Charlie Rose

sock puppet  09/19/2008 05:14 PM Report

Populating current conversations with this comment at risk of irritating some, which for those (types) so inclined my profit will compound. This is another (wildly) vivid case for regulation. Even Kosher meat processing is dishonored. Religions don't temper our baser instincts - from carnage to egregious greed. Corporate greed via their lobbying pimps and Congressional venal whores promote the human debasement depicted in the video cited below. Corporate greed to maximize profits dehumanize employees (they of necessity have to overcompensate with an anger at their dumb victims) abuse, torture the dumbest yet the most innocent amongst us. Other earthlings. All slaughter houses need regulating and oversight - particularly corporate ones. They mock Kosher proceedings, but most of all they mock and dishonor common decency. Please pass it on. Why hell if we would do this to dumb animals we might even justify torture of humans, err I mean water-boarding err sensory deprivation err . . . . I repeat, please pass it on. A kernel of humanity towards the humbler (but nobler?) among us might help transfer similar sentiments to ourselves. (A variation of Pogo's revelation.) The link: (it ain't pretty - largely because our values are refracting (magnified) right back at us.) Thanks for your time. N.B.: It's important! _____________________________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1282796533661048967&hl=en _____________________________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________ Attribution and kudos to "Marilyn!"

Narciso Sandoval  03/14/2008 12:27 PM Report

How soon we seem to forget what happened to the Kennedy's and why.

Our next President will be a Republican or a woman. Why? Because this country is not ready for a Black President. If Obama was to win the nomination, which I doubt, some Redneck would make sure he never was elected. Find that disgusting? Maybe, but true!

Michael Wizniak  03/14/2008 11:27 AM Report

Although a one-sided discussion... that is the very point. There has not been enough practical discourse in the conventional media on America's failing relationships across the globe. American media & leaders seem to argue about what social or economic programs should be enforced (from an objective sounding unilateral point of view), while erroneously not recognizing that both are contingent on America's international relationships in which it must be trusted/respected enough first. This is exactly the sort of program that most voting Americans need to hear before "going to the polls," on either side of the aisle. Unfortunately, they are stuck like deer in headlights on the celebrity style reporting that is all to prevalent on the TV. Thanks for having the discussions that are important.

SING SCHAUF  03/12/2008 05:28 PM Report

It is to bad that we do not get to see this on the cable and main media news.

This is so heartwarming, it made me cry. I hope that we can restore our good relations with our European kin.

Barack Obama has the ability to bring the world together. We will never have this opportunity with Hillary Clinton. I disagree with Barack Obama on one point:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DwVO9mxw9hs&feature=related

at the New Hampshire debate, Barack said that Hillary was "likeable enough"....NO SHE ISN'T!

Bob Tourville  02/28/2008 10:02 PM Report

Intelligent men. Good thoughts. I would like to comment on one though, the idea that U.S. visas are hard to get and we have become fortress America. I would like to remind them that Atta came to the U.S. from Europe where he had become an engineer. The Dutch are having horrible problems with there influx of Muslims and the bedrocks of their culture is at risk. It is Europe that should attend to its policies. It is a serious problem and needs serious thought. What ever happened to the notion that before one could be trained as an engineer, or trained to splice DNA, or any other technology which can be used for great good or great harm, one would first have to have a solid liberal arts education with grounding in Western thought, and be vetted. I think it disappeared in the 70's. I do not think a degree from Mad Rassa U. should be taken as a substitute. There is another concept that might be helpful that I would like to see explored. The Muslim world did not evolve culturally as did the Greek, where hospitality was extended de facto, to the stranger. There the stranger must ask for and be granted Aman, which bound the stranger to do no harm to his host. It is worth looking into.

TABS  02/28/2008 05:36 PM Report

It is precisely that the Western economic and cultural models of capitalism and secularism are supplanting traditional cultures in the ME and Central Asia that is causing problems that we face today with radical fundamentalism.

TABS  02/28/2008 05:22 PM Report

"A sense that it is/was all coming apart," as a comparison between London in 1908 and Washington DC in 2008 is ludicrous. Does anyone remember that it took 2 World Wars to BK GB and her empire. Who in 1908 could imagine that in a decade (1918)the British Empire would be a shell of its' former self.If GB had realized WW1 was going to cost them so much treasure they would have never entered into that war. America on the other hand became aware years ago that we are selling off the farm bit by bit (1980's to Japan) as Warren Buffet so aptly states. Also the statement that the West is no longer the dominante model is fallicious. Exactly what model of economics has the Wests competitors adopted if not the Western model of capitalism. Pure revisionist drivel to justify ones occupation.

