let your freak flag fly. don't miss the grooviest trip at sea. announcer: from our studios in new york city, this is "charlie rose." brooks is here. he has been a columnist for "the new york times" since 2003. he is known for tackling wide ranging subjects from politics and the presidency to capitalism and character. more recently, he has turned his focus to the 2016 presidential campaign. i am pleased to have him back at it table. welcome. david: thank you. been too long,

but i know you have books to write and other things to do. david: wine to drink. charlie: food to eat. david: museums to see. charlie: isn't it great to have a huge appetite? that is what i say. i don't want anybody with a small appetite. david: you should have a bunch of opera stars. torlie: i was speaking someone the other day who felt they had been stolen from having a big life. i thought, that's sad. a big life is not being a celebrity or having a lot of money. a big life is being connected to all that is possible. i had a journalist friend who asked a woman, what would you do if you were not afraid, and the woman started crying. get intowell, you things like marriage, responsibility, mortgages,

career. david: i always tell my students, two thirds of you will be more boring at age 30 then you are now. inple's happiness is high their 20's and then bottoms out at 47 -- which is called having teenage children -- and then it rises after they have gone away. when people are older, they look at the world in a happier way. they look at happier phases. they don't look at the bad phases. and you get to a certain age and you sort of know who you are. you can take a big risk toward the middle of life, or even toward the end of life, because you can see how it is all adding up. you have the resources and you are ready to take the risks. so, you are taking risks? david: i hope so. partly, this election, i messed up big time by not knowing trump was coming. when something like that happens, you take a look and

think, what did i miss about america? much in the court order. i have to -- corridor. i have to get out. charlie: you mean the corridor between new york and washington. david: i travel every week, but i am at a college here, so i am always in the bubble. i have to get out. the other thing is, i achieved way more career success than i ever thought i would, so it's time to take some chances on the spiritual realm, on the emotional realm. torlie: let me come back that. there is so much about trump to talk about, but you are willing to take chances on the spiritual realm. what does that mean? camp: i went to a summer for 15 years and i had a friend who was exuberance personified. he could not get through a sentence without clicking and whistling because he just had an

inner life he just radiated. he died two weeks ago. i went to see him on what happened to be the day he died. he greeted death with such confidence and almost joy. he was a man of deep face and he said i am going to the kingdom. deep faithp faith -- , and he said i am going to the kingdom. to have such deep faith and greet death that way. and he was a man who had gone to honduras a lot and been a counselor. a life of such selfless giving. i certainly don't have that. how do you get that? andsee examples like that, you think, what do i have to cut loose to get that, because that would be wonderful. have spoken to that

idea in other places. david: of course. it has been a lifelong passion, but frankly, reading a bunch of books about it or writing a book about it doesn't get you there. buying books about it -- like my book. to get there with the direct contact with the people. you have to have an emotional connection. and a lot of us in middle-age hopefully become more open and, frankly, more feminine. the radical leap has to be within the realm of emotional vulnerability. comes fromrt of this the fact that you know that you have the skills of life, in a sense. you have skills that you can, as you say, you have a certain level of achievement and comfort. david: carl young said the first half of life is building the ung said thearl j

of life is building the outside world. the second half should be building the inside. widen your repertoire of emotions with relationships, music, literature. and suddenly, you are more emotionally sensitive to people, and you are hopefully braver and willing to be more vulnerable, willing to slow down. that is something that is challenging for me, but out of that comes a risk. notph said leisure is having your mind play golf, it time to playhaving golf, it is having your mind to slow down enough that people can access you. a friend as he was

approaching death, within days, time, i wouldonly do nothing. and doing nothing is to expose yourself to all that is there, not having a schedule and ambition. david: inner formation does not always look like outer formation. was based on the difference between the resume and the eulogy virtues. good at theto be eulogy virtues, be honest, honorable, capable of great love, but how you get there is sometimes a matter of passivity. another piece of great writing by joshua has shuttle is on the sabbath, taking a day off. -- great writing is on the

sabbath, take a day off. you want to climax your week at the sabbath. through's done abstention, by saying no to things. of aie: is this part conversation with students at yale? david: a bit. commitment about making. my last book was too individualistic. i got something's wrong about in life. and characters in my book, eisenhower, dorothy day, were able to make awesome commitments inside themselves. that strikes me as the key to a good life. the argument in my class is you make for big commitments in life. to a spouse and family, to a vocation, to a philosophy or faith, and to a community. and how well you make and maintain those commitments will

