>> from our studios in new york city, this is "charlie rose." >> senator kristen gillibrand is here, democrat from new york to replaced former senator hillary clinton in 2009.

she was previously a congressperson for new york's 20 ninth congressional district. she has emerged as an advocate for women's rights and taken on the battle for sexual assault especially in the military. she has a new memoir, "off the sidelines," and in the forward hillary clinton writes it is not a job but a calling. i'm pleased to have her here at this table. great to see you. what leads one to write a book at this time in your life? >> i wanted to share a little bit about my personal journey for a way to ask women to be heard. it is part call to action, part memoir, part self-help. it impacted me. my mom was one of three women in her law class. really as a way to ask women to be heard, speak up to raise the voices on the things they care deeply about. they could not only make a difference but change outcomes. >> especially looking at

violence today, women need to be cowed and we need to hear. >> if you look at the nfl, the way it was handled was outrageous. it was a clear the player had beaten this wife, drags her out of an elevator, and given a slap on the wrist. the institutional bias. they are protecting their own closing ranks about a star player, a favored soldier or student. it's problematic because what it shows is how little we are valuing women and this is a lot about if we value women in the workplace and our communities, really making the point that there argues and life experiences that might be different than those differences are good.

>> what about roger goodell? >> i think he handled a terribly and he now has to lead this reform going forward making sure we have a zero-tolerance policy and full accountability. >> and if there is some evidence that he did not know -- that the nfl and knew but he did not? >> if he lies, he has to step down because he will not have the credibility. he can lead the effort, create accountability, create a true zero tolerance policy. i have two boys. our professional sports players are role models and we cannot say it's ok to beat your wife. these are crimes. we should not tolerate it. >> is a day need for legislation? is it a need for what? >> all of the above. this is not a problem for when industry or one level of society.

it is pervasive across all aspect. i tell the story of two young women who came to my office to come to a meeting and they told me about how they were brutally raped on their campuses, reported, and they were retaliated against by the administration. they got up, brush themselves off, and they took this across the country to college campus after the other to create a movement of women and men standing up and saying how you need to reform how you handle these cases. it's a societal challenge that's not about any one place or person but how we handle this in the nfl. >> you've been at the forefront of sexual assault in the military. >> that is legislation.

the department of defense, dick cheney, has said there is zero tolerance, but what we have seen is zero accountability. we had 26,000 cases of sexual assault, rape, unwanted sexual content alone and only 3300 were reported -- one in 10. i believe in decision-making about whether you should go to trial and whether they should not be made by the chain of command. they will tell you they do not trust the chain of command and that is why nine out of 10 are not even reported right now. >> people in positions of power over sexual assault and in some cases they have been accused of sexual assaults. >> yes. he was accused of assaulting a woman in a parking lot. clearly, those who are charged are not either taking this issue seriously, do not care about outcomes, certainly not getting it right.

if you're going to have the accountability and care for justice, it should be a trained military prosecutor who has no skin in the game. you need someone who is there to represent justice. >> what's going to happen to the legislation? >> we are going to keep fighting. it's ok to take risks and not win every battle because sometimes you can build on what you've achieved. we did not overcome the filibuster at 60 but i know we can continue to earn the support of survivors. the stories make a difference. rand paul and ted cruz were on my bill. it's not democrat or republican but about the right thing to do. you can move these important

issues to the floor and get things done. >> the forward was written by former senator hillary rodham clinton who was in iowa this past week and. what's the relationship you have with her? >> i thought about how she has been a role model for me. when i was a young lawyer pushing paper, i saw her go to china as the first lady and give the speech women's rights are human rights and that impacted me. i had been in asian studies major in dartmouth. i knew mandarin and studied in beijing and i knew how powerful it was for her to take that message. i was kicking myself because i was not involved in politics and that really woke me up. i joined a political group with a bunch of ladies and i got to go to an event where

she was speaking. i was the youngest by far by 10 or 20 years. she says to the group decisions are being made every day. you have no one to blame but yourself and it was such an aha moment as i felt she was talking to me. i started sweating. she's telling me i have to run, i thought. he got restarted my interest in really working hard. >> before you started working for andrew cuomo. >> i tried to get a job at the u.s. attorney's office and failed. i tried to get a job at major foundations. then i tried to get a job on hillary's campaign but i did not have any experience to get it a position.

