Charlie Rose

BVA  08/02/2008 03:47 AM Report

The Swift Boat Ads (2 paragraphs) from Bob Shrum's ironically titled book "No Excuses".

"While Kerry was at the Grand Canyon, the so-called Swift Boat ads...had already been on the air in three states for five days....The warnings about the consequences of accepting federal funding were about to become too true; if we hoped to be competitive with Bush in the fall, then, we had agreed, August for us had to be the month without advertising money. Otherwise, we would have heeded our first instinct--to hit back hard. I never understood the criticism that we preferred to let an attack like this go unanswered....Kerry was on the phone constantly. His honor was being stolen, his good name, and he wanted to get it back. I tried to calm him: What we wanted to get was the presidency--and [Mark\ Mellman was reporting another 'reality', that in his nightly tracking, the Swift boats spots weren't having any impact. Kerry reached a boiling point--before Mellman finally warned after almost two weeks that, well, it now looked from his latest data like the ads were hurting us. They had triggered a flood of coverage on cable news, with a big ride on Fox. Soon an Annenberg Survey would find that almost half of Americans had heard of the attacks...

"Five or six of us--Cahill, the media team, and Mellman-- convened in a windowless conference room at the headquarters and called Kerry, who was in Boston. He was scheduled to address the firefighters' convention there the next day. I argued that he had to take this on in his speech, and we had to produce a response ad, put it on the air, and put the onus on Bush for a third-party front group that was doing his dirty work. Kerry was relieved, and he was angry that we hadn't listened to him and struck back sooner--and that he hadn't just ordered us to do it. No one dissented from doing it now except Mellman. He was concerned that we were just escalating the battle; this would make it a big story on the network news. It is a big story, Kerry retorted; he didn't want to hear any more debate about this. And he didn't understand why the Democratic National Committee or one of the independent groups on our side hadn't figured out that they should have been broadcasting ads defending him." (Pages 368-369)

"No Excuses: Concessions of a Serial Campaigner" by Robert Shrum, 2007, Simon & Schuster

Peter Mitchell  07/30/2007 01:26 PM Report

Dear Charlie Rose: No-one disputes your great charm, knowledge-base and sharpness of mind, but there are times - and the Bob Shrum interview was about the most extreme example I've see to date - when you keep re-wording the question until we're ready to throw something through the screen, and then, without pausing for breath, proceed to provide various possible answers. Is your guest just supposed to say "that would be answer B, Charlie", or battle to speak over you with their own answer? Which, I might add, one can't hear half the time! PLEASE just ask the question (which are always excellent on take one, I promise) and then let them answer!

Judith  07/27/2007 07:09 PM Report

I was so happy when you said, "Why does the answer have to be political?" That was in reference to the spat between Hilary and Barack over whether they would talk to various disfavored leaders in their first year in office. A moment of sunlight!

Charlie Welholm  07/27/2007 03:16 AM Report

Dear Mr. Rose,

I am an incredible fan of yours and rely on your show for tough and interesting interviews, but your show with Mr. Shrum was a love fest and a disservice to history and your show. I am a liberal, a Democrat and have been intimately involved in every Presidential race since 1992. Bob Shrum has blood on his hands. I do not believe in placing blame on one individual because every election has its own dynamics. However, if there is one person going back as far as the the early eighties that has more to do with Democratic Presidential losses than Bob Shrum, I would be curious to know whom you think that is.

The only elections Bob Shrum ever won were a few US Senate reelection bids for various sure-win candidates. If my count is right he is 0 for 7 in Presidential races/campaigns. Why didn't you ask him about the utter failure of his plan at the 2004 convention to embargo anyone at the podium from mentioning George Bush or Dick Cheany negatively because we Democrats needed to "win over the undecided voter." Conventions are the one place where the message can be completely partisan and the views of the Party holding that convention. You didnâ??t ask him about why he advised Senator Kerry that the Swift-boat accusations/affair would have no impact on the campaign and would â??blow overâ?? (by the time Shrum finally was persuaded to act - it was overâ?¦if Senator Kerry could not defend himself did America think he would defend them?..John Kerry wanted to act). You did mention the awful slogan he gave VP Gore, so I give you credit there. I note he reaction was to litterally laugh your question off. Bob briefly said during your interview that Mary Beth Cayhill told Sen. Kerry not to go wind surfing. He failed to mention that he and others were in the process of firing her that day. This is important because as we all know now when Sen. Kerry was photographed windsurfing he was trying to answer a question by a reporter. The reporter yelled to Senator Kerry, â??can America win the war on terror?â?? That day President Bush had said that America could not win the war on terrorism. The reason Sen. Kerry looked and sounded caught off card that day was because he was. Again, Bob had failed him and us.

In the midst of the firing and staff shake up going on that day, everyone (including his most trusted advisor, Bob Shrum) failed to let the Senator know what President Bush had said. Bob Shrum is at it again, he has complete disdain for Senator Clinton, because the Clinton's know how to beat Republicans and they don't like or find Bob Shrum remotely relevant. He almost fell over himself to trash Senator Clinton at the same time pumping up her rivals. These are only recent examples of Bob Shrum's inept, ego driven and just plain wrong advice he has given to some incredible Democratic Presidential candidates over the years. All at the same time fleecing those vary campaigns for millions in ad buy revenue.

Perhaps Bob Shrum would like to rewrite and tell history the way he would like it to be. I wish you had used your interview to discuss the facts as we all know them to be. Asking Bob about the countless examples of his true cold cruel warped reality and about his undoing of the Democratic Party and its recent Presidential candidates he worked with would had got us much closer to the truth. Thatâ??s what I have always relied on you to do. Unfortunately for me and the rest of America, Bob Shrum's fantasies and warped views have given us the most dangerous and unstable Executive branch in our nation's history. I wonder if Bob has one of those Photos President Bush sent out to all his best supporters. Or perhaps a bobble-head of GW, Bob certainly deserves one. Or maybe it should be a Bob Shrum bobble-head.

Next time ask the tough questions and get the truth.

Keep up the great shows (they always are, but this was not one of them)...I'll keep watching.

morpheus  07/27/2007 01:59 AM Report

Way too many interruptions, Charlie!!! Let these people speak, please!!