Charlie Rose

montrose  12/05/2008 01:31 AM Report

OOOPS. Please note the date in the second line of my previous email should read 1942.

montrose  12/05/2008 01:29 AM Report

Own background: Upon getting my BA degree, I joined an anti-Nazi undergound cell whose leader soon thereafter was arrested and summarily executed by the Gestapo, in 1842. Undeterred, I continue to this date.

Comment: Not since those days have I experienced such an Alice-in-Wonderland fantasy aka current presidential politics. During the Nazi and Soviet era all pretended everything was OK, except the unwashed masses. Now all pretend everything is OK, except the 105+ million visitors to obamacrimes.com. We might be facing the gravest Constitutional Crisis in American history but it is a subject upon which the MSM imposed an omerta even stronger than the Sicilian mafia's. Fortunately I''m a man of faith That means I believe everything will work out for the best. That faith includes faith in the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States who hall under no circumstances administer the oath of office on Inauguration day on an individual, unless he is absolutely convinced that individual meets the Constitution's requirements any and all presidents must fulfill.

John  06/11/2008 12:07 PM Report

guys, it's a conversation, not an interview. In a conversation, you dont just listen in awe.

Brian M  05/27/2008 01:31 AM Report

When will Charlie stop the constant interrupting of guests and his own personal rants. He should consider just interviewing himself.

Deborah  05/25/2008 04:55 AM Report

Thank you Arianna Huffington for providing the public service that corporate media have abandoned. The fourth estate -once the guardians of democracy - no longer serve to promote democracy; instead, the corporate media blunts public discourse with propaganda, misinformation, and manufactured stories . The most disheartening shaper of public opinion today that threatens democracy with a constant flow of propaganda is Fox News and radical right wing radio. Its emphasis on extreme nationalism, scapegoating, and blatantly false information exploits ignorance and bigotry to distract from the serious economic and social issues facing Americans.

Charlie, I notice you are exceptionally tough on liberal thinkers or critics of the existing corporate power structure and neoconservative thought, but I have to thank you for having people with a variety of views on the show.

jay  05/08/2008 12:47 PM Report

Charlie:

I must say I enjoy your show but there are times that you need to let your guest fully answer your questions and without your interruptions. You can always rebuke after or question in greater detail if needed. Now what I want to see is a show, which explains why this country is in such bad shape - it needs to give real answers and not just politically correct ones! For example: why is there a housing crisis? Think about the fact that most homeowners bought their houses at a time when 4%-6% was the going rate to get into a home. ALL WAS WELL!!EVERYONE WAS MAKING MONEY!!! It wasnâ??t until the variable rate kicked in that things went WHACKY! Mortgage people - along with the government allowed this to happen-why? Even when homeowners tried to refinance they had to come to the table with more money (for extra closing costs). The amount of money was so great that they were locked or chained to this sinking ship! If you want to bring things back to normal the mortgage people should be forced to give homeowners who are in foreclosure a fix rate of the initial 4%-6%. EVERYONE GOES BACK TO MAKING MONEY!! YOU NEED TO HAVE A FORUM FOR EVERYDAY PEOPLE TO INTERACT WITH THESE SO CALLED EXPERTS. We donâ??t need to be Einstein to see the nonsense of this 3 card Monte.

Soso Sayso  05/07/2008 06:53 PM Report

Charlie - My husband and I were appalled, outraged and frankly disappointed in your behavior during the Huffington interview. Have you seen your interview? Clearly you must share our disgust at your unforgiveably disgusting behavior. Shame on you!!!

JMan  05/07/2008 03:13 AM Report

Charlie; let the woman speak, please.

Doug F.  05/06/2008 04:06 PM Report

Please add my voice to those crying out," Who is this man, and what has he done with Charlie Rose?" His interview with Arriana Huffington was his worst performance ever. During the 3 1/2 minute Bear-Stearns exchange he interrupted her 15 times, spoke longer than she did, and completely missed the point. Is he ill?