andrew gave me why one big opportunity. it talked about public service and why it's important and to fight what you believe in. i went up to him and i said i love your speech but i think politics is an insider's game and i don't know how to get from a to b. he gave me a job on the spot. i went down a couple days later and got the job. that's what started me in my public service career. >> collections are who you fight for. -- elections are who you fight for. you would have to ask governor patterson -- >> and senator schumer. in perhaps even secretary clinton. >> my aha moment in that is i was never sure. secretary clinton was elevated. i had just won my reelection to the house, a 24-point margin. we are at disney world. i start seeing these

articles about how hillary has been appointed to the secretary of state. should i put my name in for consideration? my husband has always been the perfect art or from he who gives me just the right advice. he said, kiersten, we are only in this to help people. do you think you could help more people if you were in the senate? of course i could. then he said we should. we should only be endless as long as we're helping people. i was very blessed to be selected to represent our whole state. >> they thought it would be good to have someone who represented upstate. >> the governor was grateful for hillary's leadership and wanted to continue that legacy. i think i benefited from that as well. once i got appointed, my job was to introduce myself to 20 million people. >> they say every united states senator gets up and goes to the bathroom, looks

in the mirror, and sees a future resident. >> -- president. >> all senators might say that but not me. >> what are your political ambitions? not just for office but justifying your position? >> i particularly think about that when i feel like i've lost a battle or not being a successful advocate. what keeps me going is being that voice for people who don't have lobbyists in washington, people who don't have enormous amounts of money to be that voice for lost causes. if you look at all of the issues i champion, most of them started out at zero, no chance of repealing don't

ask don't tell. i wanted to fight that battle because i felt they were going to die for our country but was being told no because of who we love. these things concern me. i cannot tell you the lack of empathy in washington for a family that's on food stamps. i feel like the reason i'm there is to fight them and that is why i feel so passionately about taking on sexual assault in the military. >> he says in political circles nobody doubts angela brown's sexual assault crusade has elevated the issue and her profile -- nobody doubts gillibrand's crusade. whether she wins or loses shoe wins according to chuck schumer. >> that's the lesson of the book for any woman trying to work in her school community or anything she has a passion about. anyone with a voice can make a difference. the only reason i was able to fight so hard for reform is because survivors came to me and shared the worst details of their lives, the worst details you can imagine. it's so enraged me that it's burned me to action.

>> is the core of discrimination against women, violence against women? >> respect and lack of value. that is why it's a much larger issue than anyone context. we see it in the simplest thing as equal pay. the fact that they do the same job and only get $.70 on the $1 or $.68 if you are latina. it goes to the core of women not being valued. there's the and blaming. the solution, charlie, is for women to be heard. if we can elevate our voices, we can help the outcome. when i was a young congresswoman i was appointed to the committee and to change the debate.

we're debating issues of military readiness. they focused on how many ships, how many aircraft, equipment-oriented issues and gabby gifford said the doctors on my bass in my district say 70% of women going back into combat are not mentally ready. why are the divorce rates so high? 11 members of the military commit suicide every day. what are you doing about posttraumatic stress disorder? it was a more complete debate at the combination of the male and female debate is what was so powerful and results in a better array of issues being debated and certainly better outcomes. >> one of the things secretary clinton is given credit for is the global outreach to women. >> she does it so well.

i've read stories where a woman taking care of women who have been raped and are a tool of warfare and she stops by that place, the advocates say she has brought light to an issue we have been fighting for a generation. she has always used her position to shine a light on injustice, one reason why i'm such a fan of her being our next president. >> you also talk about how often they come up to you in the senate and spend time commenting on your looks whereas that's not something as men receive very much. >> the reason why i purposely put in specific stories -- >> weight as well. "you're even pretty when you're fat." "good thing you're working out. you don't want to get

porky." >> what do you say? >> usually i'm disbelieving those words exited their mouths, but the stories that i think are more important are when i'm younger and my career. these issues don't affect you. they are your peers and they are just being stupid. i can tell you when my boss said something like to me when i was a young lawyer at a celebratory dinner when i had been working for months and months and he spends one minute saying, thanks kirsten, for your hard work. don't you just love her haircut? it felt like i wasn't as valuable or important or my hard work was not the noticed. those kinds of comments are tough on women particularly early in their career. i want the women reading my