determine the quality of your life. whether it is a partner or a faith -- charlie: it's an ongoing learning process. david: to me, a commitment is falling in love with something and then building a structure of behavior around it for those moments when love falters. you cannot ink yourself into who to marry. au cannot think yourself into vocation. you have to love your way into it because it is such a big stretch of time. you have to be in love to be a deeply loving creature. thathen there are moments sack. you have to have the discipline of community and craft. , a surgeon has to has tools. in my case, i have a very bad memory. what i do is write everything column,d when i write a i sometimes have 200 pages of

research material and notes, and my craft is i lay them out in piles on the floor of my living room, and each pile is a paragraph. i could have 14 paragraphs later crossed the floor. the process of writing is crawling around on the carpet and laying out my piles. sometimes when the ideas are flowing, i am writing notes to myself and that's the best part of my job. that craft disciplines our commitment. when you do that, do you know where it starts and ends, or do you think of it almost as containers, as in ends up, and how it will depend on how it comes together. david: i need to see a geographically or it is just a jumble in my head. when you get the order right,

the words will flow. if you get the order wrong, it's all choppy. and if you get it wrong, you cannot fix it. you have to start over. it's completely new. charlie: you could have a thought or opinion and when you it, nothingconfirm comes out. david: and you know you're wrong. it's about structure. it's not about fancy words. getting the structure right is the foundation. i do it on my floor. some do it on a wall. charlie: but it is about words in the end. yes, you get the piles right and you have the ideas in there, that in the end, you have a command of words. david: yes, but i work for newspaper. saw stephen-- i

king thing online, and this is the lesson of my two favorite writers, orwell and cs lewis, never use a big word when a small one will do. both are some of the greatest stylists of the age. they wrote for radio, so they had to be heard. so they wrote great narratives. .t has to be heard but there is still artistry involved. genius at theed first sentence. during the blitz when he was being bombed in world war ii, he wrote an essay and the first sentence was high above my head, highly civilized human beings are trying to kill me. it's a good first sentence. it drags you write in. did cs lewis have a religious influence? he wrote four love's

which is a book i highly recommend. there are words in there -- you could be christian or not christian -- the definition of pride, of sin, of seoul. the idea that there is a core piece of yourself that with every decision you make you change that core piece of yourself into something more wholly or more degraded. you don't have to believe in god . he is a secular language to describe parts of our moral architecture in a way that is so clear and commonsensical. charlie: but he had a real one-to-one relationship with jesus. became a definitely christian, but it took him a long time to get there. it was a high longing and a lens through which he saw the world. he had a very writer's approach to faith, less ecstatic and more common sense. charlie: indeed.

what youack to referenced, how is your evolution taken place on donald trump? because you have been very strong. david: i didn't take them seriously for the longest time. i knew there was dislocation and a coalition of the dispossessed in the country, but i didn't herk they would turn dispossession to him, just because i don't think he answers -- turn their dispossession to him, just because i do think he answers any of their problems. couplehink there are a of things going on here. one, people are into manners. they are attracted by revolutions in manners and policy. and he has revolutionized the manners of how you run for president. charlie: what do you mean? the first debate, he

had already insulted carly fiorina's face. rand paul says i'm not going to insult his luck but i have a lot to work with over there. that's a way that his looks -- his looks, but i have a lot to work with over there. that is a way to run that nobody had ever run. he took the style of professional wrestling and brought it to politics. and what he did, and i think the most egregious thing we have seen in the last week or two, is he has offered us a different and uglier form of masculinity, which a lot of people are drawn by and a lot of women are repulsed by. we have a form of masculinity in our culture that i think we should be there he proud of. combines man traditionally feminine and traditionally masculine traits. to be successful at work but gentle at home.

to honor the woman in your life at whatever she wants to do, but to be romantic at the same time. we are called on to be both male and female, and i think that is a wonderful way of idealizing what is a great goal for all of us. ,he trump is pure masculinity and his treatment of the world is as an arena where males there as a women are body to complement the status of the man. question oughte to be raised does he mean what he says and does he say what he means? , he has built in his own mind, i am the best, i am the best, i am the best. du believe that? you have written for eight years that?-- do you believe

you have written for eight years about the supreme confidence of barack obama, a man with much less bravado and much less emoting. david: obama is confident, but he backs it up with actual , andedge and substance .ntegrity, and humanity charlie: he doesn't see the world as win-lose. david: he sees it as a conversation. sometimes to a fault. but he has a grace and elegance that is sorely lacking this year. and trump it demises that. that obama's -- trump epitomizes that. is abama's confidence believe in a set of ideas, whereas trumps is a belief in himself. and he has a heartless view and i am completely repulsed by him,

