Charlie Rose

Ricardo_Amaral  09/17/2012 10:50 PM Report

Israel is planning to attack Iran...

http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=56237e2bcd88086d146a635e9eea3314&threadid=67053&perpag e=6&pagenumber=72

September 17, 2012

SouthAmerica: The United States is probably the first superpower that let itself to be completely manipulated and influenced to the highest degree by an immaterial little country such as Israel.

In the 21st century makes even less sense for the United States to associate itself to this little country that is completely irrelevant (Israel) to the new world order – the world of the “BRICS.”

The real economic and financial action in the next 20 years will be generated in the world of the “BRICS” - and Israel means nothing to the world of China, India, Russia and Brazil. In the new world order Israel is nothing more than a little country (Israel is smaller than the state of New Jersey in the old USA) with a small economy with a GDP of $238.2 billion (2011 est.) compared with the state of New Jersey GDP of $ 497 billion for 2010, and a small population (about 7 million people, also a smaller population than the state of New Jersey with 9 million people)

When compared with other countries around the world such as Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa – the country of Israel is completely irrelevant.

http://www.akhlah.com/israel/size_israel.php

It doesn't make sense, and goes completely against the self-interest of the United States as a country to continue this close relationship between the United States and Israel.

Unless the United States want to become obsolete and irrelevant even faster than it is happening – the close association of the United States with Israel will just serve as a distraction to the US government as the US economy and financial system become less important and influential in the new world order of the “BRICS” with half of the population of the planet and the place were the real economic and financial action is going to happen in the coming decades.

The United States can place all its eggs in one basket the Israeli basket and become irrelevant and immaterial at the speed of light in the new world of the 21st century.

.

SharkswithfrikingLazers  09/17/2012 04:24 PM Report

Yes David, let's increase economic growth.

Yes David, let's decrease the deficit.

Yes David, let's increase social equity.

Yes David, let's develop the work ethic and the creative culture.

Yes David, let's harness the energy from everywhere (on many levels).

Please fill in the working details.

SharkswithfrikingLazers  09/17/2012 04:07 PM Report

David tells us in 1960 90% of working class people were married and now just 40% of them are--social collapse.

David, you need to look at the glass as 40% full and wonder why those people are still getting married.

It is amazing that 40% still bother with marriage considering all the pain of divorce--which most times results from fights over money.

When people become disposable in the work place that carries over and they become disposable in the home. So why even get married and make it more difficult to dispose of the other person.

There are few employment contracts for working class people so why would you expect them to want to have a marriage contract?

It has become an "at will" life.

Put some money back in their pockets and give them some security and free time and let's see what happens.

SharkswithfrikingLazers  09/17/2012 03:54 PM Report

David tells us there is a giant problem with Medicare—-do not know how to cut costs.

Cut fraud.

Cut visits to the doctor for social visits.

Cut end of life care so that after $50K it is out of pocket.

Cut 10 specialists seeing one patient having surgery.

Add smart cards for each Medicare patient and have a supercomputer track claims and benefits paid for each patient.

There . . . run with it.

SharkswithfrikingLazers  09/17/2012 03:47 PM Report

On Romney, David tells us, “Therefore he doesn’t have a consistent core of beliefs that he is going to go back to.”

David, Romney was a Mormon Bishop then a Stake President.

He has consistent core beliefs on more things than you think.

SharkswithfrikingLazers  09/17/2012 02:17 AM Report

Well David, not everyone is gloomy.

This guy loves Obama and probably doesn't know the word protocol (or having your head chopped off for not bowing to a king).

http://youtu.be/bvkN3ODGn-I

Gelles  09/16/2012 08:24 PM Report

This is conversation and comment "on the Presidential race". Or, it is a little more than that. The race is not normally fought in the middle of wars, revolutions and radical changes in political-economy all over the world.

So, some of the criticism of the comments in this archive are rejected by me because they are too general. They do not address issues in the race or issues beyond the immediate race. They are cheap shots and pure garbage themselves.

None of us knows who will win or why. So if we address poverty, inequality, diplomatic skills, agendas worthy of our vote, we are contributing something. Our critics may have nothing to say -- but want to sound off with words instead of silence.