book to see they are not alone. the jerk in your office said something rude to you and you can push past them. you can run that law firm and change the climate. don't be discouraged. >> as christine lagarde did. what is this midterm election going to be decided by? there were serious suggestions that it may turn republican. kay hagan is ahead in some of those places they thought they were in danger may not be so. how do you see this campaign we will vote in november and what it is about? >> all campaigns are who you fight for. they will be very much a part of that state. i think our candidates are better and we will hold the senate for that reason. even in these tough races, the issues being debated are about values. do you believe the people

who work hard every day should not be living in poverty? that they should still be below the poverty line? those are important values questions. >> what do you think of the themes of her campaign if she decides to run for president? will there be a focus on things like income inequality? >> one of the debates we have in the book is having it all. i dislike the phrase "having it all." what are we having? a second slice of pie? for a long time women have been doing it all. eight out of 10 families today, moms are working, four out of 10 they are the primary sole wage earners. we are not supporting women and families in the workplace.

>> the stock market is at all-time highs yet the middle class is not participating in the kind of growth and of their own expectations and economic power. >> for typical mom and the work lays, the fact she doesn't have a believe is a real problem. when her mother is sick and dying, she does not have any flexibility. when her child gets hit by a car and is in a wheelchair, she cannot take care of her child or lose her job. these are not elevated to the forefront of the national debate because there are so few women in congress. 18% in the house, 20 in the senate. the next presidential campaign could very much be focused on issues on if you believe in paid leave, raising the minimum wage, equal pay for equal work. these are bread and butter issues for almost all working families. if we can fight for all of

our workers, you will see a growth in the economy and more economic activity. >> president obama talked about isis and the challenge. secretary of state john kerry has been in paris trying to get more support. doesn't he need to come to congress to get approval? >> for certain strategies he does. >> what are those? >> if he wants to use military force, bombing, airstrikes i think he needs a separate authorization. >> if he wants to bomb seriously needs to have congressional approval? >> there's a difference of opinion but i think he does. >> isis is a serious metastasizing threat. it is fast-moving, extremely well-funded and is hazardous to our interests. i appreciate a lot of the response in terms of

engaging the arab world, the muslim world, making it very clear this has to be a sunni-muslim led effort and whatever battles we decide to engage in. only then will be be able to have any hope of success. >> the president has indicated that there might be bombing in syria, do you support it? >> he needs to seek authorization. >> without authorization? >> i would not support it, but with an authorization i would have to look at it very closely. i've been very clear about him needing authorization. we are being asked whether or not we support arming the rebels and we will have an opportunity to vote against that. >> against arming the rebels and syria even though senator clinton has supported in the past? >> her statements are clear that she thought it was a time that it was appropriate.

i don't know what her views are now. >> do you? >> i don't think she's made a statement on it. i think it may not well be effective and there are serious potential unforeseen consequences. >> arming rebels? >> correct. >> you worry that they will fall in the hands of more radical jihadists? >> we've seen that happen. after years, isis came through and cut through them like about her. i do not know if you can -- we were training them so i don't think it's effective at if you train a certain sector of moderate rebels that those weapons stay in their hands. they are not the best fighters. >> if in fact they have created or are in the process of creating an islamic state between syria

and iraq, if in fact they are expanding, at what point do you think we need to do everything we can to stop them? what is your red line? >> there are certain strategies that will be effective in certain strategies they do not believe will be affect this. i think the ones the president laid out in terms of engaging the muslim and arab world are essential. this has to be a sunni-led muslim effort. many in congress are suggesting that and what i believe is -- >> the question is what the president is prepared to do not what lindsey graham is prepared to do. >> if the authorization to do so is broadly written tom as collins is concerned about, his authorization of war with syria, those are serious concerns.

