In order to download Charlie Rose podcasts to iTunes for transfer to an iPod, you must have iTunes installed. If you do, please click the following link to download the podcast for this interview:
itpc://www.charlierose.com/view/itunes/9116
Otherwise, close this window to continue viewing.
Close
Page 1 of 1
Page 1 of 1
mallory 07/06/2008 10:34 PM Report
Wow!
So much passion and lots of fear....which breeds anger....
Everybody, take a deep breath....
To to last post:
""What are the specific proposals perscribed by Obama and the Democrats in limiting "special interests." influence on the political process."
What I've heard him say, and which he's talked about in both of his books, is that lobbying is a necessary and important part of the political process. He want to eliminate the influence of MONEY in the legislative process, so that legislation is written based on the merits of the arguments and all available data, to the benefit of the MAJORITY of average citizens of this country (not the top 1%).....as opposed to what we've gotten over the past 50 years (of democratic AND republican administrations1).....doesn't sound too scary to me....The problem is the PROCESS of washington, not the individual players.....Sen. Obama has figured out how to affect change.....get us all on the same page to make it happen
"Will those proposals limit the access of the rival Republican Party from ever ascending to power again. Or is America going to be a one political party in powwer nation from this time on."
No, I think the "change" in washington is about restoring the government to the people, by reducing the direct influence of money on decision making. The change he's already created is getting average people reinvested and involved in the political process. When Republicans nominate officials whose ideas resonate with the average american, they'll win office too....
TABS 06/11/2008 09:16 PM Report
The Coming Democratic Party Revolution
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"It was Hitler who created the modern concept of revolution.....Modern revolution did not overcome power but seized" it, and employed bureaucratic rather than bellicose methods. It was a quiet process."........
Joachim Fest pg 497 of "Hitler".........
In 1933 Hitler's National Socialist Workers Party received apx 33% of the vote which the the biggest percentage of any political party in Germany. As such Hitler was selected to be Chancellor of Germany to Hindenburg's President. Hindenburg was 85 and in 1934 passed away. It was soon after that, that Hitler started to coalesce his power in Germany................
Apply that to the rhetoric of Obama, and the Democratic Party. They are aiming at nothing less than a revolution in America. This is a question that better be answered before the general election in November 2008. What are the specific proposals perscribed by Obama and the Democrats in limiting "special interests." influence on the political process. Will those proposals limit the access of the rival Republican Party from ever ascending to power again. Or is America going to be a one political party in powwer nation from this time on.
Hmm 06/10/2008 01:21 AM Report
Obama is not that impressive.
Deborah, VA 06/09/2008 03:08 AM Report
Great conversation Charlie. I even grudgingly tolerated, okay, enjoyed a little, Mark Halperin.
-- TO Laura Decker -- re Hillary vs. Barack -- 06/07/2008 09:16 PM Report
For now I'll bypass your apparent claim / suggestion that white women have had it worse than Black men in the history of America. Of course there's been sexist remarks about Hillary by people in the media: I guess you hadn't noticed that a lot of these people in the media, including media pundits, columnists and politicians, *are* both _sexist_ *and* _racist_. (Like *Bill* was, when he spuriously attacked Sister Soujah to boost his campaign polling numbers his first time running -- didn't pay any attention to that, did you? -- or both Clintons letting an ultra-right-wing columnist racistly and sexistly call Harvard Law Professor Lani Guinear, an African American woman, "a Quota Queen", a direct verbal take-off on a Black "welfare queen"! -- and Hillary, a woman and supposedly a "liberal", said *NOTHING*). Reportedly, at 21:12 into Charlie's show interveiwing George Will, Will flippantly, glibly and smugly said (in that typical George Will way), "If you're worried about (racial and economic) *equality* (in this country) then ask all the (he meant *white*) students to quit school"(!!) -- in the contextual assumption of Black & Latino students 'all' dropping out and otherwise (inherently) being inferior students, and *that's* the *CAUSE* (rather than a result) of racial and economic inequality in this country: supposedly "all *those* lazy Black and Latino people who won't go out and get themselves a proper education". Everyone intelligent and *INCISIVE* knows that Obama hasn't been given a pass because he's Black &/or male, but because he's a suitable viable candidate ('The Mulatto Savior', racially *non-threatening*, "light, bright and damn near white!", with *no* connections to the African American Civil Rights Movement, he wouldn't even go commemorate the 40th anniversary of Martin Luther King's assassination, but instead went to one of the whitest states in the Union in New England) -- WHO'S *NOT* A CLINTON. In fact, Barack has been giving *WHITE* people a pass by directly dismissing