Alexis Rzewski  02/28/2008 12:26 PM Report

I was struck by the remark that Mr. Ash made about London of 1908 being like Washington in 2008, so I googled around, and voila': found the direct link to that observation to one of his articles that Mr. Ash did three years ago. It compares Britain's Boer war with the US's Iraq war.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2005/aug/25/usa.comment

tom & kathleen  02/28/2008 11:09 AM Report

Charlie - This UK/Europe evening was masterful! Would love to see this group continue to comment on the US elections as we move to and thru November 2008. Would also love to see a similar group from Asia, so we could gleam their thoughts on our presidential process.

Marilyn Robertson  02/28/2008 09:17 AM Report

Thank you for the show on Tuesday Feb. 26. We watch your show daily. What a great insight into the views of others. We, as a county, could learn much from such discussions but first we must have an open mind. We found this program to be most interesting and information. Please continue with other similar shows. As a county we need more of this type of programing.

tom  02/28/2008 04:04 AM Report

Is it me but when British and other Europeans talk about America there's always a tint of jealous in their analysis, when the were talking about the success of the surge everything was given as a reason for it, except the American military strategy and leadership

sam  02/28/2008 03:50 AM Report

I'm Canadian and this anti-American sentiment is ridiculous to the extreme, I hear people complain about America with stupid arguments that they would never use against any other country. Europe caused two world wars that Americans in the thousands had to die for including Canadians, they colonized Africa, Asia and the Middle East, that to this day we are still experiencing conflicts through civli wars because of ethic division that the Europeans magnified to control the countries. When European countries were the power in the world it used it's power to control and colonize almost every part of the world. People say China hasn't started any wars besides killing millions of it's own people under Mao, no they just say that the land and people belong to main land China and the people don't have a choice, Tibet, Hong Kong, Taiwan. Then there's Russia which from it's core to everything it touches has a tint of evil, to the millions killed under Stalin to the reporters it slaughters today if any truth is spoken about the Russia of today. Russia, China don't give a shit what happens to people in other countries as long as it can make a deal they wouldn't care if they were dealing with HItler or Mother Teresa, and Europe is more worried about Co2 then millions dying today of preventable diseases and civil wars, and the truth of why Europe cares about "Global Warming" because it see it as means to slow down America's and the developing worlds economy. I really want all these people who find America as the world's problem to just imagine the world today without America as the dominate force for the last 60 years and replace it with say China, Iran or Russia.

Brandon Fox  02/28/2008 03:45 AM Report

phenominal

Joanna  02/28/2008 02:02 AM Report

The program from London's discussion topic could have been even more interesting if there had been a Maggie Thatcher-type person (or Why Not Her??)in the mix. It was a bit gratifying to see John Burns (who, as a journalist for a far-left rag actually reporting the war in Iraq from on the ground fairly most of the time)distressed by the anti-American sentiment in Britain now that he's working and living there. He seemed agitated by Oxford's Ashes remarks. Ash just came across as a pompous, condescending one-world government socialist in his views and projections of the future. Alistair Horne seemed to be at times "taking up" for America because of childhood experiences, which was refreshing, to say the least. But what caught my attention the most was his statement about the media making President Bush look bad and swaying people against him around the world (paraphrased). Charlie, you disagreed, although lightly. I keep up with reporting internationally, and I've noticed this prejudicial journalism for 8 years! NOT in Hungary, where I teach a few weeks each summer. The former Soviet bloc countries seem to like and appreciate him very much. When Bush was in Africa last week, BBC news gave a positive view of his popularity and their show of honor and affection toward him and vice versa. I felt sad and embarrassed that our major news channels pretty much ignored this historical trip. Many of you have mentioned Obama in your comments. I was frustrated with the heavy dose of "Obama adoration" on the London show, but admittedly it was more from Ash, naturally. Charlie, you mentioned only 3 candidates. Remember next time, Mike Huckabee is still very much in the race. One has to admire that kind of persistence. I'm not an "evangelical" and get tired of hearing (not from you) that word tossed around by media regarding his supporters. But back to London. I hope you have more shows like this one, but just have a bit more balance of views, please, Charlie. Thanks

Tyler Hodgson  02/28/2008 01:59 AM Report

Great programme Charlie. Thanks once again to you and the generosity of the people that provide financial support to your work. I am always struck by how your programme raises the bar compared to some of the fare we are fed on cable.

