]]> growth andartistic acheivement by not asking ONE relevant question about artistic process or even how other musicians and howcultural and political events of the daymight have influenced the songs and albums of this evolutionary non-conformist groundbreaking all inspiring artist?(Well you did ask 1 question about influences) but you fell pityfully short of all the probing important and relevant questions you could haveasked this brilliant interpretative musician. What a LOST Opportunity! But it's not too late. Youstill can redemn yourself. Charlie and BEG partial forgiveness. You better have Joni on again and for an HOUR and do your homework! and apoligize to her and all your (dumbfounded)faithful viewers. Right-On Tavis! Comment by Willie Yanock on Saturday. Jul 12 at 02:51 AMWhy are people so surprised about a bad interview? Everyone that goes on TV always plug their shit a book cd art or whatever their selling today. That is exactly what Joni Mitchell did. I got it. Buy Shine. This is all discussed between Charie and Joni before the interview goes on air. God's thunder will not be heard on sound bites nor from a business woman. If you expect Joni to enlighten you then buy more of her cd's or buy her art work. She is just a woman who has achieved great success and as made mistakes in life that makes her human. She broke my heart but I still love her. In my book Charlie is alright. Comment by night owl on Friday. Jul 11 at 10:48 PMI agree with most who have posted here with this notable exception: I would not like to see Ms. Mitchell back for another go-round with utterly tone-deaf Charlie. He doesn't deserve another shot just as she doesn't deserve another insult. I used to enjoy Mr. Rose as an interviewer but over the last couple of years more often than not I've tuned out because of his worsening Larry King-like interruptions but more his choice of guests. I agree with Bartholomew's comment: Charlie seems to have sold out completely to the usual corporate suspects--and anyone who thinks PBS is pure isn't paying attention--and seems to have buddied up to more than a few of the neocon mouthpieces and perpetrators. Not to mention countless business criminals. Watching Mr. Rose interview artists of any sort has usually been painful for me. Even if he's done his homework and asks better questions he's just so far off of that wavelength that it's annoying. So I agree with someone who said: Stick to politics business and sports people Mr. Rose. Please. Comment by Daniel Rodriguez on Tuesday. Apr 8 at 04:12 AMJoni Mitchell is an icon a seasoned artist a musical legend. She is also an intelligent woman concerning social issues as she always has been. People should put aside their stereotypical outlooks and not be so quick to dismiss her commentary as the ramblings of just another hippie and actually listen to her. She expresses a raw inclination to grasp what is going on and is not ashamed to voice it regardless of how ugly the truth is (by this I am referring to her criticism of the government). Last time I checked criticising a country wasn't only permitted to those who are citizens of the country. People are people and possess the same inalienable rights to voice themselves and she does a great job of it. She's a poet a painter a treasure. I for one have never before had a gripe about Charlie and his show. He's usually dead on with his management of an interview but not this time. He could have asked better questions and should have alloted more time to her. Comment by Levon Helm III on Sunday. Mar 16 at 12:33 PMIt's true what these comments are saying - Charlie Rose has a subtle impatience for Joni's open associative style of conversation. THe length of time allocated to this great subject is an insult in itself. He is nowhere near her level of intellect or intuition. Not surprisingly. Joni is WAY more interesting in her greenroom interview for this show - available on youTube search 'Charlie Rose Joni Mitchell' -her comments at the end of the greenroom clip about war and the state of young American men and women in a culture of vice are right on and chilling. And far far too deep for a boring Park Avenue pseudo-intellect like Charlie. Comment by Willie Yanock on Saturday. Mar 15 at 12:23 AMMr Rose; Ms. Mitchell is a tough nut to crack. If you think my asking her little cronies that answer to her beck and call about how Joni might react to this or that; is just simply naive. To be a respondsible journalist you must ask the toughest of questions. Who did she use for inspiration and who would she trash before God for fame and money. Don't make me beg for you to do your job as a journalist. Joni has not revealed her true revelations. She denies God's inspiration in fear of culminating a lesser to her standards of perfection. The truth lies with the unforgiving and the innocent love. Comment by Willie Yanock on Tuesday. Dec 4 at 06:33 PMI love Joni Mitchell and I respect Mr. Rose. Mr. Rose asked all the right questions but Joni was not forthcoming in her answers if she wants to hide behind her stoic ambiguity then its her choice. I gave Joni my love and this is my choice and I will shout this out on top of any mountain. I once told her that she owns the streets and she doubted. I gave her the Words of God and she shrugged her shoulders Oh well just another hard-time band with Negro affectations. One can ask all the right questions but one is not always going to like the answers. I saw the real Joni Mitchell just a woman not some know it all Goddess. Comment by Tony Babjak on Friday. Nov 30 at 12:25 AMIf you will a point of view hard enough you can find just about anything to support it. I recognize the lack of Eskimo issues on the Charlie Rose program and therefore the show must be anti-Eskimo. Absurd. If you're counting heads on gender or race instead of focusing