the fact of serious *continuing* racism in this country and denouncing anyone -- Black or white -- who says that there is. And Barack's going to have a whollle lllot more ignoring of racism, or renouncing or denouncing of others, to do when he's head-to-head up against the much more overtly conservative McCain *alone*: Obama will start playing to the conservatives -- like now his talk *already* about attacking *Iran* and immediately playing to *AIPAC*, *HARDLINE* pro-Israel Jews, the unrelenting zealots for an Israeli 'Jim Crow' / apartheid / segregationist state. Thus he's seen as socioculturally self-effacing -- "*See*, don't worry about *me*!" -- and thus *non-threatening* to white people, except for verbally overt bigots. OBAMA REPRESENTS THE *CONTRADICTIONS* OF RACE AND RACISM IN THIS COUNTRY, *NOT* THE TRANSCENDENCE OF IT. *Early* in the campaign season the *media* portrayed Hillary as the Democrat probable / likely presumptive nominee and Obama as another Black whatever..., also-ran. (I think there was even a Saturday Night Live skit about this.) Early on, if you note, the majority of *Black*-Americans (like Civil Rights icon Rep. John Lewis of Atlanta, Georgia) supported *Hillary* (and still so with most of those, especially Black women Democrat party politicos, who jumped on her campaign bandwagon), the Democrat they thought the most likely to win. Shirley Chisholm (the first Black presidential candidate to run on the Dem party ticket in 1972) wasn't given a pass over white male candidates, and was attacked/dismissed because she was *Black*; today, Cynthia McKinney (Greem Party presidential candiate) hasn't been given a pass in the media (ABC Nightline even sicked a mainstream media Black woman journalist, Michelle McQueen Martin, on her: look it up online) -- and the media has mercilessly attacked McKinney because she's *Black*, not because she's a woman (although, of course, the media will resort to sexist, as well as racist, tactics); the same with Maxine Waters or any strong Black political figure, male or female, that tells white people what the don't want to hear: that racism / discrimination *isn't* over, and that it also often carries over into U.S. foreign policy. Do you seriously *at all* think that Jesse Jackson would be given a pass if he were running against Hillary? What did Senator Joseph Biden say about Obama?: "Finally, a *clean-cut*, *well-spoken* African American candidate running for president!" (So, I guess that not even Shirley Chisholm, Cynthia McKinney or Carol Mosely-Braun were "well-spoken" *or* "clean-cut".) There has clearly been a lot of internal Democratic party factionalism going on behind the scenes in this Democrat primary elections season, that explains this. If you pay/ed attention to the press carefully and piece/d things together, it's obvious that the Clintons must have stomped on and pissed off a lot of people in their party, or even in Bill's administration, in very ham-handed ways. Look how many Democrat political heavy weights from Bill's administration, and/or many of the political friends of the Clinton's, one by one like a slowly dripping faucet, have been giving *them* a slap in the face at strategically spaced times in the Democrat primary season. Supporting Obama, and building up "liberal" media support, was *payback* against the Clintons. If it weren't for this, you'd see the same kind of attacks on Obama that you have on Clinton. Obama just happened to come along at the right time, with top white university degree credentials and with, by happenstance, the right racial credentials as 'The Mulatto Savior' (fortuitously not too, if not 'really', Black) who knows what platitudes he needs to say to even "liberal" white people and can say it well in a *cheerful*, *glossy* and *inspirrrring* way -- especially that, finally, "REAL RACISM IS *OVER*, IT'S ALLL IN THE PAST" -- to make whites happy and *proud* of their "liberal" selves for voting for him. Obama was *cheerful*, unlike Edwards who (at least *said*) he actually wanted to *ffight* for the middle-class and the poor against things like predatory corporate greed and corporate welfare, jobs in even *profitable* domestic manufacturing being shipped overseas, exploitative (even in *this* country) national and int'l capitalist market deregulation, and economic loss of benefits like health care (over 100 million Americans: 35%, the *adult* figure given, uninsured, ~47 million; and seriously underinsured, the balance; both figures steadily growing) -- but ohhh, Edwards sounded "too angggry" to most of the very people he was trying to help/save! Obama caught a *lucky* break (and not because he's supposed to be, "Finally, the first clean-cut, well-spoken African American to run for president"): like anyone who gets a winning sweepstakes ticket, he just happened to be in the right place at the right time. ______ Joseph Anderson, Berkeley, CA
caught 06/07/2008 06:06 PM Report
clarification - I have seen White people pretend to be Black by writing poorly because they think Black people do. I do not. I find it a sign that somebody is trying to disguise themself. If I am wrong here then I appologize.
caught 06/07/2008 12:36 PM Report
funny how when guys want to write something sexist they chose names like "alice". Or when they want to pretend to be black they chose names like "shaft" and write poorly. Whoever is writing this stuff needs to take a break.