Doug F.  05/06/2008 04:06 PM Report

Please add my voice to those crying out," Who is this man, and what has he done with Charlie Rose?" His interview with Arriana Huffington was his worst performance ever. During the 3 1/2 minute Bear-Stearns exchange he interrupted her 15 times, spoke longer than she did, and completely missed the point. Is he ill?

Kevin  05/06/2008 02:50 PM Report

Why does anyone listen to this woman? She clearly doesnt have a grasp of the issues, and as far as polemics go she's no better than Ann Coulter.

Shaft  05/06/2008 01:22 PM Report

This woman is the smartest woman, she is so smart that she recognizes Sen. Barack Obama is the answer America has. She is also honest with respect to answering all them questions. Like many people I have a small complaints to make on the way Mr.Rose rebuttal on the Bear-Stearns issue. He sure looked unhappy when she made that contentious remark as to why the rich get bailout for making wrong decision of selling loans knowingly to people who are unqualified to handle the mortgages they were showered with. This administration is so quick in making mistakes and have them shouldered by others. She also hit the nail on the head when she said the KATRINA failure was a reflection of how incompetent the RIGHT is. I think her book title says it all, making America and the world less stable and leaning toward more danger. The RIGHT-WINGERS made America weaker by pre-empting a war that is not well thought out and handled terribly. Today, American economy is weak, our standing in the world has diminished and the world is less-stable adding the sub-prime market to it is the perfect condition for ungraceful decline in treasure and power. The RIGHTS made many of our competitors' and enemies' dream come true. At the expense of American blood and treasure Iran is feeling safer and stronger, had Saddam was in power he would not let them have nuclear weapon. Russia is flexing her military muscle lubricated by high oil price revenue threatening Europe with touting gas faucet, and China is rising faster than even the Chinese Communist party wants to. All this was made possible because of the poor judgments of the RIGH-WINGERS, I am not sure how history will deal with them but I am getting sick to my stomach.

who wrote this?  05/05/2008 09:13 PM Report

"The reason the conventional wisdom survives no matter how many times its lies are exposed is that shows like Meet The Press allow their guests to go unchallenged." Maybe Charlie read Arianna's book and decided to challenge her?

Jeff  05/05/2008 05:58 PM Report

This chick is a political opportunist of the highest order. Have all of you Huffington-ites forgotten that she was a "compassionate conservative" in the 1990s...until that ex of her proved to be a flaccid politician, and she decided that the left was the place to be and trimmed her sails accordingly? If Charlie kept cutting her off, then it was because he wanted her NOT to spout too much of her useless drivel. Charlie, please please please interview Andrew Sullivan in the same manner if you have him on your show again--you have given that hysteric little shrew (and La Huffington) way too much deferrence in the past....time to interview them like adults now. Well done!!

Mark  05/05/2008 05:17 PM Report

Charlie, you have a bad habit of staying with the predictable. Huffington's point was the Far Right ruthlessly implemented its destructive agenda for America during this Administration, and the press and the Democrats mystifyingly colluded in letting them do it. So why did you need to 1) interrupt her constantly to quibble (soccer in Iraq, for God sakes), and 2) insist, as if you were a member of the rest of the shallow, useless, vapid media, on talking about Jeremy Wright. He related point about Iran was WAY more novel and important than having to have you plow over the Wright scandal with Arianna to the detriment of that point. Try, please try, to think outside the box sometimes.

carla  05/04/2008 03:40 PM Report

charlie wins the chris mathews test for ADHD, at least chris doesnt cut his guests off so rudely...its a wonder that people still watch when all we want to do is go to the computer and unleash our venom.

charlie, learn from bill moyers...he is a pleasure and a lesson one wants to learn...you should ,too.

and please, can we have howard Zinn on the show, but careful, he is gentle, and we do not want to see him squashed....get that, charlie.

Francine Bettencourt  05/04/2008 02:17 PM Report

Charlie, I used to love your show. It was one of the only examples of intelligent conversation on TV to date. Therefore, imagine my disappointment with your interview of Arianna Huffington. I have to say Arianna was very patient with you and illustrated a great deal of grace in the face of a hostile environment.