on topic then the program is not reaching you. Take that noise down to the Village and perform it under a red bulb for likeminded anarchists. Joni Mitchell deserved an hour. There are other great women who deserve the same. But to call the program sexist when it is clearly topic driven is rubbish. You demand equality at the expense of quality. I suppose because far more people watch the NBA than the WNBA. Charlie should have equal representation on the show just to appear sympathetic to cult viewers. No it's a matter of responding to the public interest which is never comprised of equal splits. All of you crying discrimination against the best interview program on television should go down to your local coffee shops stand on your respective stools and demand an equal amount of bluberries in each muffin. It's just as pointless as ferreting through this show looking for something to offend you. Comment by Dub on Saturday. Nov 24 at 11:46 PMIronically. I was visiting Canada when I saw the Joni Mitchell interview preceded by a panel discussion by pundits on the current state of American television programs terribly moderated by Rose with everybody talking at once and covering the same shows over and over again. Then Joni gets the tail end of the hour and seemingly rushed through her answers by Rose like he knew he was pressed for time. Charlie Rose frequently has actors directors producers and musicians on for the entire hour. How does he give the Beastie Boys an hour (which I enjoyed) and Joni Mitchell only 15 minutes? Where was he during the '60's and '70's? (Did he have "other priorities"?) This is my first time commenting on the Charlie Rose program. But I cannot let this one go. Charlie should apologize publicly to Joni. Comment by Andrea on Monday. Nov 19 at 07:05 PMI meant to respond to Kellygo's comment: "At the end of your interview with Huffington you said you heard us about having more women on the program and that you had no excuse for not doing better."I did a search on this website and found no segment on Huffington. I wish I had seen it but have to say that it would strike me as absurd to hear her object to the sexism on the Charlie Rose show when she is every bit as guilty re the Huffington Post! How perplexing! I used to regularly read HuffPo when it first started but the official bloggers she choose were almost all men - outnumbering women bloggers 10 to 1. None of the women she chose were heads of feminist organizations few active feminists yet she made room for Kristy Hefner. Huffington it seems to me still wants to be "queen bee" despite her public pretenses of being a feminist. I have never seen her stand up for women's rights on her top featured blog space though the "entertaining news" section of HuffPo is full of "news" trivializing women and objectifying female bodies. Then when her book came out (about women's poor body image) she has the nerve to publicly express bewilderment that so few of her blog readers are women. So she started a "relationship and lifestyle" section of her blog to do something about that. I who normally have plenty to say about social outrages was rendered speechless. So what exactly qualifies her to criticize Charlie Rose? The sexism on the Charlie Rose show is extreme - as anyone other than an extreme sexist can see by doing even a brief gender count of the guests on the show. This is alarming and unacceptable. I'm glad there are some women who are hoping for the best thinking that the staff of the Charlie Rose show are simply unaware of all the interesting women to interview. The problem isn't though just an oversight and won't end without outside pressure. Unfortunately there are a lot of male viewers who are very uncomfortable with equality and will name-call and try to silence women and feminist men who point out the obvious. Isn't the obvious on the home page? Now 100% of featured guests are men. Sorry a single one hour interview of Annie Lennox doesn't satisfy. How about you boys getting one hour with Jerry Seinfeld and.. that's pretty much it just an occasional male guest here and there. The rest of the guests all women. And slam anyone who dares to identify the imbalance as "knee-jerk" in an effort to preserve the status quo. Comment by Rikki on Sunday. Nov 18 at 06:35 PMCharlie Rose's interviewing technique is somewhat like the 70's talk show host Dick Cavett without the erudition wit charm style or sophistication of Cavett. By interview technique I mean both men are egocentric and inevitably try to direct the conversation ask long winded questions to showcase themselves and their knowledge (or lack thereof as is often the case with Rose). Also Rose doesn't seem to have Cavett's love and challenge of talking with strong intelligent and talented women (at 66 he seems an old jock). I watch the show for the guests and tolerate the host but am often frustrated by his constant interruptions and self reverential style no matter the guest. Note: the Cavett/Rose interview in 2001 was interesting and Cavett prevailed - Charlie was no match at holding the floor.. funny. Comment by Madge on Sunday. Nov 18 at 06:03 PMI make no comment on group think madam because to comment on such an inappropriate line of thinking would validate it far beyond worth. What on God's green earth are you talking about? This is supposed to be a forum about Joni Mitchell guesting on Charlie Rose. Not your forum for personal debate. If that's what you want start a blog somewhere. It's a free country sure and no matter how much in the minority your views fall in this case you do have a right to present them. But just because the rest of these people don't agree with you myself included you resort to an attempt at invalidating everyone else's ideas by categorizing them as group speak? Rubbish. You've commented on the interview a few times