Two men want the power to end civilization with the push of an attack button: but neither claims the power to create jobs oversight with all of Bernanke's offered money. I say they are cowards and deserve to be unemployed -- both of them: unemployed and penniless!

frankelee  09/16/2012 05:26 PM Report

Even David Brooks wants to trot out that tired old idea with GOP-circles that Barack Obama isn't a great debater. Even David needs to turn off Fox News apparently, you can't come across as having worthwhile political news opinions if you can't see the basics correctly.

SharkswithfrikingLazers  09/16/2012 04:32 PM Report

Charlie, David Brooks again saying almost the same thing?

Here is where America is at buddy:

http://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-live/video/weekend-update-honey-booboo-and-mama/1417079/

Freud  09/16/2012 08:00 AM Report

I used to wonder why Charlie did so many shows on the abnormal human brain series. After taking a quick glance at the book-length, multi-entry comments here, I'm thinking he needs to do more of them. Paging Dr. Kandel! You're needed in the Comments Section, stat!

rtb  09/16/2012 05:58 AM Report

The Obama team should pose this question:

Is Romney/Ryan better off now than 4 years ago? My guess is (and it's not much of a guess) that if we could see their net worth's, the answer is "yes" and "a lot".

rtb  09/16/2012 05:58 AM Report

The Obama team should pose this question:

Is Romney/Ryan better off now than 4 years ago? My guess is (and it's not much of a guess) that if we could see their net worth's, the answer is "yes" and "a lot".

Gelles  09/16/2012 05:20 AM Report

The foreign policy of the non-Islamic nations who face Islamic fascists and terrorists and their supporters from the Middle East and North Africa has yet to gel in support of America and human rights oriented democracy in this new century.

China and Russia play games. The Muslim Brotherhood has survived. The Clash of Civilizations remains a threat to Europe and every city targeted by backward looking Muslim enemies allied against the West. Obama has ordered our drones and special forces to kill more of these enemies than our side ever thought possible.

Obama's plans are to keep our armies out of lands where enemies must be killed but their sympathizers may be left alone to modernize over centuries. But his determined effort to prevent such enemies from winning a very long asymmetrical war makes more sense than any other out there.

The issue comes to a head when the Iranian nation under fascist religious leaders is brought to heel -- or not. Russia remains a spoiler. China is bad as well. Obama or Romney will have to deal with the mess.

Our objective is to prevent further proliferation of nuclear weapons manufacture by the worst nations on earth. In addition, we must prevail in the Clash between the political forces of Islam and the rest of the planet. It is a foregone conclusion Islam cannot win. But, they do stand a minute chance of setting a fire that consumes civilization.

David Brooks assessment of Obama's performance in these matters is sound in my opinion. Obama certainly has been lucky. I remain in awe of that.

In the coming debates I hope to see Obama show the same determination to protect our homeland from economic decline and loss of leadership of the free world as he has shown to protect us from Al Qaeda and like organized thuggery.

His ally in the struggle for economic power is Ben Bernanke. His allies in foreign policy ought to be all the democracies he leads. What FDR established, our presidents must preserve for decades and centuries to come. In this connection, we need to reform all our systems and join the race for exploration of our planet and its oceans and the moon and Mars.

ShalomFreedman  09/16/2012 02:58 AM Report

I am surprised by David Brooks. I thought that he was a knowledgable commentator on world affairs. But his assessment that President Obama is handling foreign policy well is absurd. Since President Obama's opening speech to the Muslim world in Cairo we have seen a transformation of the area in which the fiercely fundamentalist Muslim Brotherhood reigns supreme. Is that an accomplishment? I do not think Obama can be blamed for the messes in Iraq and Afghanistan but when he brings the troops home those places will be as Anti- American as before. Iran has continued to defy the U.S. openly and is racing ahead enriching uranium without real interruption. The President's tilt toward the Palestinians yielded nothing but an even greater extremism and nay-saying on the Arab side. I do not see any success in making the world's most volatile region much more fundamentalist than it was before.