You never stopped talking and continually interrupted her never letting her answer a question fully. Upon reflection of this interview you appeared arrogant, sexist, egotistical and obnoxious. If you find interviewing an intelligent and vocal woman intimidating you should stop pretending to interview them.

Charlie, you donâ??t need to be so aggressive to demonstrate to your audience that you did your research and know the topic under discussion. How about letting your guests have their say?

michelle  05/04/2008 11:57 AM Report

Wow, charlie! My folks use to say, "With friends like that, you don't need enemies" After reading what Arrianna Huffington's fans had to say about you, it sounds to me that with a guest like her you're not in need any help finding criticism. By the way, l love your show. I work hard and don't have time to blog and meet the personalities and the ideas of the people you invite to your table other wise. And I can always count on you to conduct the conversations at your table the way I conduct the dinner conversation at my dinner table. With respect for the individual and humanity at large.

Juan  05/04/2008 04:19 AM Report

For the opponents of Arianna Huffington that say her points are so weak they warranted the attack dog interview C Rose displayed, I counter that your wrong -- she didn't get to speak long enough for us to form an opinion on her commentary. Therefore, your comments display a prejudgement of AH's points.

For those like me who want something to happen with all this commentary, do like I did and also write your complaints to the PBS Ombudsman: ombudsman@pbs.org voicing your displeasure. As far as I'm concerned, PBS needs to weigh-in on behalf of their irate and outraged viewers.

Finally, I'd let CR come into my home for dinner and a discussion or interview -- but if he acted like he did with AH, he'd be out the door. I am certain that CR would not let a guest act the way he did, so what gives him the right? I bet his mother would be ashamed.

elizabeth  05/04/2008 01:16 AM Report

Charlie- If you believe there's a place in television for really good conversation, bite your tongue and remember that a gentleman, especially a Southern gentleman, after posing a guestion to a guest listens to his quest's response. Other than Bill Moyers you've got the most interesting and intelligent guests on the tube. Let them talk! Stop trying to reinforce your own image with your constant interruptions and get back to the purpose of the show. We know you're a "star" and we viewers know by your questions that you're intelligent or we wouldn't be watching every night. If you don't stop interrupting you're going to end up with sound bites and I for one am not staying up late for a repeat of the network news! Luv ya' Elizabeth

Susana  05/03/2008 11:41 PM Report

Charlie, I love you, but please stop interrupting.

robert  05/03/2008 10:21 PM Report

Rose's interruptions are not only unenlightening, but they are a bore. I sometimes wonder if he wouldn't be happier interviewing himself as he seems to think his wisdom, wit, and insight far outpace those lucky enough to be on his show. Huffington was extremely patient and good humored with this seemly uncontrollable compulsion on the part of Rose.

M. G. Carrillo  05/03/2008 09:53 PM Report

This is in reply to the comments by â??Ginerousâ?? and to all other that mentioned that Huffington was flirting: What is that with Arianna Huffingtonâ??s hair! Flirting? Men and women touch their hair all the time whether they are on TV or not. She was not flirting and you are missing the whole point. Furthermore, Huffingtonâ??s hair was moderately styled; her outfit was simple; and her demeanor was right down courteous and admirably professional on the face of the uncomfortable and surely unforeseen situation she found herself in with Charlie Roseâ??s barbarous interruptions. No guest should be treated in this manner whether he/she is being visiting his show for the first or the fiftieth time!

Moreover, in the face of Charlie Roseâ?? uncalled for attacks, Arianna Huffington had the fortitude to display that rich endowment of the mind called prudence, and Charlie Rose was so much his own enemy as to neglect it.

The German poet and novelist Christopher Martin Wieland (1733-1813) wrote, â??However learned or eloquent, man knows nothing truly that he has not learned from experience.â?? In other words, what Charlie Rose learned (or one would hope he did) from this interview experience, and as evidenced from the avalanche of comments submitted, was that he shot himself on the foot. If he intended injury, he did greater to himself. Charlie Rose did succeed, however, at showing his viewers that he could not hold a candle next to the resolute poise and professionalism that Arianna Huffington demonstrated.