now let it rest and give other people a chance to say what they have the right to say. As for your definition of a critic brilliant. And very original. But you might want to look in the mirror... Comment by Andrew on Sunday. Nov 18 at 11:03 AMIt wasn't overtly insulting only mildly so. The context was tragic: suffing a legend like Joni Mitchell into 13 minutes of air time. And the editing was attrocious. I get the sense that Charlie either didn't have time to prepare or just didn't care enough to. His interruptions were bothersome: cutting her off putting words into her mouth rushing her along like an annoying old lady. His questions were naive and ill-informed. If it was such an honour to have her there why not give her due time. Female musicians like Annie Lennox have been granted the full hour. Why not Joni Mitchell? I suppose it's possible that Joni had limited time to speak or that staving off the urge to light up a cigarette during an hour-long interview would have proven too much for her but really this was pulp stuff. Comment by Tony Babjak on Sunday. Nov 18 at 08:02 AMI highly disagree with the knee jerk responses concerning sexism and apathy with respect to female guests on this program. It's a mentality that rises from student unions which pine for something to rebel against. That being said the Joni Mitchell interview was a tremendous disappointment both for its insufficient length and its noticable lack of insight. This woman is one of the premiere singer/songwriters of the late 20th century and her 30+ year career is reduced to nothing more than an Entertainment Tonight soundbite. Aside from my first objection i agree with all of the other criticisms posted here. I wonder how long the interview actually ran because there was an abrupt edit toward the end. Either way give Joni a full hour and let her perform two songs acoustically upon concluding the interview. Comment by Andrea on Sunday. Nov 18 at 01:42 AMI agree that the Tavis Smiley interview was much better and more interesting but it was not an adequate substitute for what should-have-been on Charlie Rose. Charlie Rose has an hour long format and there is a focused depth and breadth that takes in these interviews that just doesn't happen in Smiley's half hour conversations. What was so insulting was not overt rudeness (to respond to an earlier comment here) but the shocking difference in the attentiveness interest and time that Rose usually gives interviewees even those of minor accomplishment and talent. Can you imagine him treating Paul McCartney the other great musician working with Starbucks alloting him 15 minutes after a 45 minute rundown over upcoming TV shows? Talking to him in an irritated disinterested way? Just imagine! Never would that happen - though Paul McCartney is Mitchell's musical inferior. And I say this as someone who does likes a lot of McCartney's music. Just saying it as it is - I don't think many serious critics would disagree with that assessment. I think there are critical questions to ask Mitchell -- the quality of her music is uneven methinks. If I were doing the interview. I'd ask her follow-up questions to the concerns she expresses about the environment (Rose didn't even get that far) -- like what are YOU personally doing about it especially because she sings a lot about "them" and what "they" are doing. These are among the questions that. I think would make the interview interesting. It would show engagement not disrespect. The Tavis show was great to watch but an interviewer doesn't need to be a die hard fan to conduct a respectful and fascinating interview. How can you NOT have a fascinating interview with such a figure? Charlie Rose managed to do this though he has the ability to make just about anyone seem fascinating with patient probing unique questions. I can't believe it had anything to do with Rose's lack of understanding of culture. I think it had everything absolutely everything to do with sexism. Just look at the current homepage and the line-up of guests. Almost all men and one young woman. Men even minor figures get the hour long segments. Women in the rare instance they appear alone as guests get half hour segments (or 15 minutes in the case of Joni Mitchell!) I've also noticed a double standard in the way he treats powerhouse women guests. He gets irritated even belligerent in place of asking the interesting probing questions and giving time for thoughtful answers which is usually what makes him an excellent interviewer. This is PBS supported by your and my tax dollars. It just ain't right. Something's gotta be done about it. Oh and back to the Joni Mitchell interview: Did anyone notice the way the show highlighted the "Both Sides Now" song in the introduction? But Joni has said in interviews which the Rose staff surely saw in preparing for their interview that she considers that song a "failure," and far from her greatest songs. I think the word "failure" is an exaggeration but it is not among her great works it is the work of a young musician learning her art. Was the focus on this song an intentional dig by the staff part of an effort to "put her in her place" in response to her unfeminine show of self-appreciation in other interviews? Comment by kellygo on Sunday. Nov 18 at 01:39 AMI can't call myself a Joni Mitchell fan but I watched the interview and must agree she certainly deserves an hour. Charlie. I love you but I am sick tired and weary of you giving the few women you interview the short end of the stick. I sent an email to the show several years ago with ideas on women to have on the program. Your assistant at the time responded (I was pleasantly surprised) She thought I had good ideas and printed my email for you. She also said one of the women I suggested would not appear again unless she was given emough time (she has not appeared