Gelles  09/15/2012 10:42 PM Report

Within a few years America will have re-inflated its capital assets and re-created its manufacturing lead over all comers.

Or it will fail to keep ahead of China, India, Russia and Europe.

I trust we will not fail. We need the liquidity Bernanke promises in his acceptance of responsibility for high employment and low unemployment.

I like story in the current Business-Week on Elon Musk. He is as American as Apple Pie via South Africa and Canada. Read about him and thank God you live here and not anywhere else.

As for the coming election, it may be close. But I assume the Democrats will win. And I expect this new Century will be better than the 20th relative to war and poverty. But it won't be easy. Many in this audience will have to open their minds to science, technology and the vast change in research based reform due to our exponential growth in knowledge data bases and our ability to use them.

The real economy of good food and good health, augmented by near-free solar and green energy systems, will take over from the crooks on Wall Street whose power will be curtailed as casino capitalism gives way to decentralized free enterprise, fully funded by debt-free money supplementation of honest business and banking institutions.

To all pessimists I say we are at the beginning of the best years of American leadership and achievement.

richard-lipscombe  09/15/2012 08:27 PM Report

This is what the Charlie Rose round table was designed for I assume - a civil discussion about interesting, insightful, and far-reaching ideas...So when David Brooks begins to talk about the culture of America then we have a round table discussion going on...

Culture to me is "the way things are done around here"... David Brooks points to an innovative culture in America... he talks about innovation as if it is a tap that can be turned on or off...I have spent most of my career, in one way or another, trying to change the culture of corporates, communities, and my nation....there is no tap marked "culture"... for example, ask my NFL team "the raiders" if they want to be more innovative in 2012-13 season... this season they have a new, just about everything, and yet they lost the first game of the season due to their baked in losing culture - their special teams suck! what "the raiders" have is a "way of doing things" or a culture that is hard to change...America is like "the raiders"... America has a culture that is baked in and it is not an innovative culture it is a tribal culture - that is why the politics of America is so divided...

America is in sharp decline...it will take generations to change the culture drivers of this decline...the big issue for the next 20-30 years will be the culture wars of America...it will be tribe against tribe or culture against culture...one tribe has shared values around "fairness" or "equal outcomes" in life...the other tribe or culture is about "generosity" or "equal opportunity" in life....

the America that I grew up in "love with" had an overwhelming culture based on "generosity" but America today is no longer that place...America today is a place of "culture wars" between the tribes based on fairness and those based on generosity...

David Brooks says that American culture is in social repair...the interesting thing is that people are doing that by themselves...they are not being led by great American leaders in politics, church, academia, business, etc..the American people are doing all the heavy lifting and their task is made even more difficult by the poor leadership throughout America...

if America was the innovative culture that David Brooks alludes to then there would be many more clans throughout America...clans are bond together by people with contested ideas and ideals...clans thrive on diversity not the conformity of the tribes...

if there were more clans then there would be big numbers of independent voters turning out for this Presidential Election and in that case Obama would lose and lose big...Romney would be voted in despite all his failings and shortcomings because America's clans want, no demand, innovation and disruptive change not 4 more years of denial of decline and massive institutional Groupthink (expansion of money supply and intrusion of big government into American lives)...

I fear that David Brooks is wrong...America is no longer an innovative culture....

cheers, richard.

NeilMacCallister  09/15/2012 06:10 PM Report

No, John!!!

This election is between the "have already's" (the government paycheck drawers) and all the courageous Americans who are ready to earn their OWN place in this natural world!

Barack Obama has asked Bern Bernanke to print him up a few Billion dollars so Barack can buy some more votes, and try and ensure the luxurious life he has been able to wheedle from the American "dreamers" for the benefit of Barack, Michelle, and his two lovely daughters.

But you know what??? ..I have a lovely daughter TOO!!!! ..but she does not have a thieving stealing "government job" awaiting her whenever she decides to sit down at one of those desks within Barack's combine!

I HATE slavery!!!!!!! ..Please!! ..Let's get rid of our slavemaster Barack Obama!!!