JI 06/07/2008 02:35 AM Report
It is hilarious how Israel comes before the American people in the USA. No wonder this country is falling to pieces.
Shaft 06/07/2008 12:51 AM Report
Nice conversation with political pundits who by the way got it so wrong in the New Humpshire primaries. The fact is gender did not play any wrong here, in fact Sen. Clinton gained more voice capital from the female gender than Sen. Obama did. Her race has also helped in two of the big states Ohio and Pannsylvania. The major factor for her loss is her husband (former Pres. Bill Clinton) plus not having to go all the 50 States like Sen Obama did. In addition to that point one can argue that his appeal to the youth has confused the Clintonites who are more of traditional have been candidates that relied on connections. Him being new to the game helped him more, because he was not afraid of trying new ways to approach politics. Gender did not cost Sen. Clinton the nomination, TIME did. We are in the new century people are tired of hearing Bush-Clinton names time and again. Her stay in the Senate would help Chelsea down the road, maintaining connection. In 2015 Chelsea will be over 35 yaesr of age, a year later she can run for the Senate. If she is careful with her votes then after 8 years (2024) she can for the Presidency. The Clintons have been exposing her face to the public, her mother allowed her to convene meetings and speak to crowds, she will master the art of politics. After all, its in her genes.
Irish 06/06/2008 10:11 PM Report
sigh. Charlie how can you ask somebody who got so close why she didnt let go or couldnt let go? I see you with the man love for Lance Armstrong because he wont give up and yet you go after another formidible person because she wouldnt give up. I just dont get your double standard. Do you even hear yourself?
Amy 06/06/2008 03:00 PM Report
From an article in the N.J. Star Ledger: ... Rep. Rob Andrews, who supported Hillary Clinton throughout the primary season, disclosed he received a phone call shortly before the April 22 Pennsylvania primary from a top member of Clinton's organization and that the caller explicitly discussed a strategy of winning Jewish voters by exploiting tensions between Jews and African-Americans. ... "There have been signals coming out of the Clinton campaign that have racial overtones that indeed disturb me," Andrews said at his campaign headquarters in Cherry Hill Tuesday night after he lost his bid for the U.S. Senate nomination. "Frankly, I had a private conversation with a high-ranking person in the campaign ... that used a racial line of argument that I found very disconcerting. It was extremely disconcerting given the rank of this person. It was very disturbing." http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2008/06/superdelegate_says_clinton_cam.html
RE Mant 06/06/2008 12:07 PM Report
Obama is not, of course, an Afro-American in any traditional sense of the term , but he was able, on the one hand, to persuade real Afro-Americans that he was one of them (and Pastor Wright was a big help there), while persuading the professoriate, on the other hand, that he was one of them. A considerable feat of prestidigitation, but the blacks want to act like Jews, and, the whites, because most of them are what used to be called "nigger-lovers," "bleeding-hearts," "child-savers," etc, ie, ppl who condescend to help such ppl to boost their own egos. It is hard to decide which group he, himself, belongs to. Or just how this is going to "change" America. Reagan may have been the Teflon president, but Obama has been the silicone candidate. Even so, he would likely not be the candidate at all if Michigan and Florida had held their water. Demos should be thankful if Hillary doesn't get together with someone like Carly Fiorina and form a Women's Party.
Alice 06/06/2008 02:27 AM Report
The predictable crowd is out pimping Hillary as VP. It's NOT going to happen. Obama will lose more votes (independents like me and his republican supporters) than gain if Hillary is anywhere near the ticket.