since). I also sent another email recently on the same subject but nothing has changed. No Improvement whatsoever! At the end of your interview with Huffington you said you heard us about having more women on the program and that you had no excuse for not doing better. I agree. You need to do much better. You have no excuse! Here are few suggestions:Please invite Ms. Mitchell back immediately for an hour. Aplogize to her and us on the air be well rested and prepared. Then Follow up a minimum of one woman per week for the hour. If you need a list of names I would be delighted to help out. I'm sure other viewers would be equally delighted. Thank you Comment by Barbara on Saturday. Nov 17 at 11:05 PMThank you so much for the comments here that lead me to the Tavis Smiley interview with Joni Mitchell. Now that's an interview by someone who listens and encourages their guest to reveal. It was also refreshing to hear how Tavis was clearly aware of Joni's mastery of so many disciplines and gave his full enthusiasm and respect for this wonderful renaissance women artist genius. There people are rare and so special you know - let's encourage sharing them and their work with the younger generation for real inspiration. Comment by Lance Rutledge on Saturday. Nov 17 at 08:38 PMI agree with most of the previous comments. All of you should listen to Tavis Smiley's recent interview with Joni and You'll see what you did not in Charlie Rose's. Tavis conducted a conversation that brought out the best in Joni. They were really connecting. She appeared relaxed and jocular... Really opening up. Obviously he understnds artists and Charlie does not. That should be evident if you've seen any of Rose's other interviews with people in the arts. He should stick to politics business and sports. Comment by Tony on Saturday. Nov 17 at 06:45 PM I enjoy Charlie's show - not a long time mega fan like all you wonderful people - but I have seen a few shows. I read many of the comments about the Joni Mitchell interview BEFORE watching it myself and so I was looking for all of the abuse Charlie would cast on this poor sweet woman. It wasn't there - NOT THERE. I believe all these comments were sent in by biased Joni fans who just loved the 60s. Does anyone wonder if Joni told Charlie up front that she would rather not sit for a 60 minute interview - and that now Charlie would rather suffer all of your attacks alone and not drag Joni into this foolishness ? Comment by Catherine Oller on Saturday. Nov 17 at 05:46 PMI just want to add my voice to the others here. Does Charlie Rose actually know who Joni Mitchell is? Anyone new to the planet who just read a brief outline bio before going on air could have been a better host. I was outraged by his dismissive and abrupt treatment of Joni dripping with insincerity - Charlie seemed like he had a plane to catch and just wanted to wrap it all up quickly. I had happily awaited this interview (thinking of course it would be the full hour) but what we got instead was an interminable bull session on the current television season that by-the-way was also thin in substantive comment and also dismissive of the medium by those charged with covering it - though Charlie seemed to really perk-up to this topic â?¦ how depressing. When the show was over I was angry. Comment by Jody L. Spaziani on Saturday. Nov 17 at 04:57 PMAs I've read down this list of comments on Charlie Rose's interview with the great Joni Mitchell. I see much disappoint in what the TV audience expected. I like everyone else expected more! But what I expected more on was the current going's on in Joni's career. I have been a major Mitchell fan since I was 14. I know so much about her career right from the beginning until she unfortunitly retired. Now at 48,what I would have liked Charlie to have focused on is much more of the current. Because there is so much! Also for a longer interview time with one of the most important icons in music/artistry in the last 40 years!It was informative but not nearly enough. I would have loved to hear deeper detales of the making of "Fiddle and the drum". The making of "Shine" which I personally think is one of her finest works! More of the relationship with Starbucks Hear Music the relationship with the musicians on the Cd. The indepth details of each song on the CD and whats to come in the future of the re-emergence of this truly gifted and iconic artist. As Charlie said he finally got her on his show. Well hopfully he will invite her back and give her the respect she truly deserved in the first place! Comment by Kevin Cade on Saturday. Nov 17 at 04:45 PMIt appears my comment will echo most every response posted here. If it's true though that every written reaction represents thousands of unwritten ones then I think it's important for Mr. Rose and his staff to receive as much feedback here as possible -- and realize with that just how many and to what extent viewers were disappointed in the Joni Mitchell interview. I'm afraid that poster Michael McGarrah's comment is true. It was a moment lost. Mr. Rose and I'm afraid Joni is not likely to return soon. Charlie and Joni are obviously contemporaries yet I'm baffled by his (apparent) unfamiliarity with the extent of Ms. Mitchell's contribution relevance and impact -- not only to those of their generation but mine and the next. Of course we wanted to hear about her recent "Shine." If however it was a matter of music not being common ground. I assure you. Charlie that Joni would have been willing and able to discuss ANYTHING with you -- and the insight would have been greatly appreciated by those of us not fortunate enough to be gifted with the opportunity to sit across from genius and ask any question we could. What about how giving up and eventually finding her biological daughter influenced her songwriting for years? Or her acquaintanceship with Miles Davis? Or Charlie Mingus? Her perspective on those two relationships alone could have easily taken up fifteen minutesâ?