Gelles  09/15/2012 05:24 AM Report

CHARLIE   ROSE   ARCHIVE

To repeat and correct Gelles  09/14/2012 04:58 PM

The above conversation between Brooks and Rose is about the current race for the presidency between Democrat Obama (with his own unique perspective -- not 100% organized labor) and Republican Romney (with his own unique perspective -- not 100% Wall Street or billionaires club, of which there is none).

So it is about more than the stereotypical issues we say are defined by a model of left versus right, have-not's versus Have's, etc.

The conversation also invites us, in the audience, to add issues we believe are more profound than were surfaced in the broadcast hour. This I propose to do. And I may take more than one post to do it. In the end I will provide a URL that captures all that is important about Obama, Romney, Brooks and Rose and other big names, like Bernanke and Volcker, who would influence the future peace and prosperity of the human race -- now responding to conventional and unusual challenges.

Why try to understand all this? As we say, because the challenges are there. BECAUSE -- WHY NOT?

WHO   WHAT   WHY   HOW   HOW-MUCH

WHO

FDR, Keynes, Volcker, Bernanke, Powell

      FDR offers the Four Freedoms and the Second Bill of (economic) Rights. These establish our goals in greater detail than "achieving peace and prosperity to overcome current challenges".

      KEYNES defines the Monetary System of Production as a tool to help us succeed. Other tools are High Technology, Scientific Method, A Logical Syntax for Common Language, Risk Reduction and Higher Risk Avoidance.

      VOLCKER and the Volcker Doctrine address monetary rules for containing Inflation.

      BERNANKE and the Bernanke Doctrine address monetary rules for containing Unemployment and Deflation.

      POWELL and the Powell Doctrine address military rules for containing and/or destroying deadly enemies.

Missing in these names is the one who as Diplomat in Fact worked miracles that tenured good fortune beyond all expectation.

Possibly, Obama strives to be that one -- it would fit his Nobel prize. To date, in my view, he has been a successful commander in chief. To move to become Diplomat in Fact may not be his desire or fully match the skills of any man alive.

WHAT

Produce the real needs to end want, fear, wage slavery, persistent ignorance, etc.

In my view such production begins with motivation that often requires massive amounts of sound money to fuel its organization, plans and first days. Thereafter, production in harmony with savings allows money to fuel the rest.

The Bernanke Doctrine to use money until real results are achieved, as he announced today for his objective to reduce unemployment, is the best news we have had in many a year.

WHY

There Is No Alternative -- TINA. If there are alternatives, others are obligated to present them.

HOW

Using the WW II examples, and feedback of results to improve all aspects of HOW, often enough to succeed.

HOW-MUCH

Enough change, action, effort and money -- but not too much of anything turning sour.

Reform needs energy to start and persistence to move ahead. It needs wisdom to stay away from blunder and disaster. All this is as old as the hills. It is also as important as it was when we started.

bonacker  09/14/2012 09:09 PM Report

These recent shows recorded a few hours before airing are what has made Charlie's show, for me, appointment TV for many years. It's a welcome return to the show being timely following the conventions when his shows were a day old. Herb Caen used to talk about "Friday fishwrap" which was what he said Thursday's newspaper was good for.

One year old shows or ten year old shows can be fascinating to watch as historical documents, but I never realized how stale a one day old news show could be until I watched a few minutes of Charlie's convention coverage. I hope, as the campaign season continues, the timeliness of the PBS show will not be subordinated to the demands of the CBS morning show.

Gelles  09/14/2012 06:05 PM Report

Please read my post 04:58 PM PDST first.

Sub-topic: WHO WHAT WHY HOW HOW-MUCH

..... ..... WHAT

Produce the real needs to end want, fear, wage slavery, persistent ignorance, etc.

..... ..... WHY

There Is No Alternative -- TINA

..... ..... HOW

Using the WW II examples and feedback of results to improve all aspects of HOW often enough to succeed and not so frequently that change becomes counter-productive.

..... ..... HOW-MUCH

Enough change, action, effort and money -- but not too much anything turning sour.

Reform needs needs energy to start and persistence to move ahead. It needs wisdom to stay away from blunder and disaster. All this is as old as the hills. It id also as important as when we started.