>> authorization to do anything he can to stop isis? >> it depends how it's written. there needs to be an opportunity for congress -- >> no one is suggesting war against syria, are they? >> we need to debate that and see what is being asked of us. we have not seen this in regards to arming rebels. these are serious conversations. >> what is the political conversation about what the fall iout might -- fall out might be? then senator obama says i'm not against war but i'm against this war and helped repel him within the wing of his own party to the nomination. is this seen among democrats as having political consequence? >> you have to ask each individual senator what they feel, but i can tell you

many in our state are very war weary. did you not want to see boots on the ground. they do not necessarily want to see an american-led mission. in terms of special forces, intelligence gathering that can be very vibrant and powerful, but i do not think they will work or a think they will have very grave unintended consequences. i do not with to see our weapons used against our men because they can so easily take them from relatively untrained moderates. i will see with the president requested i will make a determination then. >> the president will request -- >> put it this way, charlie. i'm not in favor of an open-ended request to allow the next president to put armed and boots on the ground. >> no one would support that. how many senators do you think would support putting

boots on the ground? >> i think chairman menendez had made certain statements -- >> that he would support putting boots on the ground? >> you can ask every senator what they think. i'm not in favor of boots on the ground. i may consider airstrikes. i may consider them at a certain time, if authorization is requested. how that is worded is very important. i have seen a draft authorization broad enough to allow for boots on the ground. i'm very concerned about how that is written. you can see the two 1001 and 2002 authorizations are being used for all sorts of oceans. i've been supportive of his strategies and approaches that i do not agree with all of them. my job as a senator on the armed services committee is to have a voice in these decisions. >> which of the approaches do you not agree with? >> i do not agree with arming the syrian rebels in those weapons could easily get into the hands of isis

in the future used against our men and women which is very concerning to me. >> it's going to be a debate that will be had in washington. you said if i had a daughter i would tell her certain things, it's a great to be really smart and being smart makes you strong. emotions are powerful so do not be afraid to show them. some people may judge you on how you look or what you wear but that's just how it is but keep your focus on what you say and do. she may see the world differently that noise and that difference is essential. >> thank you, charlie. >> the book is called "off the sidelines." kirsten gillibrand, senator from new york. back in a moment. stay with us. ♪

>> ian mcewan is here. the best his tells new book tells the story -- i am

pleased to have him back at the table. he tells you a story? >> there were several judges at the dinner table. they all seemed to knew each other's judgments very well. >> you were there to talk about judicial proceedings? >> i had his judgments in my hand, a bound volume. i said this was a form of fiction, a subgenre, especially the family division. it's right in the heart of fiction. even then, i was not thinking about it as a novel. i put it in the back of my mind and three years later he did tell me the story of the jehovah's witness case and he was halfway through and i knew i was going to write a novel somewhere in there.

>> what did you say just a minute ago? >> i think the family division has pitched its tent in the family division. contesting children, medical ethics, crimes with diaries and knives, rapes. ordinary dilemmas that face people certainly once or twice in their life. all of those things. >> you set out to write it. what did you do then? >> i read more judgments. the great thing about the internet is you can pull them down now. i became impressed by the best of them. huge philosophical sweeps, love of irony, touch of wit.

the other thing that really struck me, these are all secular judgments. they do not refer their moral systems to any supervening, supernatural entity. they're constantly dealing with religion. there is kind of a rift that opens up. that's what i would like to explore. >> where is religion in your life? >> oh, church of england which is a kind of atheism in my background. polite and conventional. i used to carry the flag in the garrison church because my father was an army officer. sometimes i even read a lesson from corinthians, i think it was. but i lost all religion in my early teens. >> you said writing a new novel begins with a set of feelings that are so vague that you cannot even write them down because you might ruin them.

>> sometimes wrapping words around a thought suffocates it. hesitation, i think, is a very important creative element. rushing into things, having a good idea, but sit on it a while. if it's a good idea two months later then you know it's a good idea. you just mold it like a cheese. >> how do you know you're ready? >> when you can no longer stop yourself writing some paragraphs. perhaps it's the middle or the beginning, testing it, tasting it. >> this case has a stark confrontation between the courts. >> it happens a lot and the more i looked into this, i was at the 92nd last night and there were three judges all of whom had at one point or another forced

against his wishes a young jehovah's witness to have a blood transfusion or forced the parents to accept that the hospital had the right to do this. it comes around. >> what if the child dies? do they say it must he god's will? >> there is a certain degree of fatalism. i've heard them say this to me. we do not see death as something as final as you do. the courts take a very robust approach to this. if you wish to make yourself a martyr to your religion, that is fine. you cannot inflict such martyrdom on a child. generally, the courts will give the hospital permission to transfuse against the parents' wishes, but the closer that child gets to 18 to his or her majority, the more of an anxious

