Charlie Rose

rpupkin  09/06/2012 06:14 AM Report

honestly Charlie, i don't know why you have Jodi Kantor on. she's a low rent gossip columnist hiding behind a NYT masthead. she doesn't report, she "dishes". i expected a Kardashian update to spill out at any moment. it was clear first-rate biographer Dave Maraniss didn't take her seriously.

so why do you?

NeilMacCallister  09/06/2012 04:13 AM Report

What I heard from Michelle was "Stand by your Man".

Cool, ..marriage is an important promise.

Next from Michelle was: "It doesn't matter if you are poor, you are still a good person".

That is the 2012 version of "Let them eat cake".

But, ..I am glad she likes her husband.

JimBullis  09/05/2012 08:36 PM Report

Before the Democratic Party convention is over, maybe someone will be looking for a real way to solve our economic problems. It could be more important than the Interstate Highway system put in place under President Eisenhour starting sixty years ago. I would challenge either set of politicians to avoid being the party left behind.

There is a massive area of under-used land in America which could be the basis of a powerful new economy simply by establishing a national water distribution system whereby flood and drought would be controlled and universal irrigation would be put in place. This would result in a new level of employment making immigration a manageable issue and a massive increase in export products making the trade imbalance a thing of the past.

This infrastructure concept inspired invention of the Miastrada Dragon that can be seen on youtube. This is a tractor that would make the farm labor acceptable to all sorts of folks, and even be a way to give disabled veterans a new opportunity.

BENEZRAA  09/05/2012 06:53 PM Report

SOCIAL ISSUES V. ECONOMIC ISSUES

Perhaps restating the matter may help us to understand what is facing the nation: ANTI-SOCIAL ISSUES V. UN-ECONOMIC ISSUES.

Clearly our nation is torn by anti-social attitudes and un-economic policies. There is such mis-regulation in both of these issue areas that we often see anvils used to swat flies and fly-swatters used to swat elephants. Government does not seem to know the difference between true small business and Big Business masquerading as Small Business in order to benefit from regulations that should be helping true small businesses. And pick your dis-pleasure: there is so much anti-social behavior rampant that balkanized unities based on mutual hatreds, jealousies, and ignorances pass for social discourse.

I think the most quotable words of the past fifty years can be attributed to a badly behaving alcoholic giant, who may have been deservedly restrained, who in being subdued became an icon, and whose subjugation touched off deadly rioting. It was Rodney King, who said, "Can't we all just get along?"

BENEZRAA  09/05/2012 06:21 PM Report

THE AMERICAN RACIAL DIVIDE IS STARKLY ILLUSTRATED BY THE DELEGATE AUDIENCE POPULATIONS AT EACH PARTY'S CONVENTION.

It is a sad thing to see it and a worse thing to feel it.

Are we overdue for another full-blown, out-and-out Civil War or perhaps a military coup?

Or will our democratic process survive and transcend the ugly, rife divisions here at home in the USA?

richard-lipscombe  09/05/2012 06:08 PM Report

Thanks for this interview Charlie Rose...for me, it is a great pity that more Americans will not see it...

this interview explains so much about the speech given by Mrs Obama...a speech so well received by all in the media, as it should have been because she was brilliant, but these hardened journalist and critics rarely mention just how politically well crafted it was...whoever wrote Mrs Obama's speech is brilliant...

having said that the speech reminded me of a game we use to play in our 20s ... my family was poorer than your family...we had it harder than you growing up...it went like this 'you think you had it tough, we live in a hole in the road'....I could never top that one...Mrs Obama lived in a hole in the road with a DAD who had MS (doesn't Mrs Romney suffer from that) so much worse than anyone in the world...go figure!

Mrs Obama painted Democrats as victims...the whole campaign paints Democrats as victims...victims of the financial crisis...victims of events in Europe - I heard one senior Democrat say that even Europe was not coming to help America recover...was he expecting payback for the Marshal Plan?

there are victims in the White House and on the Streets of Charlotte saying to each other - we have got your back...is it any wonder that America is in decline?

cheers, richard.

tabs  09/05/2012 03:38 PM Report

The following has been Posted to this Board several times before and seems to be a blue print for all the Obama experts who follow.

This was posted to the Charlie Rose Comment Board for the Mathew Dowd interview of 12/7/11.