to be honest. i have rarely been this motivated by a political figure in a negative way. he is taking people who have taken economic lumps and telling them -- charlie: he is telling them i am your hero. david: it's authoritarian. they are all stupid and i consolidate, obviously. and, you may not be thriving, but at least you are better than women or mexicans, or muslims. charlie: do you think he can win the nomination? me to it's hard for imagine, but i have been wrong before. his favorable-un-favorability rating is like 25-55 or 60. you're unfavorable rating among women is 75, unless you , you are doomed.

those unfavorable ratings among the total population have been there he stable for eight months. among women, they are rising. how did it happen? he has all of these qualities or lack of qualities, and he is on the precipice of getting the nomination for president. there are two big things. k re is a much discussed piece that the republican party was basically the party of the white working class. they spent 25 years harvesting their votes and offering them nothing. there is a slow building anti-political wave that has been building for 30 years. we live in a diverse country. there are two ways to do that. one is through politics, negotiation, compromise, which is unsatisfying.

people you listen to disagree with. the other way is through force. you get a strong man to bully his way through. in the republican party, the willingness to compromise has become a sign of weakness, so the only alternative is force. there is a tolerance of an authoritarian personality type. charlie: it is almost as if he has become an action hero. does, every interview he he did an interview with us and the washington post, the transcript from the washington him if he thinks african-americans are unfairly targeted by police, concept about which he knows nothing, so he starts talking about immigration. taking ae a student test, you're nervous if you have

no level of preparation. but he is not nervous even if he is unprepared. charlie: my point is, does he know that? or is it that he would see the world in a different way. suggested --ldberg and i realize we are talking about different levels of intellectual preparation, but this donald trump somehow think, look, all those people are supposed to be smart. i was in china. and sitting next to me was a man who was a very, very successful businessman. and he said i just know he's going to be different. i said do you know anybody supporting donald trump, and he said me. me. why? because he will get on the phone and say to patent -- two

vladimir putin, i am coming for you. you say that will never get anything a copy. he believe it will -- he believes -- you say that will never get anything accomplished. he believes it does. david: the idea that you could get on the phone and somehow vladimir putin would see the .ight i mean, do we think the state department is filled with idiots? problems are collocated. and the big problems of the world are not a question of one person coming to the table and being tough. they are structural. saidie: the president has i am more concerned about climate change than isis. david: they are both important. it's hard to rank them. charlie: but he said that. david: but climate change is a comp, structural problem. charlie: that's my point. that's why he said that. but you cannot browse

people -- browbeat people into compliance. somehow, i didn't see it coming, and i am not alone. a lot of us didn't see it coming. i am sure there are people now claiming they did, but in part because we had seen this kind of candidate run before. the party that nominated mitt romney, john mccain, bob dole, bush, nominates a certain kind of person. suddenly, we get a blacks one. nonetheless, there are a lot of trump voters out there. i would run into them, but i didn't take them seriously enough. maybe i was blinded by my own prejudices. i have trouble with the people who do vote for him. how does one regard them?

i have some level of sympathy, because obviously, they have been dislocated by the economy. on the other hand, i think they are supporting a guy who is polluting the cultural atmosphere in which our kids are teded, with the attacks on cruz's wife and all that stuff. i think voters have to have some culpability for that. charlie: so, what happens if donald trump crashes and burns? grievancess to their ? constructed a very optimistic narrative for the republican party, which is that the republican party party had grown obsolete. byhad been imprisoned reaganite categories, which were great for the 1980's. n donald trump was the agent of death for that old structure, and that old structure is never coming back. so, after what i hope will be a

trump defeat, there will be what thomas kuehne called a period.onary after a scientific serum -- scientific get serum collapses, you get all sorts of theories floating all over the place. there will be a segmenting of america and the disunity of the social fabric. the problem with the reaganite orthodoxy is you have all of problems, wage stagnation, inequality, and the republicans had no response because they didn't believe in government for anything. the future of the republican party will have to believe in government action because the structures require it.