Gelles  09/14/2012 05:31 PM Report

Please read my post 04:58 PM PDST first.

Sub-topic: WHO WHAT WHY HOW HOW-MUCH

..... .... WHO

FDR, Keynes, Volcker, Bernanke, Powell

..... FDR offers the Four Freedoms and the Second Bill of (economic) Rights. These establish our goals in greater detail than "achieving peace and prosperity to overcome current challenges".

..... KEYNES defines the Monetary System of Production as a tool to help us succeed. Other tools are High Technology, Scientific Method, A Logical Syntax for Common Language, Risk Reduction and Higher Risk Avoidance.

..... VOLCKER and the Volcker Doctrine address monetary rules for containing Inflation.

..... BERNANKE and the Bernanke Doctrine address monetary rules for containing Unemployment and Deflation.

..... POWELL and the Powell Doctrine address military rules for containing and/or destroying deadly enemies.

..... Missing in these names is the one who as Diplomat in Fact worked miracles that tenured good fortune beyon all expectation.

Gelles  09/14/2012 04:58 PM Report

The above conversation between Brooks and Rose is about the current race for the presidency between Democrat Obama (with his own unique perspective -- not 100% organized labor) and Republican Romney (with his own unique perspective -- not 100% Wall Street or billionaires club, of which there is none).

So it is about more than the stereotypical issues we say are defined by a model of left versus right, have-not's versus Have's, etc.

The conversation also invites we in the audience to add issues we believe are more profound than were surfaced in the hour. This I propose to do. And I may take more than one post to do it. In the end I will provide a URL that captures all that is important about Obama, Romney , Brooks and Rose and other big names, like Bernanke and Volcker, who would influence the future peace and prosperity of the human race now responding to conventional and unusual challenges. Why try to understand all this? As we say, because the challenges are there. BECAUE -- WHY NOT?

Ellen_Dibble  09/14/2012 12:39 PM Report

David Brooks began the interview saying that Americans choose the candidate who seems most orderly, the one with most gravitas, most likely to bring stability, that being Obama over McCain. That having been GWB over John Kerry, he said. But as he spoke about the Republicans, he spoke about gravitation with a different twist. I think it was the sheer weight of depression and "gloom," which attaches to a party without new ideas. Obama's ideas are the same as he offered when he was in the Senate, I heard him say. All that is pretty thick, and maybe presupposes I read his column, which I don't. The New York Times presents itself with a Catch-22. They often have the best coverage of this or that, and the best columns. However, after a certain number of online hits for any particular month, you end up paying for a subscription, as I understand it, so I choose a New York Times article online last, "saving" that for special occasions.

REMant  09/14/2012 12:16 PM Report

Romney said re the military and foreign policy: "His {Obama's] trillion dollar cuts to our military will eliminate hundreds of thousands of jobs, and also put our security at greater risk;...

"President Obama has thrown allies like Israel under the bus, even as he has relaxed sanctions on Castro's Cuba. He abandoned our friends in Poland by walking away from our missile defense commitments, but is eager to give Russia's President Putin the flexibility he desires, after the election. Under my administration, our friends will see more loyalty, and Mr. Putin will see a little less flexibility and more backbone.

"We will honor America's democratic ideals because a free world is a more peaceful world. This is the bipartisan foreign policy legacy of Truman and Reagan. And under my presidency we will return to it once again....

"The America we all know has been a story of the many becoming one, uniting to preserve liberty, uniting to build the greatest economy in the world, uniting to save the world from unspeakable darkness.

"Everywhere I go in America, there are monuments that list those who have given their lives for America. There is no mention of their race, their party affiliation, or what they did for a living....

"That America, that united America, will preserve a military that is so strong, no nation would ever dare to test it.

Obama said re the military and foreign policy:

"I'm asking you to rally around a set of goals for your country - goals in manufacturing, energy, education, national security, and the deficit; a real, achievable plan that will lead to new jobs, more opportunity, and rebuild this economy on a stronger foundation....