question it becomes and the more the courts want to hear from the young teenager himself. it's not just a rubberstamping moment. they take it very seriously because it's a manner of criminal assault to treat someone against their wishes. >> how did you create her? >> what was the first thing i did. >> she's a judge, 59 years old. >> 59 years old, childless. it is again this vague process. i tell you what it's like, charlie. it's like watching someone walking toward you out of the mist. you have the faintest outlines and you serve them with a few sentences. they bring that person a little closer and you see the outline of their shoulders, their face, something of their personality

begins to emerge so you write them into existence. suddenly when you are lucky, if you are lucky, she has a life of her own and she tells you what to say, as it were. >> you get enough in the character so they tell you what they think, what they say, how they say it. >> they exclude all the impossibility. this lady was somewhat against the grain, rather self-contained. highly rational but emotionally rather inarticulate. they're meant to be so much more articulate and i thought let's not go that bandied route. wonderful in her work and now it

is facing a crisis. she is not good at dealing with her own problems. >> i love the name fiona. if i had three daughters, one would be fiona. the other would be margaret, my mother was margaret. i just love that name. it has always been somebody who knew their own mind. >> it was back in the magistrates court who was incredibly striking. she was tall and freckled, highly competent, a very warm person. >> quick of wit and mind. >> i'm sure we could find some

fat, stupid fionas. don't marry them all. [laughter] >> she meets adam. >> the case is before her in the high court in london and she does a slightly a regular thing. she suspends the court proceedings, crosses london in a cab and goes and sits at the boy's bedside. he is 17 years old, rather intelligent, determined to die. she sees right through him in many ways. at the same time, he stirs her. this is the child she might have had. >> and then down to the gardens. >> paradoxically, for a boy thinking about death, she is learning to play the violin.

she recognizes the irish lament. she tells him that it is by the poet yates. he's one of the elements of the new life that comes flooding in for him, the life of poetry and music. she's a messenger from another world. suddenly she's the reason why he wants to go on living. >> and therefore you have the drama. what else is going on in your life? >> at what level? we are possibly about to break up my country. >> you are against it and your wife is for it. >> i have an english mother and a scottish father. i am the united kingdom. [laughter]

>> i'm amused how david cameron and -- >> alex salmond. >> how david cameron and george osborne became very close quickly and scampered over to scotland. >> what did you mean it? we will give you whatever you want. [laughter] >> i think you are witnessing the political elite in panic mode. >> you're the prime minister of britain in the united kingdom and someone comes and says there's a chance that you will be forever identified in history as the man who lost scotland. >> in the referendum, gave into the terms, extended it. there's a spot of gerrymandering, i suppose. 16-year-olds have never had the vote in britain. my point would be this.

scotland always was a different country, as soon as you stepped off the train or the plane. we don't have british novelists. we have english and scottish. we do not have british poets. >> you have irish. >> we do not have british novelists. scotland has no shortage of identity. >> do we think of burton as welsh or united kingdom? >> welsh. of course he's welsh. it's like soccer. we don't have a british football team. >> manchester. or chelsea. >> if we lose the union we will say it is amazing. we take it for granted. i think literature is about the beating heart and soul of the country.

>> you had a conversation with richard dawkins a few years ago. he said to be really frank about islam would cause you to look nervously behind you. >> i'm afraid that is the case. there is not sufficient tolerance of free and open. i was talking to a young woman who is a writer in pakistan. she says if she were to express admiration for the writing of rushdie, she would probably face the death penalty. already her family lives under armed guards because they were forthright secular journalists. >> living under armed guard. >> i've had the rumblings of

threat. it is problematic. >> bill mahrer was here the other night and he talked about it. more than one billion muslims and clearly there are moderate muslims. he jumped down my throat. >> what was the objection? >> he said there were no moderate muslims. >> i don't take that view. i know a fair number who are greatly tolerant. >> that is my point. >> and now we seem to be back to square one with the united states having to get into bed with some unsavory regimes, egypt. troops on the ground. >> the enemy of my enemy is my friend. >> that old adage.