And since this was a public offence, I stand by my belief that he, in turn, owes her a public apology.

Hosshi  05/03/2008 09:41 PM Report

I was slowly -- and am now very quickly -- becoming frustrated with Rose's fairly new interviewing style, a style that has become all very apparent during this interview. It's as if he needs to compete with Chris Matthews' Attention Deficit Disorder. Rose must occasionally go off of his meds. Ms. Huffington attempted constantly to make an important and necessary economic distinction and he constantly interrupted her -- and our listening -- because he disagreed with her, but interrupted her with the pretense that he was forcing her to make her distinction! That's idiotic. He hides his conservatism very badly lately. I don't care that he leans more toward a conservative perspective, but Huffington had a right to pursue her thought along the lines of her own choosing, not along the narrow path that he preferred. We have begun to witness these giggling "But, now, wait a minute!" moments all too often from him. His show is becoming boring. His guests remain being excellent as guests go but their host is now constantly in their way, especially when he disagrees with them. Has he the right to disagree? Yes, but not as an O'Reilly-Hannity-Matthews gambit. Rose was once above that. He has lost what once made him distinctive. He has lost his sophistication even as his collars no longer are crinkled!

Tom Bowler  05/03/2008 06:43 PM Report

I didn't know too much about Arianna Huffington except few snippets of interviews where she seemed like a ZaZa Gabor like personality.

This time she said so many real and true facts about important viewpoints that I sat up and replayed some of her sentences so i could absorb them. Athough you obviously like her and get akick out of her you went overboard in trying to balance her views with defence of the right and talking over her words. As an earlier responder noted Foc and other Right wing programs aredoing there best to ruin interviews by using these harrassing techniques. it's so not you, (except for the overtalking and andasking questions which are a choice of several answers to chose from which you've been dooing less than you used to)!

Nevertheless as I listen again to it She obviously didn't mind your jibes and interuptions and the show has real conversational feeling. Also she gets her dander up and has the facts and language at her fingertips.

i've become a fan oc Arieanna and have subscribed to he Huffington Post.

I do question one thing she said "A thousand Suicide Attempts a Month by the troops"???

I'm gointto ask her this question also.

Keep up the good work Charlie I love your show Bill Moyer's Journal, Exposé, NewsFront

Don & Helen Reid  05/03/2008 04:38 PM Report

We were very disappointed in the confrontational way you interviewed Arianna Huffington Wed. 4/30/08. Please allow your guests to answer questions completely before you confront them with yet more innuendos, accusations & denunciations. Fox News has successfully destroyed the journalistic integrity of (nearly all) TV news since it came online some ten years ago. We are hoping you (at PBS) will remain independent of their pernicious influence. --Helen & Don Reid. Amarillo TX.

john barger  05/03/2008 05:36 AM Report

I am amazed people find fault with Charlie's interview. Ariana Huffington needs to be challenged on her wacky, fatuous, self important ideas. Also her background (for which she gets a free pass--can you believe she is even invited on a show like this?). She is a shameless self promotor, something a closer look at her life would reveal. I mean, how many books has she written? How many times and why has she changed her views and why? Does anyone recall here political marriage to Michael Huffington, a conservative? Once she climbed over him, that was it. Oscar Wilde is quoted to have said, 'there is one thing worse than being talked about, and that is not being talked about.' That is about all that can and should be said of the views and persona of Ariana Huffington

joseph  05/03/2008 04:41 AM Report

Reading through the comments here, I see a strong Majority View that Charlie Rose can scarcely be considered a fair or impartial interviewer, but rather an openly biased shill for big money and the status quo.

I happen to agree. Rudeness and a tendency to interrupt persons whose views he doesn´t care to understand are perhaps his most glaring bullying techniques.

