(December 21, 2008) Charlie Rose interviewed Henry Kissinger. Kissinger says that he sees opportunity in the current world crisis and made two basic points. One, he talked about the period right after the Second World War – 1945 to 1950 – as the most creative period in American foreign policy and in the construction of a new world system. He referenced the founding of NATO, the United Nations and the Marshall Plan. And Kissinger underscored that going into that period, the world was in chaos and there was a tremendous fear of destabilization following the war. Consequently, his point was that we should not make the mistake of thinking that being in a chaotic situation internationally means that new things can't get created in that context. The other point he makes is about "parallel interests" that now exist, particularly for Russia, China, India, Europe and the United States, all of whom have reasons to want a quiet international environment, because each country or region has so many domestic challenges that they want to be free to address those challenges without getting caught up in an overheated international conflict. Kissinger is not hugely optimistic, but is "moderately optimistic." So, let me start by asking you how you think about the broad issue of there being opportunity in crisis and chaos?

(December 14, 2008) Let's start with the auto companies and the Detroit bailout. The Senate failed to reach an agreement, so the deal fell apart in Congress. The White House is going to make some kind of move. On the Lehrer NewsHour, David Brooks and Mark Shields got into a more heated fight than they typically do.

(December 7, 2008) I'm going to start with the foreign policy story. Obama's put together his foreign policy team, including the holdover Robert Gates as Defense Secretary and Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State. By-and-large the appointments have been applauded by the establishment and critiqued to varying degrees by elements of the Left. The left critique is – well, if Obama is looking to change the mindset that took us to war in the first place, then where is the change in the mindset? They say they want what they're calling a "left perspective" on the foreign policy team. To what extent do you think Obama is adjusting to certain realities about how you govern and how do you suppose he is thinking about how to use that kind of team to introduce a new mindset?

(November 23, 2008) The talk is about whether Obama's announced appointments signal that he's allowing Washington to change him rather than his being the one to change Washington. That's coupled with the idea that the team Obama is putting together is a sign that he is going to govern from the Center-Right. Tell me your thoughts about that conclusion.

(November 16, 2008) Paul Krugman, the economist, was on the Stephanopoulos panel. They were talking about the auto industry, about whether the government should bail out the Big Three automakers. The industry is about to go under. There are three million workers involved and Krugman says that if this were 1999, under more normal circumstances, he'd favor having the Big Three go into bankruptcy. This sets in motion a restructuring of the companies but allows them to continue to operate because they can access credit while they are in bankruptcy. But the problem now is that the credit markets are frozen and so bankruptcy is really not an option in this situation. And, of course, the credit markets being frozen is a function of the meltdown on Wall Street. So, you're basically left with only two options: Chapter 7, which is liquidation. Or a bailout. Then the "go for the bailout" argument runs up against the agitated response "Well, is this a free market economy or not?" The auto industry has refused to innovate. It's refused to create products to allow it to be competitive, etc. Where do you draw the line on the bailout process? That's the fly bottle that the American economy is stuck in. How do you think about working out of that? How does Obama think about working out of that? How do we, as a country, think about working out of that?

(November 9, 2008) George Stephanopoulos asks his panel: 'What were the American people saying in electing Barack Obama?' George Will says the American people were saying, We don't like the competency level of the Bush administration. We want competent government in place that can deal with the issues that the country is facing. David Gergen says, 'Let's not forget that this was a cultural election and the election of Barack Obama was as much cultural as it was political. What the American people were signaling was an embrace of change, both politically, but also culturally.' Let me start by asking you the same question that Stephanopoulos put to his panel: What were the American people saying in electing Barack Obama?

(November 2, 2008) A lot of predictions on the shows today. Guys and gals on Stephanopoulos calling it for Obama. The McLaughlin Group crowd posturing as equivocal on the outcome. Eleanor Clift says in one of the few intelligible moments in their discussion, since they basically screamed at each other for 28 minutes, 'Barack Obama came in as a transformational candidate and he transformed the electorate.' It was hard to hear, though, because The McLaughlin Group was literally hysterical.

(October 19, 2008) I want to start with a characterization of where things might land after the election by Joe Scarborough on Meet the Press. Scarborough says this is not a 60/40 country, meaning not a 60% center-left vs. 40% center-right country, it's a 51/49 country, likely to break for the Democrats two weeks down the road.

(October 12, 2008) There seems to be across the board agreement, to use James Baker's phrase, that 'This economic crisis is bigger than the private sector can take care of by itself.' At this point in the process, I'd call that a bit of an understatement.