The world is hungry for tempered visionary leadership with a focus on the long term interests of the free world. The beauty of America is that it has built-in mechanisms for self-correction and renewalâ?¦ and it does this while providing an opportunity to its citizens to make a difference, based on merit and their willingness to contribute time and money and to get engaged, to an extent and diversity that is arguably not enjoyed by any other people on earth. For that reason, America deserves to lead the free world, even if sometimes it screws up royally. In return, Americans have a responsibility to choose that de facto leader of the free world carefully. While any of the remaining candidates in the running for the nomination of their parties might be a welcome change, we do not need a new presidency of warmed over policies of the current administration when it comes to world leadership. We are tired of warmongers. We need a leader who can be resolute, practical, strong, humble, understand limits, yet inspire us to live up to our promise and potential as human beings and freedom-loving nations. We need a leader that understands that a nationâ??s sustained greatness does not flow from military power alone, for no single nation on earth can withstand a strong alliance. We need someone who understands that we do not need to lose what took us hundreds of years to win, in the hunting down of certain cavemen or in the fight against the canker they peddle. I am no longer the spring chicken that I once was in my youth; so I know it is increasingly difficult to try or trust new ideas or things, or to accommodate new ways or approaches to problems. For most of us, our thinking becomes ossified under the pressure of advancing years, the weight of disappointments of life, the tendency to re-fight old wars, and so forth. We are products of our environments and experiences and sometimes it is difficult for many of us to imagine or think of a world beyond the comfortable familiarity of old ideas, let alone try to really improve the human condition. Yet we know that for the leader of the free world, at this moment, we do want just such an extraordinary man or woman, whose thinking will remain nimble and fresh even as the body becomes stiff and aged; someone whose mental agility and grasp of the long term consequences of policy transcend cold war thinking or hegemonic fantasies that are not attuned to 21st century realities. We need a leader who is open to new ideas, who will embrace other people - not treat the rest of us like a necessary nuisance. We need a man or woman whose thinking has not ossified into a certain discredited 20th, 19th, or 18th century worldview. Surely, even if only for a brief instant in our troubled history, we can work together for the good of the world, just as the greatest generation of the past century did. We just need America to make a choice that favours just such an outcome.

foreboding  02/28/2008 01:26 AM Report

Agree Alice. Skeptical is probably better expressed as cynical. Not much to cheer about anymore.

foreboding  02/28/2008 01:18 AM Report

Perhaps too much unwarranted attention is attributed by this but would someone tell me what the Hillary post is based upon. Is it merely malicious libel? Such an exhausting diatribe is too much to digest. Wish they would apply the same amount of venom to Shrub. It's file stuff copied from another source, canned venom. But so excessive, over-the-top that it loses its point. ??????????????

Alice  02/27/2008 06:56 PM Report

forebordings, I agree with your comments, and I would say you are not skeptical enough.

As we saw pre-Iraq occupation, he media is fully in bed with the administration, compliments of media consolidation and therefore they will be useless in monitoring. Sure they throw a bone here and there our way, but that's just to make sure you and I think we have a free media.

TABS  02/27/2008 06:29 PM Report

Mr Rose presented 3 esteemed guests on his show. However all they succeeded in doing is inducing somnolence for all the importance that they brought to the subject at hand.

Outraged  02/27/2008 06:16 PM Report

I agree with the comments of Lyn Marie Broach above.

I also rarely miss a Charlie Rose show (despite it being broadcast at the difficult times of noon and midnight in the San Francisco Bay Area.)

Other than Timothy Garton Ash directly attributing (not speculating, but attributing) the circulation of the Obama-swathed-in-Somali-dress photo to her, the only allusion to HRC as a viable candidate for the Democratic nomination was during the closing remarks of Charlie Rose. Otherwise, the entire fifty-minute discussion referenced Obama as the presumptive President-elect.

II am outraged at the misogynistic bias of television media, which some factions of the voting public depend on as their only source for objective reporting and analysis.