Too bad Mr Rose is unlikely to respond to this uniform groundswell of complaint: despite offering this Comment Box for viewers´ reactions to his surly journalism, why do we assume that he (or anyone on his staff) will actually read and react to the thoughtful critical voices here represented?

Gingerous  05/03/2008 02:15 AM Report

So many comments mention "flirting" from Charlie, but I sense it more from Arianna. She touched or flipped her hair every 2 minutes! I don't know why he has her on the show when he doesn't take her seriously (and rightfully so, in my opinion). Frankly, she has no right to comment on the failings of the "media" when her own site is highly biased, and she gives only opinions as opposed to substantive answers.

Dilhan  05/03/2008 12:19 AM Report

Watching Charlie's interview with Ariana Huffington was nerve-breaking, to say the least. I am totally puzzled as to what happened here. There was some weird dynamic going on, that's for sure. We didn't get to hear what Ariana had to say thanks to Charlie's frequent interruptions. Of course, very disrespectful to the guest and the audience. He displayed a style which better suits Fox News rather than PBS. The only good thing that seems to have come out of it can be this strong audience response. It should be taken as a good sign that so many viewers are passionate enough to actually get into the trouble of leaving a comment here. The only way to make up for this journalistic embarrassment is to invite Ariana back to the show and actually interview her this time. p.s. Having seen it mentioned in some of the comments here, I have just watched the interview with Amy Goodman. It was painful to see Charlie defending the corporate media so dutifully and blindly. I would love to see Amy back on the show again to pick up the conversation from where it was left off and put the previous discussion in perspective after 4 years.

Robert Philbin  05/02/2008 09:27 PM Report

Charlie is at his worst in this session for two reasons. He refuses to listen to his guest; and he pretends to understand an issue beyond his reach.

If the taxpayers are going to underwrite JPM's purchase of BS by guaranteeing the "bad business", the taxpayers should then own a share in the new entity. If WE bail the losers out, then WE OWN OUR SHARE of the new firm. Nationalization is a meaningful way out of our current national disaster. Let's look at the Oil Industry NOW, not when they need to be bailed out. . . Charlie gets none of this.

Thank you,

Bob Philbin

RJ Town  05/02/2008 08:54 PM Report

I was Apalled at you poor treatment of Arianna Huffington. Shame to you. Are you a professional reporter or just another Dullisional Right Wing Nut? A formal appology from you to Arianna Huffington and to your audieience in in order.

bonnie  05/02/2008 07:32 PM Report

Please take Charley to a doctor and send him to where others also think they are Napoleon!--That "interview" with Arianna Huffington was sick. He and the network owe Arianna and the

public an official apology. He was rude, smug,

mean and incoherant. Everyone I know who watched it was screaming, Shut up, Carlie!Such a shame You have lost our trust.I have watched you for years--some people cannot take success. Say goodbye, Charley, it's over.

medical leave for 20 years. Goodbye arrogant one!

JM  05/02/2008 06:04 PM Report

I generally find interesting Charlie Rose's interviews, but I too was taken aback by his interview with AH. As many have said, his constant interruptions prevented AH from fully answering his questions, and created a very disjointed and increasingly frustrating interview. But what really hit me was how Charlie seemed to not understand her points even when it was obvious what she was trying to say. He's certainly not stupid so I kept wondering - what's going on here? Why is he pretending not to 'get' what she's saying. If he doesn't agree with her point - fine - but why throw out 'straw man' arguments and tangential examples? I expect more thoughtful and relevant comments from him. I don't think the main problem is that C. Rose's sexist - I don't know if he is or isn'. But I do think he's too vested in defending 'his world' - be it the media, corporate capitalism, status quo - that his 'interview' suffers when the guest presents viewpoints and FACTS that take on his world.

I will continue to watch as Rose's interviews are still better than most of the screamfests and bumper-sticker 'analysis' on TV. But I too - after watching many of his political and economic interviews - am more aware of his biases and how they shape his questions and tone during the interview. I think his 'cultural' and scientific interviews are a better bet. Thanks.