country as you said, in after country, society is challenging the liberal order. this is a global phenomenon. have been inacies retreat for years. i think it is the stress of globalization, the stress of

technological change, verizon of religious fundamentalism, the rise of -- the rise of religious fundamentalism, the rise of ethnic nationalism. all of this is making the world and uglier place. charlie: who is articulating the , or of idea or narrative oughture that you believe to end may emerge from all we are going through -- and may emerge from all we are going through? well, i awake. if anybody has seen it, there was this guy named alexander hamilton -- a latino hip-hop artist -- he created -- my shorthand view is that there are two parties but three structures in movements in this country. there is a conservative movement

that believes in limiting government to enhance freedom. a liberal movement believes in using government to enhance equality. and a third movement believes in using government to enhance social mobility, giving people the tools to rise. still think the human capital agenda, not only giving people access to colleges, the giving them the emotional and psychological capacity to compete, is the big agenda. charlie: do you think that might emerge out of all of this? i hope. i am not confident because the country has turned ethnic-nationalist. this is not my view. there are so many things we can do to surround people with loving relationships that would give them the emotional security to thrive and succeed, and we are, unfortunately, graduating from a very economical view of

human nature, which is that we all respond to incentives and tax cuts, to a more relational view, that we are primarily loving creatures and not thinking creatures. we are all in mesh -- he emeshed. charlie: there is no one articulating -- it is almost a third way, in a sense. it's a traditional definition between some sense of social responsibility and conservative fiscal policy that enables you create the skills that enable you to prosper in a modern economy. david: if you do have those relationships, it's very hard to exercise self-control, to sit in a school room and build a teacher, to with a

sit in a modern workplace where computers are doing all of the non-personal stuff. i came across a study in a book called life reimagined by barbara bradley haggard. teacher, to they did a study of all of the guys from world war ii. some rose to high ranks and some didn't. what explains that? you might think intelligence. not that. social class? no. physical courage? no. it was relationship with the mother. given deephad been love by their mothers were capable of giving deep love to the men in their units, and therefore they rose. it's a shift in the way we are thinking about social policy, which is all economic. i think both the right and left are making that shift. pope francis is making that shift. and that opens a wider array. relating family and social connections across the

diversity of the socialized , conservatism needs a worldview that is accurate about human nature. yourhere a key in experience that unlocked this for you, or was it simply the progress of a curious mind? david: i hope it is the progress of a curious mind. i rarely have epiphanies, but i realize things in retrospect. charlie: as we often do. david: the story begins to make sense to me as i go through it. the emotional opening i have been talking about. i wrote a book called the social animal about six years ago. charlie: and talked about it on this program. david: you are good for my books. science of cognitive shows it is wrong to think that reason and emotion are opposite. emotion is the foundation for reason. is a value device, a

motivational device. love is what motivates you to do well in your job. it motivates you to get through med school, through the marine corps. of humans inhink .hose terms we will not always be motivated by incentives. charlie: coaches teach that. love your colleagues. love your teammates. love the game. david: and knowing yourself well enough to have the right desires. some of us think we want one thing but we actually want another because we don't know ourselves well enough. and surrounding yourself -- this is the commitment -- the willingness to fuse yourself with another person, with an identity. from thea quote i love author of captain crilly's mandolin.

in the book, there is a man talking to his daughter about his wife who is now dead. he says love is an art form. .our mother and i had it while we were loving each other -- i am sort of mangling the growing intos were the ground. and as all the pretty blossoms fell from our branches, we discovered we were one tree. and that is what you want when writer, acoming a journalist, or in a relationship, or serving your city. joined withbe so that thing you love that the commitment is rock solid. charlie: the democrats. sanders. no one would've predicted that as well. i am not sure where they would have gone other than some sense of -- or, how do you see it? how is it different from what

trump is about? david: well, sanders is a more than trump,figure for sure. but this is also a product of the segmentation of society. are wondering what to do about it. sanders has a coherent explanation. for 60: which he has had years. like the hedgehog and the fox. the hedgehog knows one thing. that's sanders. the fox knows many things. that's clinton. there is consistency. we have to think for all of our , execution strategy. how is any of this going to happen? i am not sure any candidate solves it. how do you get 60 votes? with think somebody

running for president would have thought about it. that's what you would hope. vessel andn empty people poor things into it, so what comes out as a campaign speech or talking points. understanding where the country is, what is in contrast and opposition, and how do you fix .hat how do you go from poetry to prose? from campaigning to governing? david: i think what barack obama is it's not enough to be good at campaigning. you have to have a set of policies that cuts across lines, a little from column a. coulde: he thought he prevail. he thought his own pursuit of bipartisanship would overwhelm the opposition. think he had a genuine