Again, the final outcome of the presidential election is being skewed by deliberate misinformation, lack-of-information, and personal agendas.

I no longer watch MSNBC or its affiliate NBC, CNN, or the other national networks. Neither do my friends. We are outraged by the chuckling, gleeful expressions, and nasty asides and innuendoes of Chris Matthews, Wolf Blitzer, Tim Russert, Keith Oberman, Tucker Carlson, Howard Fineman, Jack Cafferty, et al.

I had thought the Charlie Rose show was a safe refuge from this.

spoite  02/27/2008 03:25 PM Report

More on the "view from Europe". It is striking that the guests hardly talked about Europe, except to denounce its anti-Americanism, and even less about the EU. If they agree, as garton Ash correctly states, that a new multipolar world with several regional economic entities or countries is on the horizon, then, why not talk about the EU, which has the largest economy today (over a $ trillion larger than the US economy and the gap is growing), a decent potential for growth (by adding new countries, which evidently the US can't do), and a huge market. Historians such as Horne and Garton Ash might also remind viewers that the EU set up the economic and institutional structures to render war impossible among the current EU members, all this in a continent that had been the global trouble-maker for centuries. No small feat and perhaps THE event history books will remember in two hundred years. Not the "remain-to-be-seen" rise of China or other powers. But perhaps the "stealth revolution" that's has taken place in Europe over the last 50 years is not enough for British commentators who evidently still can't talk straight about the "continent", or an endeavor the UK didn't initiate.

Carol J  02/27/2008 02:38 PM Report

OBAMA, OBAMA, Who is Obama??????? Unfortunately it looks like we are down to 3 candidates for the Presidency, too, too, too bad others dropped out of the race. We still have 8 months to go until the general election, just because some people seem to be caught up in tne Obama mania does not mean they won't come down to earth by Novemeber, then see if they vote for this OBAMA, OBAMA person.

morris wolfe  02/27/2008 02:32 PM Report

Re: Conversation with John Burns etc. Once again I found myself shouting, "Shut up!" Charlie at the screen. I don't see Charlie as the equal of his guests, although he obviously does; he's a host, facilitating a conversation. His questions are too long and poorly formulated. Has he lost the ability to listen to his guests? I don't tune in to hear Charlie; I tune in because I want to hear interesting people talk about their lives. Charlie too often gets in the way.

spoite  02/27/2008 01:47 PM Report

About the guest speakers, it should also be noted that besides being all men they also are British Americanophiles. They don't represent the view "from Europe" as Charlie mentioned in the introduction, but an increasingly improbable form of transatlantism. Following the suggestion from "Paris", what about someone like Olivier Todd, indeed, or Régis Debray to mix it up a little bit (and please not Bernard-Henri Lévy).

The relationship between the US and Europe has to be redrawn on new terms, and, apart from Garton Ash (although I view his position as strictly British), these commentators don't strike me as especially cognizant of the matter.

In that regard, their assessment of anti-Americanism in the UK and elsewhere is simultaneously right (widespread) and wrong (silly and facile as John Burns indicated). Most of it (and they implicitly agree with this when admitting it is directed toward the current administration's wrong policies) is legitimate as it is nothing more than fair and regular criticism; something most American citizens have a hard time accepting when it comes from abroad.

watcher  02/27/2008 01:16 PM Report

I thought the gentleman on last night were typical of the far left people Charlie consistantly has on his show. I am irritated that PBS(with public $) continues to air his one-sided views. I found it scary that they all were so much in favor of Obama. Has anyone ever wondered why they were like someone like him to be President? Do they have selfish motives? If Americans are hated so much around the world, it is to be blamed on the media who presents such a negative picture of its own country and what is so "wrong" with our country. As someone who has travelled throughout the World, America at her worst is far better than any country in the World. Someone like Obama would have never been afforded the education or opportunity America has given him in an European, Middle East, or Asian country.

Paris  02/27/2008 01:06 PM Report

I quit relying on U.S. media in 2000. Thankfully, with the web, you can read newspapers from around the world. The Guardian U.K. was especially interesting, predicting the coup attempt against Chavez in Jan. (via Greg Palast's source within OPEC), noting the total propaganda of the Jessica Lynch story, questioning the veracity of Rummy and Cheney's (OSP) "intel" on Iraq, which has since been shown to have been provided by a source the CIA already discounted. Karen Kwaitkowski's complaint about Israeli generals who bypassed registration protocols to create the false intel on Iraq (in American Conservative mag and liberal ones...and not a word in the U.S. press until the invasion was a done deed and totally unlike the Bush admin's ridiculous claims... Asia Times gives interesting perspectives on the India/Pakistan issues... it is important to remember that the Iran-Contra crimes were not reported in the U.S. media until this information had been reported in a Lebanese newspaper. Their information was subsequently affirmed by Russia, Iran, France and Israel.