M.G. Carrillo  05/02/2008 04:42 PM Report

Whether Charlie Rose agreed with Arianna Huffington's comments/opinions or not, she was a guest at his show and, as such, was unquestionably entitled to be treated with the appropriate respect. I am apalled at the rude treatment she received from him -- it was almost like being interviewed by Bill O'Reilly! Interrupting Huffington every time she tried to explain something is plain wrong and inexcusable. Why didn't he interrup Sophia Loren's silly tears when she started crying over nothing? It is there where he had a reason to stop the interview, but he patiently and politely continued it. I also ask why Rose didn't display the same rudeness when he interview Nancy Pelosi? Because she is a top politician. Huffington is not stupid -- if she were, she would not be a frequent guest at CNN. I applaud Huffington for staying calm, cool and collected despite his constant rudeness. If I were Huffington I would NEVER accept an invitation to be interviewed by Rose again. CHARLIE ROSE OWES ARIANNA HUFFINGTON A PUBLIC APOLOGY. In closing, I noticed that this interview is not placed online for other to watch. I CHALLENGE YOU, CHARLIE ROSE, TO PUT THIS INTERVIEW ON YOUR HOME PAGE INTERNET FOR EVERYONE TO VIEW!

Jakob  05/02/2008 04:27 PM Report

Excuse me Lynne, But Charlie Rose happens to be a member of the Huffington Post. I also think its healthy for people to debate and disagree on certain things. That is what makes a good conversation. Even though I do agree that Charlie Rose should not interupt his guests.

Carl  05/02/2008 04:27 PM Report

Huffington's argument is sufficiently fuzzy that Mr. Rose's strategy of pressuring her for clarification and detail is understandable and necessary.

Lynne  05/02/2008 04:07 PM Report

Shame on you, Charlie. How utterly arrogant and rude you were with Arianna Huffington. You constantly interrupted, criticized and showed her much disrespect. (Much the same occurred when you interviewed Paul Krugman.

Your reputation for a fair and articulate interviewer was to say the least, hugely diminished.

Why don't you have an interview with yourself, about yourself and all you think you know and get it over with?

this ain't huffpo  05/02/2008 04:04 PM Report

Arianna Huffpo has been on the show 13 TIMES. HELLLLLOOOOOOO? So which is she - self hating victim or cynical opportunist? here she is promoting Mr post partisan Obama at the same time pushing a book attacking the right wing. Can you spell BULLCHIPs?

Nel  05/02/2008 03:45 PM Report

I watched the interview and I was disappointed. I cannot recall Rose ever interrupting a guest so much. It would be interesting to measure how long Rose spoke compared to his guest -- at times it seemed that the segment was about Rose's views.

By accident, I heard Huffington talk about her new book on a radio show, and she was very clear in explaining the points she makes in her book (regardless of whether one agrees with them or not).

Rose's interview was very confusing, and distracting, and this is coming from a long-time viewer of the show.

There was obviously an issue that Rose took exception to, but it was not clear what that was to justify this much derision towards a guest. In addition, Rose should do some soul-searching to figure out if there is some deep-seated fear and gender-bias he is not aware of.

Finally, I wish Rose was this much obnoxious, or defiant to some of our elected officials.

This was a really bad performance from the host. I am very disappointed.

Monieca Seddon  05/02/2008 01:51 PM Report

I was shocked and horrified with Charlie Rose's interview with Arianna Huffington yesterday. He was extremely rude to her, took up most of the interview, firing questions at her and hot giving her a chance to respond. I admired her cooldignity under fire and she came out looking alot better than Charlie. I have watched the show for a long time and admired his skills as an interviewer but now I see a very unprofessional side of this man. In fact, I have seen his professionalism deteriorate over time. I believe Charlie was threatened by a strong woman with views different from his own. He came off looking sexist, arrogant, demeaning and rude beyond belief. Moreover, it is not the place for an interviewer to air his own views to the exclusion of his guests. Guiding a guest is one thing but interrupting and talking over them constantly is just bad manners and bad interviewing skills and as a viewer it put a knot in my stomach. What is going on with Charlie? Has his health deteriorated to the point that he can't control his emotions to do his job properly? If so, he should be dealing with his issues in therapy and not let them spill out in his interviews. If he wants the stage he should not be doing interviews with people but have his own show of personal commentary instead. Also, as a woman, I must say I'm deeply offended and upset by his antics and I would like to see him apologize for his behaviour on his own show. PBS is usually known for good taste and professionalism.