trans-partisan aspiration, but his policies were not transport us in. they were very predictable. there is a natural alliance between progressive democrats and evangelical christians. you could put together policies that would give each of them what they want in addressing poverty, and get 60 votes, but you have to be willing to step outside the orthodoxy of your party and say i am going to take a little from them -- charlie: but why wouldn't he? david: because it is very damaging. the people in your own party go crazy if you step outside. charlie: is it the nature of the people we are electing today because of redistricting? david: partly. the people who rise in congress have good donors and fundraisers. and they tend to be partisan. to have five people

at the top of society, for congressional leaders and the president, and they have to say ok, this is over. we are going to cling together by the hip and walk through this. we are going to govern in a bipartisan way. it has to come from the president and the congress. do you believe that is possible with paul ryan? david: do. he is a little trapped in the reagan era, but i think his aspirations are real. i think it's possible with hillary clinton. all believe in transparency and over and government come -- , but my government friend says that government privateo some things in for the same reason village people should wear clothing. you don't want to see everything. i think it's the only way to

begin the term. the leadership can make the terms. charlie: sanders and trump. there is a deep passion embedded in the trump and sanders phenomenon for energy, magical thinking. is that a function of disbelief? overestimated to our individual effort. charlie: i believe it's not just about the marketplace. it has to do with your ability and your initiative to change lives, and start with the people that are closest to you. changing lives meaning being open to the things you talked about. all the stuff you believe in terms of love and that there is a capacity to make a difference. david: we all know people who had every disadvantage but one person in their life with total and a set faith of standards. extremely successful people often have one parent who is

very problematic with conditional love and one who is filled with unconditional love. i read a study years ago that if you look at people who are phenomenally successful in good and bad ways, or phenomenally ambitious would be another way to put it, and amazing percentage of them lost a parent between ages 9-12. security was taken away and they became hustlers.

charlie: we had this remarkable piece by jeffrey goldberg, which you and every other writer i know has praised. talk about that piece, what you saw in it, and what it tells you. it's the difference between a dog and a cat, and barack obama is a cat. dogs bound into situations, and cats hang back. charlie: so george w. bush? extreme ando the barack obama is a cat to the extreme. theire: you talk about sense of self, what kind of community they reach out to, and how much of it is their own decision-making. david: i have a strange reaction to goldberg's piece. the first reaction was positive. i like the president more. he is thoughtful. he looks for every reason not to

take action abroad. but there is a reckoning with reality. but the disdain for the and for allt foreign-policy adviser thinkers except himself does smack of an unearned confidence sometimes. i do doubt that. thing toke the worst say in 2016, but i have come to be a believer that we need to fix the establishment. we have big problems. we need big institutions to run them. we need a good state department. the agenda should be reforming establishment. institutions.ng congress is the prime example of an institution that has frayed because the norms of behavior, have beenble codes

ripped away. when i talk about trump as a revolution in manners, the reason we have manners, the reason we don't talk about each other's wives or talk about each other's looks, or call people losers and liars is it enables us to have a conversation. it enables us to be a community and be citizens together. if you rip those away, it's doggy dog. it has reduced us to scorpions. -- dog eat dog. it has reduced us to scorpions. restoring manners, codes of civility, decency, is the prerequisite for restoring institutions and standards of behavior. ago back to eisenhower lot more than i used to, just a politics is a competition in partial truths and you are trying to balance it. charlie: what has contributed to that? there is media,

anonymity on one hand and an instant place to privately grievance, your anger, your protest, your differences, your criticisms, and there are no bounds. david: it may be deeper than that. depending on the character of the people. .hat egotism if you have a basic humility or to value taught humility, you think there's a good chance you are wrong about some stuff. if you are told you have the truth by the short hairs, what do you need other people for? charlie: that's obama? david: well. charlie: you just said that. david: ok, fine. charlie: i'm just trying to get you to articulate. david: it's not only obama. it's rush limbaugh. you -- the thing

about democracy, and this is why politics is noble. it forces you to recognize the other people in the room. you may wish them away. you may think they are jerks. but they are in the room. charlie: but that is the biggest t problem we have had in this country for a while, the absence of people willing to compromise. ronald reagan said it's better to have a piece of the pie than no pie. right? we've lost that. if we were attacked by canada we would get it all back. we need a hostile force to unify us. but it's a matter of skill. darmana guy name richard , who worked for the first president bush. we would go to lunch and he would regale me with stories of craftsmen like skill. guy who would go to