Laura Decker 06/05/2008 04:37 PM Report
RE: Oh..now you notice--My comment was regarding the program last night which was limited to the effect of the media in the sphere of the 2008 election. If you want to expand the topic-- Yes,I definitely acknowledge that there is racial bias in media coverage. I did not see many examples of it in this Primary (the show's topic), however, compared to the many examples of sexist bias. Some samples in this link:
http://tinyurl.com/6ry8zc
Yes, my eyes were opened because I really did expect fair coverage from the majority of the media, and not such a disparity. The dis-service was to Obama as well as Hillary. Had the coverage of him been more challenging before the TX primary, he may very well have had my vote. As the nominee,he will have my vote in the general election, but ask yourself these questions: Do you honestly think Obama would have been treated with such kid gloves early on if he had been a woman? Really think about that. Would his inspirational words have been called into question or given a bit more negative commentary if they came from a female?
Ebony 06/05/2008 04:01 PM Report
As an African American woman, I KNOW discrimination on both ends - race and gender....and I KNOW that the United States is both racist and sexist....the fact that both Hillary and Obama would be firsts just proved that with no legitimate denial. But the on-going cruel sexism shown by Charlie Rose and co-horts (both male and female) was astounding! Each show on the Presidential primary seemed more like a locker-room get-together on "How Obama can beat that woman." or "How to get HER out of this campaign so we can prove we are righteous, upstanding liberals". Electing Obama will prove nothing but that the "liberals" will accept a non-threatening bi-racial male. How very very disappointing and sad. Now, boys, leave Michelle alone so Obama won't be forced to divorce her before he gets into the White House!
Amy 06/05/2008 03:16 PM Report
The media have been extremely generous to Hillary. They rarely reference or refer to any of the Clinton's behavior in the WH and before, which include but are not limited to, File Gate, Travel Gate, Whitewater, Bill's philandering, his lying under oath, etc. While it may strike the media as bad manners to bring up the Clinton's past, it is key to their present actions. Sally Bedell Smith's book, For Love of Politics, is a good source, if one is interested in what makes the Clintons tick.
TABS 06/05/2008 11:32 AM Report
One has to be struck by the ironic similarities between Obama's oratory technique and Hitlers. Both start out standing quietly waiting for the audience to quiet, then to start speaking quietly in an almost halting manner where the audience has to pay attention to catch every word, finally using rising action and volume to carry the audience to an emotional crescendo. This is a very old and familiar manipulative oratory technique.
-- Oh, *now* you "notice": re "media bias" and Hillary Clinton -- 06/05/2008 07:43 AM Report
Comment by Laura Decker on Thursday, Jun 5 at 12:49 AM: "My eyes are opened, and I see press "objectivity" in an entirely different light. It's a sad realization." --- I'm no fan of Ma & Pa Clinton (with their history of near-pathological lying, as we all now know about Bill and Lewinsky, and like her tales of dodging war bullets, and his or her backhanded subtle 'race-baiting' when the campaign poll numbers were down or close -- remember earlier Sister Souljah, who Bill tried to turn into 'Willie Horton' at a Rainbow Coalition dinner ceremony, when she wasn't even a part of it?), but why didn't you notice such American media bias and negative stereotyping before it happened (as you claim) to a *white* woman, but not when it happens to people of color around the world all the time?
TABS 06/05/2008 04:49 AM Report
What Is Hillary To Do........................ Hillary got A LOT of money from her Wall Street Buds...the Dem leadership realized this and not to alienate them allowed Hillary's campaign to run its course. As a sop to the Wall Street boyz the Dem leadership may require Obama to select Hillary as a CHECKMATE on Obama's agenda of change. The Wall Street/Corporate Boyz like things the way they are, and don't want money taken out of their pockets. So it is a matter of how much does Obama wana be prez, as in if he doesn't take Hill then those Boyz will pony up the dinero in the Billions to McCain.
That is not to say they wouldn't give the Billions to McCain anyway, cause anything that gets in the way of making money they ain't for....but it will be more Billions if Hill ain't on the ticket as insurance of keeping Obama in line. Those Wall Street/Corporate Boyz do like to cover there bums with a little insurance.
However the left wing nutz in the Dem party have their candidate in play and may reject the Wall Street crowd...................
Hillary has ambitions of being prez, she is 62.
If Bama wins he is the automatic nominee of the Party in 2012, and Hill almost with a certainty could not run against him if she were the Veeeep.
So the next time she can run is in 2016, when she is 70, and will be considered to be a Grand Ma candidate like McCain is now considered to be Grand Pa McCAin.