¦ I read somewhere that Charlie Rose's parents were North Carolina tobacco farmers. In his recent Joni interview Tavis Smiley touched on her being a smoker since early childhood and even that led to an interesting anecdote about Joni's relationship with tobacco; one that ended in laughter. It would have been great to see Joni laugh here. Comment by StevenCee on Saturday. Nov 17 at 03:13 PMI too was greatly disappointed with this all too brief "interview".. Yes. Charlie did appear exhausted & burnt out altho I disagree with those who feel he was rude. I felt he was simply out of his element completely unable to ask insightful questions and reduced to hemming and hawing saying a word or two then praying Joni would fill in the blanks finish the sentence pick the ball up and run with it. My God. I would have expected that at minimum his producers could have handed him a few coherent & appropriate questions,... in complete sentences! Personally. I have been disappointed with a great many of his interviews in the past year or so and maybe it has to do with overwork burnout exhaustion and trying to juggle too many things especially after his health crisis... Maybe a little well-deserved vacation Charlie recharge those batteries take some time to chill. & come back strong & more fully awake. And try to have Joni back again for at least a whole hour! She's a very special artist one of the very few who solely follow their own muse and her words & views agree or not surely deserve a more comprehensive airing... Comment by Rose on Saturday. Nov 17 at 03:05 PMCharlie,For an artist of Joni Mitchell's caliber to be rushed through 15 minutes was a big mistake. You kept jumping in and speaking for her. WE WANTED TO HEAR WHAT SHE HAD TO SAY. And to think that you made is sound like Starbucks did her a favor. I don't think you yourself recognize her status in the scheme of those who have influenced American culture. Made you look like you didn't have a clue of just what real genious was sitting across from you. You missed it. She was probably one of the most important people you could have had onand she was treated poorly. Comment by Barbara Thau on Saturday. Nov 17 at 01:17 PMI am not one to write in to televsion shows' web sites. And I heartened to see that my idea is not original. Clearly I am not alone in my view of Charlie Rose's dismissive perfunctory treatment of Joni Mitchell--a unique and special artist. To note that Mitchell was not given a full hour of show time is just scratching the surface of Rose's baffling misjudgment. Let me say that Rose is usually a TV bright spot: His show is typically a gem. That's why it's peculiar and baffling that Rose usually tuned in to appreciating the artistic political and cultural gems of the day not only gave Mitchell about 15 minutes of show time but treated her her with a thinly-disguised irritation: he cut her off didn't pick up on her unique observations fascinating insights and totally squandered an opportunity to plumb the mind and heart of one of the few artisitic genuises. Bizaare. I think Rose's out-of-character interview with Mitchell deserves some kind of explanation. Better yet it merits a second one-hour interview. On one level I'm intensely curious as to why Rose was short and curt with Mitchell. Would he consider posting an explanation on this web site?Let me reiterate that the Charlie Rose show is usually a delight. He is a much-needed voice and provides a rare forum for substantive talk on TV. Thanks for listening. Comment by Andrea on Saturday. Nov 17 at 12:49 AMJoni should have refused to give Charlie Rose a 13 interview. Would any male great have agreed to it? I felt degraded just watching the segment. I loved the hour long interview with Jerry Seinfeld but why the disparity? I guess he must be a giant compared to Joni Mitchell in the view of Rose and his staff. Along with other guests much less talented than Seinfeld. The ridiculous time allotment and the disrespectful interview might seem confusing except in context of the overall gender ratio of guest appearances on the Charlie Rose show. Also. Charlie Rose generally seems uncomfortable and threatened by (non-actress) women guests who are strong figures middle aged and older. The very few who are invited onto the show that is. Comment by Ann on Friday. Nov 16 at 11:30 PMI didn't read all of the posts since there are so many but I was so annoyed with the disjointed interview of Joni Mitchell that I felt compelled to seek out the comment button. This is not the first time I've heard Charlie fumble through an interview with a musician. What a waste of 13 minutes. If he had so little time and interest he should have just settled on a single topic or thread and explored it as much as possible. There are some interviews Charlie does well and others in which he totally misses the mark. I'm sure it can be tough to be at the top of one's game all the time. But why even bother to air this mess? It honestly was a waste of time for the listeners. Joni and Charlie himself. Comment by Cookie on Friday. Nov 16 at 09:16 PMTrue story - I was in a starbucks tonight and I turned my head and saw the Joni Mitchell display. I asked the woman at the counter - whom I know - if she had heared it yet when across the bar a man and his wife called out "yes it's great! Wonderful!" and I said -great. I saw her on tv a couple of nights ago and the woman behind me said - yes. I saw it too. We both said how great it was to see her and kinda shrugged at the brevity. So thanks for the show - even if it was short - at least I was told about the new cd and met 3 new lovely people at a starbucks (whom I probably would not have without it). Comment