>> rose: welcome to r program, with the ames straw poll coming up with a first look at the republican dan cat-- candidates we look at the contest with mark halper, matthew dowd and ryan lizza. >> rick perry will do it with a couple of advantages. one is his record as governor in terms of job creation is better than mitt romney's record was in terms of job creation. and second, rick perry did not sign into law a health-care plan that republicans don't like as an individual mandate. >> it's a different environmen charlie, than in 2008. i don't think many republicans honestly thought they could beat barack obama or beat the democratic nominee. and we had the eight years of stuff that people were tired of. so the electoratewas slightly different. today it a much more passionate, engaged electorate that thinks they can beat barack obama. >> the conservative point of view would be who can beat

barack obama because that is the most important accomplishment at the end of this. and so i scerely doubt that micheleback mann given her background and views will pass that test. >> rose: we continue this evening with gloria steinham, the subject of a new hbo documentary. >> to take a bird's eye view i would say if the abolitionists and suffragist movement took 100 years, a legal identity as human beings and citizens, that took 100 yrs. now we're striving for legal and social equality in the women's movement, the several right-- civil rights movement that is likely to take 100 years too. and we, i think are about a third of the way or a little more than a third of the way into it. >> rose: a program note jane fonda was scheduled for this evening. she will be seen next week. tonight politics in iowa and gloria steinham when we continue funding for charlie rose was provided by the following

funding for charlie rose was provided by the following: we can all root for. hero who beats the odds and comes out on top. but this isn't just a hollywood storyline. it's happening every day, all across america. every time a storefront opens. or the midnight oil is burned. or when someone chases a dream, not just a dollar. they are small business owners. so if you wanna root for a real hero, support small business. shop small. additional funding provided by these funders: captioning sponsored by

rose communications from our studios in new york city, this is charlie rose. >> rose: the republican presidential race cked into another gear this week. on thursday night eight candidates took the stage in ames, iowa, in this year's second major presidential debate. the unanimously criticized president obama's handling of the economy. the tone of the evening was defined by sparri by former governor timpawlenty and minnesota congresswoman michelle bachmann. here is a look at some the exchanges last night. >> she has a record of missting and maybing false statements. >> governopawlenty cut a deal with the special interest groups and he put in the same bill a vote to increase the cigarette tax as well as a vote that would take away protections from the unborn. >> she speaks of leading these effos in washington and minnesota, leading and failing is not the objective. >> i didn't cut deals with special interests. where you put prot life

issue together with tax increase issues. that is a fundamental, it's a nonnegotiate am. and when we come to a nonnegotiable, we must stand and i stand. >> obamacare was patterned after mitt's plan in massachusetts. and for mitt or anyone else to say that there aren't substantial similarities or they are not essentially the same plan, it just isn't credible. so that's why i called it o bom ney care and i think that's a fair label. and i am happy to call it that again tight. >> i think i liked tim's answer at the last debate better. (laughter) >> there's some similarities between what we did in massachusetts and what president obama did. but there's some big differences. and one is i believe in the tenth amendment of the constituti. and that says that powers not specifically granted to the feral government are reserved by the states and the people. we put tether a plan that was right for massachetts. the president took the power of the people and the states away from them and put in

place a one size fits all plan. it's bad law, it's bad constitutional lawit's bad medicine and if i'm president of the united states on my first day i will direct the secretary of hhs to grant a waiver from obamacare to all 50 states. when i was at-- capital we invested in about 100 differt companies. not all of them worked. i know there are some people in washington that don't understand how the free economy works. they think if you invest in a business it's always going to go well. anthey don't always go well. but i'm very proud of the fact that i learned about how you can be successful with enterprise, why we lose jobs, how we gain jobs, and overall in those 100 businesses we invested in, tens of thousands of jobs, net-net were created. >> some people have suggested that maybe you're running for president in the wrong party. >> chris, let me just say i'm proud of my service to this country if you love your country, you serve her. during a time of war, during a time of economic hardship, when asked to serve your country, in a sensitive

position where you can actually bring a background to help your nation, i'm the kind of person who is going to stand up and do it and i will take that philosophy to my grave. >>ose: the contentious debate comes at a pov at-- pivotal moment. the straw poll will be an earlyest of the candidates appeal. and tas governor rick perry set to announce his candidacy. >> joining me matthew dowd, rynea lizza and mark halperin. mark, tell me why this straw poll is important? >> well, this whole weekend is important. the race has been going on for obviously many months. but any of our colleagues on the ground here will tell you there's an intensity to this weekend because of the straw poll, the debate on thursday night, and then both the unexpected arrival into this narrative of both sarah palin and rick perry. i think the straw poll's most important to say whether tim pawlenty will have the ca passit ot go forward as a real force in the race or a force in the

race. and if michele bachman wins the spa poll handily which i don't rule out, she will put herself somewhere where rick perry will have to condition tend with here in iowa because she will have a big head start. >> ros what would you add to that, matthew? >> the only thing i will add to that i totally agree with mark it is a big weekend for all those reasons. the straw vote usually never picks the winner but it usually always picks the losers. so out of this we'll have on additiona caidate come in tomorrow, rick perry, the governor. but i think we'll eliminate probably two o thr or four over time because of the straw poll. so while the str poll won't cessarily-- hasn't necessarily er picked the republican nominee, per se, it usually always pears the field down and says these are the guys who aren't going to go down. >> rose: how is it conducted. you have to be an iowa registered vor. by the time the election happens. and so there is going to be a bunch of 17-year-olds involved in this straw poll for the first time that did