in the new situation, we cannot separate humanitarian aid. they go closely together when you have such bloodthirsty -- >> those people opposed to the iraqi war are not opposed to taking on isis. >> i think you'll find there's a lot of opposition. >> on what basis? because it's not our business? >> look what happened last time, the thin end of the wedge. i think you are damned if you do, dammed if you don't. we are clearly not going to obliterate isis from the air. even the general will tell you

that. they're going to have to be troops on the ground sooner or later. >> why don't you write about this? >> there's no way around it. you have to face down isis. it's coming towards us. >> is it as you think? is it a new strain of nazis? >> it is certainly as evil. >> barbarism would instill fear and works to your political advantage. >> the most destructive ideas the notion of utopia, paradise. if you think you can make all of mankind happy forever just by killing a few million people, the only rational thing is to go and do it. many of these men, lots of them turkish we have now discovered, have a strong belief in paradise. and the afterlife and have prepared to do what is necessary

to get themselves there but also get their brethren there. it's a fatal idea, utopia. >> it's like religion. people are prepared to do anything for it. >> there are all kinds of atheists who have been very loud in their views and live way down in what may stupidly be called the bible belt and no one has lifted a finger against them ever. steven weinberg has been down there 40 years and has always spoken for his beliefs, which are entirely secular. no one has ever raised a finger against him. >> in the bible belt, there is tolerance? >> maybe christianity is no longer the rampant force it was. i guess in 16th-century europe if you had steven weinberg's view you would find yourself strung up.

>> martin amis, our friend we were talking about believes the threat from isis will recede because history shows that extreme and nihilistic movements don't have staying power. >> that staying power could be 10, 30, 40 years. >> how many beheadings will there be between now and the arrival of the absolute power? >> north korea would be a counterexample of staying power. inconveniently long lived. even the soviet union is two or three generations under highly inconvenient circumstances. >> what did you learn about the jehovah's witness? >> always very polite, very friendly. i was always very straight with them and said i was writing a novel.

none of them had heard of me so that was quite refreshing. i just put them all to the issues of the blood and so on. you've only have this rule in place since 1945. generally the answer would be god reveals his truth slowly. one i spoke to just a few weeks ago said the truth was always there in the bible. it's in genesis, leviticus. surely they are just dietary restrictions. these are strictly commandments from god. they were not going to turn me around and i was not going to turn them around. the exchanges were always very friendly. >> what criticism of your writing do you find the most off target?

what makes you recoil in anger or frustration? >> i'm not special in this, but there's a certain kind of the things that certain people always say about you. >> no matter what you write. >> you can never get away from it. i always have unbelievable, extraordinary, thrilling events that completely change everyone's lives. i don't remember if there was one in a atonement or it does not make any difference. they are only really thinking of the opening chapter of enduring love. someone said this is what i do and somehow i can never push people's attention away from this. the opening of the first 200 pages of atonement is one long,

slow note of circumstances and there's nothing particularly dramatic. this question has come off the internet and it is not based on his or her reading experience and i am too weary of even rejecting the question. sometimes i'm thinking, next question. [laughter] >> let's get on with it. are you anxious to get to the next book or do you have a time in which you just need -- >> i'm quite good at not writing. i like hesitation. there is a lovely phrase i often quote. he was quite a partygoer. great writers have the capacity for determined stupor. i thought i disagreed with the

remark. i love the phrase, determined stupor. that's what i like to go into. a kind of relaxed mode of reading, traveling, seeing friends and idle thinking. >> where do you write? >> i have a big old converted stone barn out in the country in glouchester which is attached to the main house by a set of double doors. i cannot hear anything going on in there. all my books are around the world. >> and you start in the morning? >> nine-ish. >> after breakfast? >> i may have a piece of toast. i have now gone three or four hours. >> i have to get up early

because of the morning show now. it doesn't take me down. it is just so lovely. it is just lovely. i'm at a place where i can look out over central park, i can see the moon and see everything. i can leave and go outside. it is the stillness, the quiet of it. you are in a quiet place. they're moving at a slower speed. >> the phone doesn't ring. but maybe an e-mail from china. >> you feel rested. you are in the top of your form. >> the exciting times in writing is when you ride all night. >> when you get on a roll and it

just keeps coming. >> you just plunge on into the night through the dawn. >> ian mcewan's book, "the children act." he is a much praised english novelist. thank you. >> thank you, charlie. >> thank you for joining us. we will see you next time. ♪ >> live from pier three in san

francisco, welcome to "bloomberg west." i'm cory johnson. a check of the top headlines. board changes coming at microsoft. the longtime directors are retiring. charles sharp is joining the board. they will hike the company dividend by three cents. that gives microsoft a 2.7% yield. one senator has concerns about the alibaba ipo.