Mr Rose during the Dowd interview you asked, "Is it inexperience" in Obama that makes him a sic poor leader? The answer to your question is that if it were an issue of "EXPERIENCE" one would think that the on the job training of nearly 3 full years years would make Obama a more efficaious leader. THIS HAS NOT BEEN THE CASE, President Obama is as inept at leading the nation as the day he stepped into office. Therfore there MUST be another cause for the Obama leadership style and that comes down to PERSONALITY TRAITS.

One will reiterate to you once again, in very clear terms why President Obama is a POOR LEADER:

1. Barrack Obama's personality set is more suited for academia than the Oval Office. As stated so many times before BO likes to stay in his head (INTELLECTUALIZE) and does not like to be emotional. BO pushes emotion away as being something confusing and messy to deal with. This is a sure prescription of someone who does not do well in real time..(Make Decisions)as decision making involves risk and therefore emotion. He will seem detached as Gen MCHrystal noticed in his conversations with BO on Afghan policy. Further his intellectualization seperates him from using emotion as an intutive device, this seperation leads him to make false assumptions based upon intellectualization about the mood of the nation. This is what makes BO out of touch with the American people.

2. BO's was brought up by a very "Socially Conscience" Mother. As such he has a perception of the world as seen through the eyes of Social Democrat/Marxist. His chosen profession is that of a Community Organizer,as such he does not understand what makes the US economy tick. Rather his Economic Perceptions are based upon ideological notions of social and economic equality which are anthama to the business class. He does not see nor understand the other side of the coin, nor does he listen and learn even though he may give lip service to the contrary.

Further Mr Dowd stated that Preident Obama "has never confronted his own Party." Mr Rose this issue was addressed to you, in an email in 8/09 and is reprinted as follows for the edification of the matter .

Why Obama Will Never Be A Lincoln

08/21/2009 - 02:20 — tabs

This observation goes beyond trite partisan politics, but instead goes to the heart and soul of a man. It takes a look at the inside of a mans character and the "true grit" that he brings to the table.

To begin with one must take a look at the mans personal history. As everyone knows BO was a kid who was moved from family situation to family situation. The hallmark of this as previously stated was that he was always the outsider looking in, even within his own personality. This has given him the objectivity of the outsider, or one who has the ability to be a detached observer of events and feelings.

It was only when BO met his Michelle that he was accepted for who he was and given the comfort and stability of a home. That he found love. It has been reported that while on the campaign trail he would always travel with someone from back home to give him the familiarity of that grounding stability.

BO has always been known as a cautious individual, always evaluating the risk involved in any political move. Further he has always relied on discourse as his method of achieving his goals. These two behavioral traits leads us to the third piece and that is BO legislative history, he has always voted Yes or Present with his own Party and never ever voted NO against his party.

This leads one to conclude that within him himself he can not risk being ostracized by his own political family. He will always go along, he will never be his own man but be subservient to the dictates of his own party. He will not face the fear and disappointment within himself of losing the only home he has ever known. He is not willing to go it alone in the world if necessary and suffer the slings and arrows of being your own man with his own principles and thoughts. This becomes obvious in letting his own party dictate the terms of the Stimulus, Budget, Cap and Trade and Health Care bills. This is why BO will never be a Lincoln.

Lincoln by contrast was willing to face adversity and was willing to go it alone if necessary, to be his own man. . The most telling fact of this in Lincolns life is the fact that he rose above his own fathers ostracization of him for wanting to rise above his station in life, that of being a poor illiterate dirt farmer from Illinois's. This was Lincolns transcendent moment. He became his own man guided by his own principles and own thoughts.

Because one wears the cloak of Caesar and or affects the mannerism of Caesar it does not mean he is a Lincoln, TR, FDR, Truman, Reagan or Caesar.

TABS

REMant  09/05/2012 12:16 PM Report

A black AND white TV? The GOP? That's as bad as the 1812 nonsense.

People who are busy struggling to be the best are unfortunately not ready to be leaders, because it is clear they are still learning, and haven't yet learned to be teachers, which is what is required above all else in a manager.

He does (still) have a chip on his shoulder, which has appeared in several rather imperious pronouncements.

I dislike the possessiveness and selling of business myself, having not been reared in that environment. And I think my feelings are shared by most libertarians who are likely to see corporate organization men in the same light as bureaucrats. We share, with Adam Smith, a rather Utopian view.

It would be interesting to compare Romney's Harvard Law performance with Obama's. But from what I've gathered both of them are equally first-class manipulators.