The recent Franklin issue in "interesting." He provided confidential info to another country, via AIPAC, is found guilty and, instead of jail, he's transferred to another dept. There is no accountability w/i the U.S. govt. now and that's why we continue to have such a mess. The founders' entire mission in their design of a govt was accountability via checks and balances.

The entire world would benefit from the demise of fundamentalisms, in whatever part of the world they exist... but especially in the U.S. Israel, and of course, predominantly muslim nations who are ruled by fiat.

forboding  02/27/2008 12:44 PM Report

Re the commentary about Israel. A revealing read is "THE ISRAEL LOBBY and U.S. Foreign Policy," by John J. Mearsheimer and Stephen M. Walt.

Michele Mathews  02/27/2008 12:42 PM Report

It was interesting to watch Frontline discuss Putin's censorship of the media and then watch Charlie Rose change the subject when Alistair Horne mentioned the Zionist lobby. It is a shame that such an important issue cannot be discussed openly in this country.

Matt Yeager  02/27/2008 11:43 AM Report

What struck me as an afterthought to the program was how matter-of-factly the 4 gentlemen mentioned how hated the the United States is around the world. Unfortunately most Americans are unaware or in denial regarding this point. I think my point is reinforced by the fact that the show was from London and the 3 learned men (a journalist, an Oxford professor and a Historian) were not politicians and provided an objective view point from outside the U.S. We as Americans should learn more about not only what others around the world think of us but how our foreign policies affect the rest of the world.

Paris  02/27/2008 11:42 AM Report

Interesting program. Perhaps in the future Mr. Rose could also invite Emmanuel Todd to participate in a conversation. Mr. Todd predicted the fall of the Soviet Union back in the 1970s while Rummy and Wolfie were trying to sell fear (some thing never change...) Todd's demographic analysis noted the USSR would fall because of its own internal contradictions (educated population vs. totalitarian exercise of power.) This was noted in his book "After the Fall." Long before Reagan, too, btw.

Emmanuel Todd wrote an interesting book a few years ago called "After the Empire." It talks about the problems with the U.S. now as a nation whose only real export is weapons and war. This, Todd claims, will lead to the U.S. as a reduced power, possibly bankrupt (is this in the works with the banks now?) Todd urges other nations to help the U.S. in its times of economic troubles to maintain stability in the U.S. and elsewhere.

If you've never read it, you should.

A. Graham  02/27/2008 10:20 AM Report

I agree with Mr. Grambihler's remarks re the extreme bias the US shows Israel. All the educated world knows about this and therefore most are deeply cynical or much worse about how the USA uses its power in the Middle East. Charlie, alas, last night, ignored Mr. Horne's remark about the enormous influence of the Israeli lobby. Charlie could have allowed an open and most interesting discussion about this. It is extremely relevant to 1. our invasion of Iraq and 2. the Palestine/Israel problem. 3. nuclear proliferation. Unfortunately, Charlie always avoids any discussion which explores issues which the Israeli lobby wants stifiled. Alexandre Graham

TK Seam  02/27/2008 09:33 AM Report

I agree with the proposition that as this century evolves no one nation will dominate global economy or politics. American economic, technological and military power will not wane in absolute terms, but only in relative terms. The trends are stark, as evident from the continuing decline in American share [in percentage term\ of global trade. Asian markets and technological prowess is growing far faster and that trend is going to accelerate even more. We are headed towards a multi-polar world. Large emerging nations like China and India are developing economically and rising in geopolitical power despite (and not because of) the US and the rest of developed world. Trade and access to western markets and technology has no doubt helped these two populous giants take off initially but a certain irreversible inertia has now taken root and cannot be stopped by the US, Japan or any other power. Both nations have vastly different socio-political systems but each also possesses deep cultural and civilizational history that has been largely non-aggressive, self-contained and peaceful. If history is a guide, neither nation has populace that has aspiration or stomach for potential imperialistic, religious or even cultural dominance of other regions of the world. That's in contrast to old European powers and current American power that have sought to patronize and mold every nook and cranny - even by force and propagation of tyrants, when that was necessary for western energy and other self-interests. Despite propaganda in western press, China has gone out of its way to make fair and non-threatening pacts with countries it dwarfs in size all around its neighborhood, including developed US allies South Korea and Japan. China, in my view, will no doubt grow its military power (mostly because it is deeply scarred by a history of invasions, most recently by the Japanese) but, if left unprovoked, it will prosper peacefully and will also slowly adapt its communist political system more in line with its impressively growing capitalistic economy. Russia, on the other hand, with its declining population but huge oil fortunes (and an enormous nuke arsenal), is a genuine threat to America and Europe.

