Charlie Rose

winter  01/31/2012 12:39 PM Report

Its just laughable to hear a huckster like Romney disparage the principles laid out in Obamas SOTU.

wrick  01/30/2012 10:57 PM Report

The comments on Romney being perceived as 'skirting' taxes and comparing his tax rate to someone making $80k is ridiculous. He paid all his taxes, and his income is all dividends and capital gains, so his rate can only be 15%. Members of the press have a responsibility to clarify the terms of the debate, and not to contribute to political attacks, and how 'Democrats can paint him', that turn a fully legal 15% into some type of scandal. Further, where was this outrage during the Kerry campaign. I understand he paid about 15% in 2004, similar to Romney, yet I can recall no discussion of that situation as a problem.

chawlydollylama  01/30/2012 07:40 PM Report

The Das Newt is running out of torpedoes.

Too bad he's a bad liar. Damn HYPOCRITE is what he is. Oh sure, he'll tell ya what ever you wanna hear. And then, as long as you're stupid enough (and plenty are), he'll reach right into your pocket and take your money, while you're smiling sweetly, drunk on his words of sweet nothings about Ronald Reagan and the Constitution. And those damn hedonists, hippy drop-outs that curse the corrupt Financial system that keeps him and his political adversaries nice Fat Cat$. Like he's some kind of alternative; he wants to repeal the banking regulations that has the Volcker rule in it to prevent another Fleecing of America by his (Das Newt's) sugardaddies (wall street bankers).

Das Newt! Ain't he a Hoot?! ..

He can toot my root!

REMant  01/30/2012 01:19 PM Report

A "strong" debate performance doesn't equate to intelligent policies, or as Halperin said, how ppl feel about him. I can tell you that politicians are not the electorate, and the latter most likely doesn't admire Romney, whose capitalism, incidentally is in no way comparable to Adam Smith's. I think Gingrich is more likely to be the choice of blue collar males. But Florida allows cross-overs and that will likely make a difference. In old-fashioned terms Gingrich is a Tory; Romney, a Whig; and, Paul, a Liberal.

Mormons are still required to tithe, if not by the state, which means that they give 10 percent to the church. For other Protestant religions this went out with disestablishment. It shouldn't probably be taken as an indication of charity, but rather of an undesirable attitude towards taxation and the 1st Amendment. Immigration seems to have become the same sort of uncontrollable issue that entitlements and the Fed have. The "Reagan revolution" didn't really begin to deal with these core issues of Democratic policy.

It seems apparent the Romney camp is pulling out all the stops now. Personally, I think trotting out McCain and Dole will probably hurt more than help them, and the ethics ads, too, when it is learned that Gingrich was eventually exonerated by the IRS. Having made enemies in Washington is not a vice.

You can probably tell a great deal about the economic future by observing the new size of dish detergent bottles. The consensus re the last quarter's data is that it reflects a temporary rise in employment, temporary spending, and a temporary inventory situation. The Fed is right about its forecast generally, altho, of course not in its remedy. What a Keynesian or monetarist wants is for ppl to take on more credit. Whether that is sustainable or even possible is always the question, and certainly mortgages and car loans involve credit, and I expected Mr Ip to try to bring his bias into this eventually. I heard a female Greek parliamentarian telling a reporter telling us how austerity had not helped recovery. But that's like asking when you stopped beating your wife. Why should anyone in Greece expect recovery? Recovery to what, the same condition that brought on their problems? To the Keynesian mind, such problems are always due to a paucity of credit, not enthusiasm. See the quote from Robbins in my comment on the other segment.

Richard_DeBiase  01/30/2012 12:40 PM Report

This is in regard to Mitt Romney's hard-line on illegal immigration.

I view illegal immigrants, especially from Mexico, as refugees from the Drug War; a war that the United States started and continues to push. So I'm a little more sympathetic.

I spent a number of years living in the war zone of the Drug War in the Los Angeles Harbor area. I heard gunfire every night. I saw gang members carrying semi-automatic weapons on the street (I assume they hid their guns when they saw cops). I didn't even live in a notoriously bad area, but I left. I think governments have an interest in suppressing information about how bad things really are, until an area explodes into wholesale civil unrest.

I'll bet, if you lived in Mexico, you'd try to climb the border fence too. If you want Mexicans to stay in Mexico, the first thing you need to do is end the Drug War that they are running away from.