there was ause and barbershop in the white house in those days. he did not have much hair, but he would go to the white house at 3:00 p.m. each wednesday. he didn't really need a haircut, but he would go. so it would say on the pentagon schedule, which everyone could see, that he had an appointment at the white house. those are the kind of tricky games. and try to's wynette control the flow of information. he viewed that -- it's why nixon tried to control the flow of information. he viewed that as our. david: -- power. passing sociale security reform in 1982 or 1983, and it was going to hurt seniors. and everyone had signed off on , and theyxcept him

beat the hell out of him. he finally agreed. that is a skill. execution is a skill. it.baker had he had that skill of execution. and it's a skill -- charlie: lyndon johnson had it. passing a complicated piece of legislation with a bipartisan majority is a skill of execution. if you want an example, see spielberg's movie about lincoln. deftness.political and that's the nobility of politics. we disdain politicians for being dealmakers, but there is a craft, and nobility to it. everyone is dumping all over the elites, but the people i know in

government, the civil servants, they are in for the right reasons. the job is not that glamorous. charlie: you talk about a culture in which those accused of incorrect thoughts face ruinous consequences. david: i do find on campus after campus that i visit that it is more narrowminded than it was five years ago. a book came out in 1980 something about closing the american mind. students don't believe anything. they are nonjudgmental. that's not true. there is a moral system being born. trying to understand what that moral system is is an interesting problem. it is,to figure out what when judgments are made and when they are not. a writer whoby a said it was because of social

media and the on the presence of social media. everyone is afraid of being excluded or condemned, so we are moved from a built culture, i don't want to do what strong, to a shame culture, i don't want to be excluded from the group. the fear of exclusion is the basis -- so, the axis is not right or wrong. its inclusion or noninclusion. and if you are not included, you are doing something wrong in the whole world falls down upon you. the problem with that is, if you have a set of universal truth is in your trying to live up to it, or can stick to those truths fit in. if you live on social media, you are perpetually afraid of the opinions of other people, and that makes you perpetually insecure. i meet people today who, television programs who are scared to death of being misinterpreted, that social

media will be on top of them. it's one click or another. have seen people whose lives have been ruined by one mistake, a small mistake or a gesture. on the other hand, if you are in the world, and this is true for everybody, not just in the media, there is a lot of criticism out there. and if you don't let it affect you, it goes away. you have to realize that if you are in the public eye. if you can't do that, you will be terminally unhappy. you have also said that middle-age has been redefined. at the three candidates we are talking the most about. hillary clinton is 68. donald trump is 69. bernie sanders is 74. they are running for their first term. charlie: and we thought ronald reagan was very old when he ran in his late 60's. that int used to be

your 20's you got married, bought a house, had kids. now that happens in many parts of the country in your early 30's. we have a very unstructured world in our 20's. there's unemployment. you're finding your identity. time is underserved by institutions. there is a company called rework that gives all of the people doing startups in starbucks a place to come work. believe they understand millennial's more than anyone alive. david: that's one big shift. but if you are 54 -- i am hoping a have 30 years of active life ahead of me. charlie: and actually tables would suggest that's true. david: i hope so. i am trying to stay healthy. so, i can think i have a moment where i can do 20 or 25

years of something substantive, satisfying, and maybe significantly new. so, maybe you think of another chapter. tell me jog my memory. you write about people who are in their 70's, and they were writing to you about the perspective they had at the time. asked 5000 readers to send in essays and grade themselves on their lives looking back. they would give himself a higher grade for career than personal life. -- themselves higher grades for career than personal life. a divided their lives into artificial chapters. some people said ok, this was the beginning of a seven-year chapter.

want to a college in seven years? and then after another seven years, another chapter. most unhappy people let time dribble by day by day. making false bifurcations is a useful tool. was aa student who colonel, and every time he went to a new army base, he and his wife would say ok, let's have a personal retreat. what do we think of our parenting style? what do we think of our marriage? and they would write it all down and it was very useful. you can cause yourself fewer problems. there is clear evidence that people get better at living. charlie: brooke astor said to me for a long time i thought about what people -- i cared about what people thought about me. now i only care about what i think about them. david: there's useful advice on marriage. as ad your own selfishness

core problem in a marriage. partners. your selfishness is the only one you can control. that's good advice in any relationship. charlie: great having here. david: always a pleasure.

>> will and in respect -- with all due respect to the presidential campaign, no, no do respect. ♪ >> we have been saying for months now to the king is a -- the 2016 presidential candidates is a three ring circus, but with the events of the past 24 hours as turned into something darker and weirder. it will get to ted cruz's troubles any moment, b