lyn marie broach  02/27/2008 05:14 AM Report

Rarely do I miss a Charlie Rose show, and I applaud the intelligent and informative dialogue. However, Tuesday evening's program, broadcast from London, once again featured an all-male panel of experts, commenting on how America is viewed by the rest of the world. And while I valued their opinion, surely this topic would be better served with a variety of voices. Moreover, I was taken aback at the virtual assumption that the Democratic candidate was all but selected--only once did anyone allude to the fact that Hillary Clinton is still very much a contender, and most of the dialogue centered on how a potential President Obama would be seen by the rest of the world. Have I missed something, or are there major primaries yet to take place? Until all the voters have been heard, I find this presumption appalling.

Anton Grambihler  02/27/2008 04:00 AM Report

Would things be different with Al Gore as President? Not likely, since the Vice President would then have been Joseph Lieberman who introduced the resolution to go to war with Iraq and the resolution to go to war with Iran.

Anton Grambihler  02/27/2008 03:52 AM Report

Laws MUST BE ENFORCED equally on all people

Shortly after World War II there was a terrorist uprising against the British Mandate of Palestine. The result of this uprising was that land was taken from the Palestine People and given to the terrorists for the creation of the State of Israel.

In 1967 this Israel invaded its neighbors and still occupies the ill-gotten land. Israel is also in violation of International Laws, United Nations Resolutions, and has unregulated non-conventional weapons (i.e. Nuclear Bombs). The United States has invaded Iraq two times for their violations of UN resolutions, but is giving Israel over three billion dollars again this year in US taxpayer money and military equipment.

The United States also supports further rewarding Israel for the invasion by giving them more of the Palestine Land. The United States calls the Palestine People trying to get their land back terrorists. The United States refers to the Israeli occupiers as our friends. Do they have any idea why the Non-Jews of the World dislike the United States?

The United States must become a Nation of Laws ENFORCED equally on all people instead of being a Nation of Hypocrites.

When the Nazis Terrorists continued to violate International Law after Land was taken from Czechoslovakia and given to them, they were forced to accept unconditional surrender. Nothing less must be accepted from Israel.

Why is it that Israel can attack an American ship with no repercussions?

I am a 100% Citizen of the United States of America.

Leslie Provatas  02/27/2008 01:54 AM Report

Great conversation, but what about Africa?

Will if become a big farm to feed the rest of the world? RE: ethnic genocide/cleansing and pandemic illnesses.

Kathy Cholod  02/27/2008 01:53 AM Report

I have just finished watching the Charlie Rose show from London. I am amazed at the direction of the talk.China is rising only because she enjoys a prefered trading status with the US.

You are giving her the power she now enjoys, You have destroyed your own industry and given the advantage to China. What is China without the US market. You have the power to change that at any time.

China also is walking a tight rope, A so called Communist country with a VERY rich uper class developing. They must keep the poor , Poor in order to keep their edge in the markets.

I believe they will inplode, They have been to revolution twice , I don't think they will fear going to revolution again. They are producing no inventive ideas bur are stealing technology from every other country and flooding our markets with Stolen goods.

Why do we trade with China that has such a terrible human rights record. Greeg on our part I guess.

We will never sell into there markets, The oprdinary Chineswe cannot and for a very long time if ever be able to afford our products.

Trade is all one way, If you wish to stop China, Stop its prefered trade with the US.

India , again a social problem with the Cast system, They also are only doing well because of all the US Companies that have taken their call centers off shore.

China, is flexing its muscle, The US better do something to stop them.