Jim B.  05/02/2008 01:10 PM Report

I'm really puzzled but the claims that Charlie was overstepping his duties as an interviewer and trying stifle Arianna's points with his own. The real problem is that, while Ms. Huffington raises some important points that ought to be brought to the table, she hasn't much to say about tackling those points. She is a propaganda queen, interested only in continuing this bi-partisian mudslinging, not with actually digging deep and trying to solve these problems. Charlie did what any good interviewer should. When she offered a provoking opinion in terms of right-left politics, Charlie pressed her to elaborate, offer substance to her sensational claims and, in general, dispense with the bullshit. Because Arianna was unable to do this most of the time, she looked like she was getting trampled. That's not Charlie's fault, but hers, for relying on such half-baked arguments to support some admittedly valid claims. Of course, what can you expect from someone trying to drawn in as many viewers to her website, but sensationalism?

Mara  05/02/2008 12:42 PM Report

I know it is late but I didn't have the time yesterday. Charlie Rose I know you tried to laugh this fact away by saying you would be getting comments and it was okay because you were "friends" but this interview revealed your utter sexism - in fact when you said that about the comments to Arianna - it had the air of a flirtation as a means to get around your inexcusable behavior - also a sexist tactic. Your question about her many lives was not anything you would ask your gray haired male guests who you always talk to with reverence and hushed tones - work on this.

But onto something more substantive - I don't agree with everything Arianna says and by the way I thought she stood up to you pretty well -but whether this current financial crisis is a result of right politics - yes it is -- the credit and financial lobby convinced or bribed the administration and legislatures to look the other way as they perpetuated fradulent practices and now claim they didn't know. I as a lapsed MBA knew they were called subprime for some reason - and that my artist friends who were borrowing 100% for homes that this was going to lead to no-good. Banks if they had thought about it one second knew that if the market turned down it would be a disaster and if they didn't understand whatthey were doing should not have been doing it. Now we go on to the credite card market - who in their right minds would think it would be a good idea for everyone to be leveraged up to the hilt - and lets not speak of the upcoming disaster with LBO's The press has been reporting this for about 5 years although it was never in the headlines - there was too much money to be made so everyone looked away -particularly the right -these were criminal acts but I guess the problem is now so wide spread that to put everyone in jail will create another crisis. So was bailing out Bears Stern a political decision - well it certainly was the result of a political decision - every time one of the finacial guru's says they didn't know I want to get sick. Investigate that Charlie Rose - find out how this really happened rather than listening with such reverence to these self important men.

Ferdinand Gajewski, PhD  05/02/2008 12:39 PM Report

I really would like to hear what Arianna is thinking. If anyone hears that she is to be interviewed again by someone (else), please tell.

bev marshall  05/02/2008 12:33 PM Report

I think Arianna Huffington needs to be invited back to the show to have a chance to answer the questions that were pitched to her by Charlie and answered by him. Charlie did most of the talking and did not give the quest much response time.I would like to hear what she has to say. i thought it was the worst interview I have seen on the show so far. Charlie dominated the show for what purpose?

J. Alexander Stevens  05/02/2008 10:05 AM Report

I'm a big fan of CR, but this interview genuinely was painful to view and, especially, to hear.

If CR would simply watch and listen to a replay of this interview, I suspect that he energetically would concur.

