in on a conversation Charlie and Carl were having about the book Carl wrote. Listening to them duke it out was both fascinating and irritating at the same time, especially since Charlie seemed to take exception to the way Carl wrote the book. I found myself wanting to hear more of what Carl had to say, but since it's impolite in a situation like that to sort of lean towards the next table so one can hear better, and since one can't very well interrupt a total stranger and say "would you please pipe down, I want to hear about your friend's book?", I ended up tuning out the whole thing. After all, there's nothing more annoying than when the people sitting next to you at a restaurant or a bar, don't stick to the narrative of their story and have the bad manners to interrupt each other, so that one simply can't make head nor tails of what theyâ??re talking about.
Criticism seems a little overblown. An interview isn't supposed to be just a format for the guest to tell his/her story. A give and take is an essential part of the dynamic. The observations at the base of this conversation seemed to me to be correct however. Charlie was challenging Carl ... more than usual. Like he thought he was being fed a line. Not sure why, but I don't currently see it as part of some push for a greater or hostile agenda.
I have not yet determined who will be my choice for President in the Democratic primary: (Obama, Clinton, or Richardson). However, the arrogant, pompous, braying Bernsteinâ??s take on Hillary Clinton has infuriated me to a VERY high level this evening, and I feel compelled to speak out. I thank you very much, Charlie Rose, for trying to pin down and clarify some of his outrageous comments and blatant contradictions. I noted that several times your efforts caused him to look as if he had swallowed one of those raw gutted fish to which he referred. Talking about â??inauthenticâ?? Hillaryâ??may I ask my first question: Name ONE politician who is, or ever has been, â??authentic!!â?? And to imply that â??SHE must become authenticâ?? ? Maybe I should take the liberty to get inside Bernsteinâ??s head and suggest that the Real Truth is that olâ?? Bernstein is sexist and the question for him is actually: â??Can a little woman lead this shattered, failing, fractured country out of the Bush Total Devastation?â?? My candid observation through my many years shows me clearly that all these Men durn sure havenâ??t been too successful in running the country! As Bernstein prattled along about her â??secretivenessâ?? I thought of ALL the long-suffering women (famous and otherwise) who have â??stood by their manâ??--doing a great job of keeping all kinds of secrets throughout their lives. So--"Sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander": If we are going to talk "secrets": Is it true or false that the Lovely Laura Bush killed someone back in Texas in a car accident when she was younger? Also, she looks and sounds like she smokes. Is that true? Is Cheney actually a robot? Truth must prevail!! Secrets MUST be revealed at all costs. Howcum if doing away with secrecy is SO important, why havenâ??t Bush and his crew had their secrets brought forward by some hotshot journalist peddling his or her book? By the way, speaking of the Bushesâ??I do believe Molly Ivans called Bush II â??Shrubâ??â??NOT â??Scrubâ?? as you both stated. Canâ??t imagine that this fine and famous journalist Bernstein would not get the facts rightâ?¦ Finally, in closing, I knew Hillary Clinton's friend Diane Blair (a brilliant, remarkable, highly principled woman) for years and I can ASSURE you that she would NEVER waste her time on an â??inauthentic person.â?? Tell Bernstein to stop his inflammatory, inaccurate sensationalizing to sell his book and make big bucks at the expense of another brilliant, remarkable, highly principled woman! Iâ??m still raging furious!
Charlie, I thought you were so sickening tonight that I got out of bed to e-mail you. Both you and Bernstein were just full of it. However, when Carl was really telling the truth about Hillary, you shut him up. That is true about her association with the communist and Black Panthers. She lied when she went before the country and said Bill's problems were a right wing conspiacy. You cut him off about her sexuality. Jim McDougal wrote in the book that never got finished that the Clintons were like a tornado that moved through and left bodies behind. Molly Ivins should have devoted some of her time writing about the Clintons and that would have been interesting. About Bill Clinton being curious-it was not about our country or Al Quaida would have been snuffed out before GW had to do what he didn't. Never thought you would cover up like you did tonight.
Charlie Rose talks too much! Mr. Rose, you are incredibly rude. We want to hear what your guests have to say, not what you think.
Charlie Rose talks too much! Mr. Rose, you are incredibly rude. We want to hear what your guests have to say, not what you think.
I'm watching this show right now and I couldn't agree more. Seriously, this is ridiculous. I want to listen to Bernstein so badly to hear what he has to say, but this is too frustrating. Hey Rose, you owe Bernstein an apology.
I tune in to see interesting guests and hear what they have to say. Tonight, as is too often the case, I had to turn off the show because it's just too frustrating to try to understand what Mr. Bernstein is trying to say with all the interruptions or with Charlie talking over him. C'mon Charlie -- you can do better.
Charlie Rose is totally obnoxious in his conversation with Carl Bernstein. I've never heard him interrupt his guests so rudely. Apparently, he doesn't like what Mr. Bernstein is saying. He just won't let him say anything.
Charle Rose consistently has excellent guests like Carl Bernstein. However, Charlie's constant interruptions and aggressive talking over his guests is quite annoying, and makes it difficult to watch the program. Over and over, the flow is broken by Charlie just as a guest is about to say something interesting.