Hillary best political bet is to say, "I like Obama" and go home hoping for him to be soundly defeated. Then in 2012 she can run again for prez saying to the Dems I told you he couldn't win. She will be 66..which is not to old...
Obama for his part would not want Hill or Bill anywhere near the WH as it would be seen as usurping his sunlight. Hill and Bill would be sent to the Antarctic on a fact finding mission about global warming for 4 years.
So why would Hill want or accept the Veep job?????
Hill best bet for her own ambition is to have her campaign debt taken care of by the DNC and become the NEW LION in the Senate as Senate Majority leader?
Tedy Kennedy for all intents and purposes is on his way out...the Lion has lost his teeth. While he may still be around for awhile a new GO TO PERSON is going to emerge in the Senate to get things done. It is for Hillary a job made to order for her talent as a "bringer togetherer."
Mugsy Peabody 06/05/2008 03:14 AM Report
I am no longer willing to contribute to PBS to support the Charlie Rose program nor watch it. Every time someone attempted to say something positive about Sen. Clinton, they were interrupted and belittled, so I no longer trust the information contained in this program. I have better things to do with my time and better sources of information than this rude and slanted so-called "dialogue."
Vaughan Hedges 06/05/2008 02:42 AM Report
HC lost because she made a political calculation that voting for the war in Iraq would show she was strong. If she hadn't done that BO would not have had his early victories.
Martina 06/05/2008 01:57 AM Report
It is not surprising that the media avoids the subject of their bias and the impact they have had over Sen Clinton's loss. It was criminal and Charlie was one of worst---practically drooling over Obama. Anyway, the "talking heads"---they don't deserve the title "journalist--have elevated one candidate far above his current abilities and bullied a fine person, who would have been an excellent President out of the race.
Happy Charlie?
Now they discuss reining in Michelle Obama...her sharp edges. Pay attention Obamas! Years ago another political couple tried to make a difference in Washington and the media has been vilifying them ever since. When will we learn that the media has way too much power in our politics?
Laura Decker 06/05/2008 12:49 AM Report
How about "glossing over" the effect that the media has had on Hillary's candidacy. Besides the mention by Connie Shultz this evening, this generally gets swept aside. As a Democrat and Hillary supporter, I bear no grudge against Senator Obama, but I do think that he benefitted from the soft, fawning coverage given to him early on and the consistently negative bias against Hillary by the majority of the media/pundits. I am so disappointed in the overall coverage. My eyes are opened, and I see press "objectivity" in an entirely different light. It's a sad realization. ---AND it seems like this bias will still continue given Errol Louis' comment regarding M. Obama being too direct and forceful. Pleassee...here we go again.
Judithod 06/05/2008 12:49 AM Report
I was disappointed in tonight's program because the participants failed to truly analyze Obama. Agree that Obama is a great orator, but one of the participants equated that talent with being a great politician. The two just don't compute. Still waiting for Obama to reveal the great change and how he's going to concretely accomplish it, particularly since his credentials are among the least credible in the history of presidential elections.
incredulous 06/05/2008 12:43 AM Report
Having trouble having empathy for Hillary. She covets too much and will say, do and hope for anything for the brass ring. Pathelogically challenged. Dodging phantom bullets, comments re Bobby Kennedy and voting for the war. She's scary and doesn't qualify for Vice President any more than she does for President. Women were ill-served with Hillary as their first fem-post at the top.
fg 06/04/2008 11:58 PM Report
Women "of a certain age" too often think being a woman, in itself, entitles them--to being president and everything else.
Dale Starkey 06/04/2008 09:03 PM Report
I agree with William Tapia's comment. Somehow, George Will speaks like he has shielded himself from the "common man." He comes off as arrogant with no empathy with the "majority." An hour with him was too long. Sorry, because there was a time when I liked George. 'Seems his fame has gotten to him.
William Tapia 06/04/2008 05:39 PM Report
Re Today's conversation with George Will:
George Will is a very intelligent man who would love a tiny,insignificant Government; because people with wealth don't need Government. If they get sick they can afford the finest Surgeons and Diagnosticians, if they have a toothache, they can call their
Dentists and they are never hungry. But when you're poor you need the assistance from our Government.
Remember this: 48 Million (Forty Eight Million ) Senior Americans do not have health insurance and 20 Million (Twewnty Million) American children go to bed every night without dinner. Also, 2 Million (Two Million) Americans are still homeless by Hurricane Katrina.
But George Will will not lose a minute's sleep.