"Four years ago, I promised to end the war in Iraq. We did. I promised to refocus on the terrorists who actually attacked us on 9/11. We have. We've blunted the Taliban's momentum in Afghanistan, and in 2014, our longest war will be over. A new tower rises above the New York skyline, al Qaeda is on the path to defeat, and Osama bin Laden is dead.

"Tonight, we pay tribute to the Americans who still serve in harm's way. We are forever in debt to a generation whose sacrifice has made this country safer and more respected. We will never forget you. And so long as I'm Commander-in-Chief, we will sustain the strongest military the world has ever known. When you take off the uniform, we will serve you as well as you've served us - because no one who fights for this country should have to fight for a job, or a roof over their head, or the care that they need when they come home.

"Around the world, we've strengthened old alliances and forged new coalitions to stop the spread of nuclear weapons. We've reasserted our power across the Pacific and stood up to China on behalf of our workers. From Burma to Libya to South Sudan, we have advanced the rights and dignity of all human beings - men and women; Christians and Muslims and Jews.

"But for all the progress we've made, challenges remain. Terrorist plots must be disrupted. Europe's crisis must be contained. Our commitment to Israel's security must not waver, and neither must our pursuit of peace. The Iranian government must face a world that stays united against its nuclear ambitions. The historic change sweeping across the Arab World must be defined not by the iron fist of a dictator or the hate of extremists, but by the hopes and aspirations of ordinary people who are reaching for the same rights that we celebrate today.

"So now we face a choice. My opponent and his running mate are new to foreign policy, but from all that we've seen and heard, they want to take us back to an era of blustering and blundering that cost America so dearly.

"After all, you don't call Russia our number one enemy - and not al Qaeda - unless you're still stuck in a Cold War time warp. You might not be ready for diplomacy with Beijing if you can't visit the Olympics without insulting our closest ally. My opponent said it was 'tragic' to end the war in Iraq, and he won't tell us how he'll end the war in Afghanistan. I have, and I will."

If there was no paean to the troops by Romney, there was little to the rights of man either, and while the president seems to think the middle class are merely those with a middle income, Romney appears to believe that peace can be had either by making war or being ready to do so, take your choice. It's 1964 redux.

It would be nice to have the candidates treat the public intelligently, but Mr IMHO Romney has no intention of reforming anything, not health care, not the budget, not the tax code, not foreign policy, nothing. That may make him solid, but yesterday, saying it wanted to stimulate home buying, the Fed pressed its attack on the Chinese and the 3rd world, and opened a new front against Europe, and assuming it is successful in getting QE3 underway in time, virtually guaranteed Obama's re-election. And whether the president is more or less of a warmonger may be entirely irrelevant when the projectiles start flying.

It's hard to be promiscuous if you're living at home, tho I'm not sure that's a sign for optimism. Maybe it is. But deviance wouldn't seem to be a question of conventional ideas of wealth vs poverty since it hasn't escalated in the past four years. That there clearly was less of it prior to the '60s, even if what there was, was more sensational, yet at the same time considerably more "vigor," also argues against any kind of trade-off on those terms. Of course, the criminals could be living at home, too. I would hypothesize that misbehavior increased as easy money increased, and declined as the value of that money decreased, and, so thanks to the Fed, we are now better able to project our repressions overseas.

To anyone with a knowledge of American history it is obvious Anti-federalist fears are being realized, and that the country has been tending away from the Protestantism and Liberalism upon which it was founded, as well as, the documents which immortalized it. With a flood of immigrants, and especially since the closing of the frontier, we have long wondered whether virtue or despotism would prevail, and are no more certain of it today. But thankfully, Mr Rose, we haven't created "democracy" yet, even if most of those who fought in the Revolution went to their graves believing their efforts had been in vain.

So I propose to amend the Constitution to have all presidential election ballots include a box for "None of the Above," which if selected by a plurality, would force a new election, some provision for a caretaker in the interim being made. Not that I think it would necessarily do any good, since the parties may decide they like the arrangement as well as they like deficit finance, but it least it would provide a focus for voter displeasure.

BTW, I bemoaned my own lack of gravitas, until I realized that those who have it were invariably stuffed shirts.