I agree with the Historain that said we have more natural bonds with Russia and not China.

We had better sart to move closer to Russia or we will be very sorry indeed. Russia is a very

Vast and Very Rich Country, They have oil, gas, Gold, Minerals of all kinds, Water, timber, Agricultural products that if harnessed properly could feed a major part of the world.

Russia will move on with or without the US, I think it should be with. Russia has the potential to supply all of Europe with all their needs. They will move towards a strong Europe with Russia as the Major Player. That more than China is a threat to American Dominance.

THe US has a very skizoid policy, Shun Cuba, and Russia but Embrace China a total Communist country.

How do you expect to be respected in the world while having such contradictory policies.

You are our great neighbor and I feel one with you, America wake up, you are giving and creating the problems in the middle east and China , They make their money and move forward on the back of the US.

Start looking and providing alternate Energy Forces, Take the power back from the Middle East.

Also in a country that has so many states that get more than 300 days a year of Sun shine you should be self efficent in energy. Why not have all the roofes in your sun states have

solar pannels, The are getting smaller and much more efficent, With some injection of Capital into resaerch of Solar energy you would soon have solar pannels that can be tiles

on the roof.

What about Tidal waves, With your coast lines on both sides of your country you are ideally set to harness this energy, Just imagine Clean air again, Blue skies, a hugh drop in health care costs.

For a bright, Talented Nation all you lake is the WILL to do it. I think the people are ready, That is wht Barrack Obama is doing so well, You need good leadership at the top, Leaders who will help you recapture your original spirit to be Free and to succeed,

For men of supposed wisdom I am appauled at their lack of Vision and understanding.

The US is GODS big experiment, Please don't let it fail.

Thank you for letting me have my say

Blessings

Kathy

Marilyn(Not Maven)  02/27/2008 01:21 AM Report

I like what all commentators thus far said, BUT HAD NOT had the thoughts FOREBODING gave on the power of the Military/Industrial Complex CONTRACTORS could have to mess up any redeployment. That's too true! I never could understand a saying from WWI and WWII ("Guns & Butter?" or something like that.) Now I do understand how the contracts for the special interests of defense contractors really make a big base of our economy. (along w/ the base of the NRA, the many makers of GUNS & Ammo.) I had a friend who was a Conscientious Objector in Vietnam War times, guess where he was forced to work!! An Ammunition factory! Also, don't belittle any of the big mining interests & chemical companies going AFTER Obama as they are rolling in the dough these days.

I am very FOR OBAMA, but HOPE he is not the 1st assassination of the U.S. in the 21st Cy. Please Secret Service,...really check things out!!!

forebordings  02/27/2008 12:48 AM Report

These guys Obamamania makes me assert two forebodings that have unfortunate potential. First, his success could endanger his life from the redneck element in the land. Second, it may be advisable (memo to the president) to immediately place all civilian contractors under control and auspices of the US Army. The mercenaries in particular (Blackwater et al) will resent a prompt withdrawal and will not be above trying to sabotage and scuttle it by inciting the insurrectionists to renewed violence. Even the army and the M-I complex may see their own selfish reasons to "sustain" the conflict. Monitoring by the press may be a prudent and necessary precaution. Too skeptical? Perhaps, but remember it was a bogus pretext to start it, similar tactics could be used to SUSTAIN it. It's important to remember: we are not as nice as our text books imply(ed).

Jessica Sondgeroth  02/27/2008 12:16 AM Report

After Alistair Horne's "A Savage War of Peace", and the implications it has as a historical account that clearly illustrates the types of ramifications that come with today's clash between the percieved "capitalist free world" and the complexities surrounding the development of the Middle East and Islamic states, I believe his input in this discussion is more than relevant, and I thank you for hosting him on tonight's show.

Wesley La Bua  02/27/2008 12:13 AM Report

Outstanding program! Our next president should seriously consider taking these three guest speakers on as policy advisors.

Dr. Kathleen Hoekstra  02/27/2008 12:13 AM Report

At the end of your informative program tonight--Tuesday, Feb. 26--a couple of voices could be heard stating that, had it not been for 911, George Bush might even have been a good president. I wish you had had time to explore THAT hypothesis, given that we now know that he had plans to invade Iraq BEFORE 9/11! Which of your guests actually made such a baseless and misleading statement? I'd like to be able to address this directly with him/them. Thanks. KH