Michael  05/02/2008 10:05 AM Report

There is something supremely contradictory about the existence of this forum. This is not like the usual "letters to the editor" space, where the editor actually answers the letters, whether individually or as a group. Instead, here, hundreds of viewers comment and (mostly) criticize Churlish Charlie, but CC totally ignores them,shutting himself up in a narcissistic, dollars-papered tower. Note that on this web page there is indeed a link to a page where CC is supposed to answer readers' comments, but if you click on it you will find it empty.

We are delusional, ladies and gentlemen, if we think CC gives a hoot about what we think of his show. The man is Arrogant Establishment personified, albeit with a nice smile and a pretense of impartiality. It is too bad that a lot of interesting personalities still see fit to honor his show with their presence because they end up playing his game: we start watching the show (with trepidation) to listen to them, but Churlish Charlie inexorably pounces on them to inflict his remote-controlled, K-street cum Wall Street views on us.

It is time to say "goodbye and good luck, Charlie".

Alex Alan Berg  05/02/2008 09:27 AM Report

Charlie, Charlie, Charlie.... You aggressively challenge progressives like Arianna, constantly, and RUDELY, interrupting them, while you just SIT THERE like an aging sycophant slug, when a right wing zealot, especially from the Bush Administration, slings their horseshit policy tripe onto that lovely Phyfe table. Absolutely disgusting!!!

Shalom Freedman  05/02/2008 05:04 AM Report

Charlie Rose is wrongly criticized here for questioning outrageous, blanket, simplistic claims by Arianna Huffington. Huffington makes the English language sound like it needs a good doctor, but others have done the same and still managed to get across cogent and meaningful messages. She however is a propagandist, and unable to respond to any reasonable question with a fact- filled answer. She has opinions and that's it.

When Charlie Rose confronted on her claim that the bail out of 'Bear Stearns' was simply heartless capitalism giving perks to the rich, she did not have an answer. Rose has had people on his show like Pete Peterson, Lawrence Summers, Paul Volcker, John Snow defending the

Bear Stearns bailout as regrettable but necessary to step to prevent a total collapse of the credit markets and with it the Economy.

She did not seem to know anything about that.

Also there was something two- faced about her coming to criticize the Media for its giving disproportionate attention to Jeremiah Wright. Disproportionate? The man is a key figure in the candidacy of someone who may be the next President of the United States. Huffington seems to want everyone to have converted along with her to the Left, and march to the drum of the Huffington Post.

Rose is to be commended for challenging some of her crude generalities.

True , it did not make for pleasant and warm viewing. But the way the pitcher pitches the catcher has to catch.

TABS  05/02/2008 05:04 AM Report

The Trajectory Of History<><><><><>

It is inconceivable that that many people don't understand the real ramifications of 911. The horror of 911 wasn't the loss of the buildings, the people, the fact that America was attacked in the homeland. Those losses while grievous all are surmountable. Even if America were to suffer a WMD attack on an American city with losses in the tens of thousands of people and hundreds of billions of dollars, that would be surmountable. What the real danger of another major attack in the American homeland is the fear and panic it would create in the financial markets, and the resulting crisis of liquidity. The attack on 911 opened the abyss, and the only thing that saved the day was the fact that the US was able to shut down the financial system within minutes of the attack. Europe was not so quick and the US had to ship $80,000,000,000 to Europe to insure the liquidity of their banking system. As it was the US closed its financial markets for a week, as a cooling down period and lowered the Fed Funds rate to 1% to insure the system remained liquid.

Since that day the US has been careening from one financial malaise to another. First with Enron and up to now with housing bubble and sub prime debacle which for all intents in purposes nearly caused a melt down of the financial system with the collapse of Bear Sterns. The US has been pumping money into the system with cheap interest rates to keep the system liquid. On the other hand because of the huge trade and Federal government deficits the value of the dollar is declining. This has led to commodity prices skyrocketing which is putting a further drag on the economy. All the old familiar tried and true tools to manage the economy are proving to have limited effectiveness this time around. So it maybe that 911 did fracture the system and all the kings horses and all the kings men can not put Humpty Dumpty back together again and we are headed for the perfect storm which brings the financial house down around our ears.