by Eileen in Oregon on Friday. Nov 16 at 09:10 PMI agree with most of the posts. Joni merits an entire hour. She is not one to be "moved along" <G> as in Charlie's abrupt seque to the ballet. Even Joni was taken aback at the lack of skillful transition. But everyone is entitled to a less than successful interview. I like another poster would appreciate any tape that was not used for the segment. And do have her back... Joni's lack of false modesty is so refreshing and she is simply a brillant artist: recording artist and painting. Thank you:) Eileen Comment by Eduardo Rubio-Arzate on Friday. Nov 16 at 08:55 PMCharlie where were you in the sixties? - and the following three decades for that matter. I was dismayed by the lack of preparation and deference you showed toward one of the most influential musicians of our time. Ask just about any young successful female or male musician who is the artist whom they admire most and has influenced their career and invariably. Joni Mitchell's name comes up. She like Dylan defined for us the spirit of the times and true to her art and the ideals of her generation never compromised and/or became complacent but always challenged herself and her fans with her musical innovationand incisive poetry of protest against ugliness greed and injustice. PBS American Masters dedicated an hour to Joni Mitchell you couldredeem yourself and honor your stated mission by having an hour long. "Informed spirited soulful" conversation with Ms. Mitchell. Comment by Carol J on Friday. Nov 16 at 08:12 PMI am not a fan of Joni Mitchell and am not familiar with her music. Charlie welcomed her with his usual good manners. Charlie did not appear bored but tired to exhaustion. If it has taken 10 years for this interview Ms. Mitchell had some say in it. Sorry about this next line Charlie if you look at Charlie's face and his clothes you will see many of his multiple interviews are recorded on different days. I would be interested in hearing more from Ms Mitchell. I agree with most of the comments that the tv prime time was a waste. I watch news on one commercial station and ocassionally other programs but I am privileged to watch 3 PBS Stations. These stations carry some of the same programs but have enough different programs that I watch mostly PBS. Take care Charlie. Comment by D. Hutt on Friday. Nov 16 at 04:46 PMI am fan of both Joni Mitchell and Charlie Rose and was also taken aback by the shortness of the presentation and how Charlie did not allow the interview to breathe to allow Joni to talk as he often does with creative people about the transformation of her music and art and increasing focus on polities. Joni Mitchell like Bob Dylan has particular relevance now -- especially as other artists are paying homage and doing tributes. A lost opportunity but hopefully not the last chance. Especially after the winning forum with T-Bone Burnett. Robert Plant and Alison Krause the night before! Comment by paul gaudet-gallant on Friday. Nov 16 at 04:31 PMI adore Charlie Rose and what he does there are so few like him but I bow before the genius of Joni Mitchell. She is a prophetess one of the greatest living artists of any medium and I sincerely hope that Mr Rose will have her back and give her the entire hour! Please Charlie don't cut her off when she is starting to tell a story.. there are millions of us who want to hear what she has to say. Perhaps you were bored by the inane drivel of the previous guests. Mr Rose if we are watching PBS we are certainly not interested in the garbage that fills the space between commercials on network television. Because that is exactly what it has all become filler for a society hooked on advertising. Crap!! Comment by Cookie on Friday. Nov 16 at 03:16 PMWhen you listen to the opening songs there is such an excitement and energy around her beautiful songs and voice. I was somewhat suprised that since this was her first time on there wasnt more homage paid to this lengend. Charlie is usually pretty good at that. I would at least have expected some followu p on why she thought she had things in common with Mr Man and Superman. I mean that was pretty provocative. A full hr on some violent film and 13 minutes with Joni says something very sad about what is thought to be important in our culture - I got the sense that this was an afterthought. Comment by Brian Miller on Friday. Nov 16 at 12:30 AMI have been a fan of most of your shows for over thirteen years now. This evening's interview with Artist Joni Mitchell however seemed almost a slap in the face both to her and to your viewers. It didn't seem to me as though the interview was at all well prepared or that you were sincerely interested or informed as to her accomplishments and contributions to the art form. So very little preceeded by such endless blatherng on about the Fall television line up.(I mean really -- who cares?) What a truly bizarre and somehow ironicprogram. Just the sort of thing Ms. Mitchell might have been inclined to write or sing about at one time in her career. (Tavis Smiley gave us much more of Ms. Mitchell on Nov. 9 for those who are interested.)

Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://www.charlierose.com/shows/2007/11/15/2/a-conversation-with-musician-joni-mitchell#comment_51681 ]]> ]]> over reports of a being sent from Lincoln's Municipal Airport to Baton make up. Louisiana. The sports reporters at the Lincoln Journal Star say it's exactly what it looks desire however the AD at LSU is unaware. It's gonna be a crazy week. modify: From in Omaha: Plane picked up Bo Pelini for a flight to Atlanta. Osborne and Harvey Pearlman on the plane. MORE: quotes Monte Kiffin on rumors he might be interviewed: “I haven’t heard anything right now. We’ll just act and see on that. I spent a little measure there so we’ll act and see,” Kiffin said.

Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://www.jim-rose.com/2007/11/lincoln-airport-hub-of-activity.html ]]> ]]>
Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/torley/2060496071/ ]]> ]]> know that Scotland will be playing Holland in a World Cup qualifier. I thought it was only alter to be back on the moment that will always spring to mind for Scotland fans when you say the words “Holland” and “World Cup”. Archie Gemmill’s goal in the 1978 World Cup. It would be one of my fondest football memories if it hadn’t happened a month and a half before I was born. XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr call=""> <acronym call=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong> Inara: Matt. I don't evaluate that's necessary. Rangers tried their beat and had some really good results in t... [] Matt: I believe it deserves one more posting... http://www youtube com/watch?v=7HAD1fcPDOM&feature... [] Matt: http://www youtube com/check?v=7HAD1fcPDOM&feature=relatedLET'S ALL LAUGH AT RANGERS! JT: I've never seen worse set pieces in my life. Ferguson couldn't change surface get a bring together of them over a two... [] Andy: 3-0 full time and the boos ring out at ibrox - walter smith got tactics wrong and the team were too... [] Andy: 2-0 Rangers are out of Champions League - did express that Rangers wouldnt manage it Andy: 1-0 to Lyon looks like Rangers are going out 8 mins left - unless they score in last minute they are... [] Ian: Ahh.. good old fashioned Old Firm hatred... Well lefutur most of the neutrals always go for the... [] lefutur: seems like the only populate pulling for Lyon outside of france are the Celtic fans.

Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://scotland.theoffside.com/scotland-national-team/holland-scotland-world-cup-i-cant-resist.html ]]> ]]> Number 1 business: Notre Dame. Ticket sales merchandising sponsorships sky boxes. TV etc -- teams create revenue like any other big entertainment cos. How much do they alter to college academics? Little. (Notre Dame contributes as much as the next 5 big-biz universities combined.) It would be interesting to see how much the university spends to support each team? I accept most big-time athletic departments are self-reliant (mostly because of football and men's basketball.) Gee... So. Notre Dame and USC all the good teams from the SEC and the top teams from the Big 10 and Big 12 are the most valuable huh?Who would undergo thunk it? Texas Longhorns raked in $92 million and some dress and only $4.7 millon went approve to academics? Where the hell else did all the be of the money go? I experience some of it has to be used to run the aggroup.. but ~$88 million??? Get a real-time be beneath the ascend in the with our tools and. Also see our original real-time tracking system. --> DIGG. DIGG IT. DUGG. DIGG THIS. Digg graphics logos designs page headers button icons scripts and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.

Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://digg.com/football/The_Top_20_Most_Valuable_College_Football_Teams_by_Forbes ]]> ]]> ever since I received an iPod for Christmas measure year. Edith Piaf’s stirring “Non je ne regrette rien,” has occupied a permanent place in my track list. The song which translates to “No. I undergo No Regrets,” is the measure song performed by Piaf (played by Marion Cotillard) in Olivier Dahan’s stylistically experimental biopic about the cut singer and it perfectly sums up Piaf’s life as come up as it is musical succinct and filled with fiery passion. In a role that the director and co-writer Isabelle Sobelman tailor-made specifically with the actress in mind. Marion Cotillard ( ) gives the award winning performance of the year completely transforming herself from her early 30’s Parisian beauty movie feature stature into adopting the distinct mannerisms speech patterns and difficult physicality of the feature over several decades in a way that never seems desire an imitation. The sprawling film chronicles forwards and backwards in measure and while I gesticulate any attempt to reinvent the make biopic and usually enjoy nonlinear filmmaking (when done alter) in the case of it’s a confusing bring home the bacon to audiences that aren’t all that familiar with the intimate details of her life. Within the first twenty minutes. I was already feeling a bit lost in the walk having to try and infer more than I’d like some cover details concerning her upbringing and the health conditions that plagued her in the difficult childhood which found Edith abandoned by her street singer care and dumped into the brothel run by her grandmother until her circus acrobat father retrieved her. Despite the fact that more questions are raised than answers are provided importantly. Dahan includes some of the vital details of her evolution from novelty songbird waif amusing passersby on street command for francs to becoming the international sensation for her distinct styling and way she just tore into her songs with a full-bodied contend that no doubt probably wreaked havoc on a system that was already abused from the unsanitary conditions of her youth and alcohol and drug addled adulthood. Still. I found myself more dazzled by the performance of Cotillard-- who so dedicated to her role actually shaved off her eyebrows and up back into her hairline according to IMDb to better resemble Edith and endured extensive makeup sessions that could measure up to five hours-- than entranced by as a enter itself. In the end. I decided I may just undergo to choose up one of the many biographies available on the singer but until then of course there’s always the greatest obtain we undergo on her available to us and that is also her greatest enable—the music. The images displayed are for touch and/or publicity use only and do not denote procure ownership or affiliation with the films or individuals mentioned in any way. If you hold the procure and would like the images removed please let the blog author know. convey you.

Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://jfilmintuition.blogspot.com/2007/11/la-vie-en-rose.html ]]> ]]> DIGG. DIGG IT. DUGG. DIGG THIS. Digg graphics logos designs page headers button icons scripts and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.

Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://digg.com/music/Pic_Dear_Axl_Rose_the_iTunes_store_has_a_message_for_you ]]> ]]> care for once again. This new intend would cost $110 billion a year and require every American to have health insurance whether they want it or not. I wish I could say that I'm confident it ordain die a horrible death like it did in 1993 but I'm not. If she's in the White House with a Democrat Congress.. the only thing that could save us would be Blue Dog Democrats and I doubt there ordain be enough of them to do it. On a related say over at The American Spectator makes the case for Rudy Giuliani as the beat hope for beating Hillary. One very big reason for this is the fact that Rudy is willing to act on Hillary and not believe on his lackeys or his wife desire many other candidates undergo been doing. Certainly the MSM ordain eventually play the "wounded female card" the way they did against Rick Lazio in 2000 but don't expect Rudy to waver. As Klein says. "This looks like a battle Giuliani was born to contend." modify: And what about HillaryCare for ? Take a guess.

Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://www.jim-rose.com/2007/09/hillarycare-rises-from-grave-rudy-ready.html ]]> ]]>
Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://www.charlierose.com/shows/2006/06/09/1/a-conversation-with-noam-chomsky#comment_48628 ]]> ]]> that Mr. Rigas is innocent. Just before bankruptcy. Mr. Rigas called an employee meeting in a large conference dwell at a hotel here in Florida to discuss what? none of us really knew. Even after we left the meeting most of us were left wondering what we were called there for. I can tell you the meeting ended with Mr. Rigas in tears almost desire he was apolojizing for something. I can express you that whenever our office ordered new furniture we were told it had to come from Mr. Rigas' wifes furniture store. No be that it would cost three times more than if we ordered it locally. When we would alter our New Construction budget it would be cut to almost nothing. We were told that although the calculate we were submitting was wacked from around 20 miles of new cable lay to 5 miles of new telecommunicate plant (not actual numbers just to give an idea) we would not be denied the money needed to install telecommunicate plant in new areas of construction. Things like these two examples really started me thinking after the charges were announced. There were also rumors that real estate was purchased in Coudersport and then sold to employess above merchandise value. Now you undergo populate who paid too much for their homes can't sell and undergo lost their jobs. Of cover i don't know that that was a real dish the dirt but it was well known in my office. I love Mr. Rigas and do believe he has a HUGE heart. I was very excited to see this converse as the measure time I saw him was here in Florida giving his very strange seemed desire apology speech. Employess from our touch land Gardens office that went to Coudersport said they received the best treatment ever and some change surface entangle desire Royalty when they went there for training. I hope that when the truth comes out. Mr. Rigas is innocent. mention by Gina on Thursday. Aug 30 at 09:11 PMThere are a lot of unanswered allegations that you could look to on this forum far more important and beyond a fact whether there was an independent come in of directors aside from the Rigas come in of directors being a discuss point that I would be more interested in your answering to. Perhaps your consider is not with myself but with the other author who was also a former employee of your company whom as we have all read his/her detailed be of many *alleged* misappropriating that went on within the company again perhaps you would like to comment on. And being that the Rigas sons are all graduates of Harvard. Juris Doctorates and Law Degrees. Tim Rigas with a Business Degree and I am suppose to accept they (excuse me) *didnâ??t know*? Or in stock market broker terms a *DK* that they were committing banking and SEC fraudulent crimes? Come come now. The SEC apparently understood the so-called complicated accounting issues to which and why the Rigasâ??s were indicted and ultimately convicted to which they undergo now begun to answer their time in a Federal prison no doubt. I see there are a be of former Adelphia employees who have made comments on this forum some yay some nay still does not depart the fact that these men were open guilty of committing crimes after a trial played out on the national stage and so it is what it is. As much as I feel sorry for Mr. Rigas (the father). I cannot condone the actions resulting in the economic prospering rise of a small town to itâ??s ultimate go due to the greed (seemingly) of one familyâ??s control. This inspect is so complicated with a complicated group of players on all sides but let us not drop or to be so bold as to send out a message that indeed has plagued this country that *the wealthy* who can afford the beat of counsel can have a place above the law as opposed to the poor who are subject to the office of the public defender. I praise the SEC for itâ??s diligence in overseeing these types of illegal corporate injustices that one of my favorite presidents in history instituted as move of the *New Deal* in the formation of the SEC by the great President *Franklin Delano Roosevelt* to disapprove corporate privileged greed. Ultimately it is the townâ??s people of Coudersport who are paying the determine right along with the Rigasâ??s. Just be glad neither of the Rigasâ??s will undergo to pay measure in a state penitentiary where life would Iâ??m sure be a lot more unbearable than a medium security facility with amenities to go the measure. *Henry* mention by Justin on Monday. Aug 20 at 09:47 PMSounds like we have a few Rigas haters in this mention forum. I will probably enjoin most of my comments in here towards the "former employee." You stated in your first reply that the interview was not one of John's best performances. If you faced 15 years crimes you didn't act would you.

Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://www.charlierose.com/shows/2007/08/10/1/a-conversation-with-john-rigas#comment_48625 ]]>