not exist before. >> rose: did the debate have impact, do you think, matthew? >> the debate have an impact. the interesting thing about the debate, i think, was that it was can the das reappeared that had kind of begun off the radar screen and candidates disappeared after the debate and one who hasn't entered is about to appear. but i think it is highlighted the competition now that exists between tim pawlenty and michele bachmann because mark is right this is basically a three way race, add those two and ron paul, but that debate and the testy exchange that happened between tim pawlenty and michele bachmann basically said what was about to happen in the straw vote tomorrow which is a serious competition. and in the end, only one of those two is going to be able to go on imy view once governor perry gets in the race. so the debate highlighted what is answer more important tomorrow even more between those two can at das. >> you've been following michele bachmann, you wrote a profile on her. tell me, give us a sense of how she has emerg to be where she is with the possibilitof winning this

straw poll and winning iowa. >> well p in a sense she's come out of nowhere. this was one who was a state senator in minnesota up until she won a seat in congress in 20 of. -- 2060. you can look at the president from how he went from a senate state senator and into the white house so maybe obama sort of lowered the bar for entry, bar of entry for all politicians. she really made a name for heelf in washington as a sort of cable news talking head, did a lot of that in her first few years. and once 2008 comes along and the economic crisis, she parked herself as one of the leaders of the then not even named yet but the sort 6 key party movement, she was rallying against tarp, et cetera. really transformed herself into economic issues candidate. her background and her history is in the evangelical christian

movement. she went to orel roberts evangelical law school, she was an antiabortion activist, a sidewalk counsor early in her activist career. and that's sort of her background what forms her. >> rose: what is expected of rick perry. he's going to announce a preannouncement in south carolina, mark. and why is it that there is a general expectation that rick perry could jump to the top of the field in challenging mitt romney. >> well, it's going to be a full throated announcement in south carolina. then he goes to new hampshire, both on saturday and comes hereo iowa at a dinner on sunday night. that dinner extend open invitations to the existing candidates. they all declined or failed o to respond but after rick perry said he was going now michele bachmann said she is going. so sunday we'll get a realtime preview of how those two look head-to-head. i think if rick perry lives up to what his people are hoping for and expecting in

terms of fund-raising, endorsements, media coverage, and buzz, that he is got the potential to within a month and a half make this effectively's two perch race with mitt romney. his potential is to crowd out michele bachmann and tim pawlenty who right now are the two most likely potential romney alternives. this race has been froze then time as everyone has said who will the romne alternative ll be could it have been barbour, daniels or any number of people who chose not to run. there is a laundry list of people whik chris christie, and others, jeb bush, paul ryan who republicans continue to pine for. i think perry comes in and ends the speculation about will there be yet another candidate assume-- assuming he doesn't come in and flame out. again if he lives up to his potential and what his people say they are going to do particularly on fund-raising. i think he becomes a very, very strong candidate and has the potential, because he's going to run on a jobs mess anding but he's got as ryan said, about bachmann he

has the background of a soci conservative and tea party pioneer but will run on a single issue, on jobs. and that makes him foremidable again i will say third time, if he performs up to the expectations. >> rose: matthew, you know a thing or two about texas politicians. tell us about rick perry. and also why there is conflict with the bush teams. >> sure. i have known rick perry for 25 years. i actually took rick perry's filing when i ran the tech as democratic part and he filed as a democrat for state reb from an lean, i took his filing. so i have known the guy and watched him over the last 25 years. this is a very, very, very talented politician. and very-- he's got a keen sense of what touches voters and message discipline. he at this point in my view is even better than george w. bush was at this point in entering the presidential race. he's got a much better sense of himself. he's got a much better discipline in how he campaigns and a much better actually message walking

into this race, anti-washington, more states' rights, much more passionate obama than the other governors than had surfaced in this race. so i think mark's totally right on this. there are many expectations this guy. the proems that, some of the prlems that he has, he has a tendency to have a little bit of a thin skin that i've watched and noticed. if he is pressed too hard ere is too much of a pressure put on him, he can sometimes say things and overreact to things. another downside that he has is he sounds and his mannerisms appear a lot like the former president. i mean a lot like the former president. he's a different guy. his pedigree is totally different. this is a guy that grew up in paint creek texas which doesn't even have a stoplight in it and he went to a land grant chrejts, an agi, texta a & m so none of the yale, harvard, he never had money. s mom made his own clothes, sowed his underwear when he went to college this guy is texan on steroids. and so i think mark is right,

he's never really been vetted. how he survives that vet and the analysis andspotlight over the next four to six weeks will tell a lot. but my prediction is if he gets through that, he will be immediately become the leading candidate for the republican nomination for president just by virtue of his message, his ability and the place he sits in this campaign. >> rose: does he have a karl rove and matthew dowd on his side that can give him the kind of strategy that he needs to win >> dave carne who is probably thequivalent of karl for governor perry who has been wh him. he lives in new hampshire but has co down and run his mpaigns in texas for governorhe has a great sense of new hampshire. he actually worked for newt gingrich until his campaign impod poed. so dave carney is the karl rove version of that. >> rose: many people have said thaperry probably will make a big splash and do well or flame out. those will be the two alternatives right away. >> i think that's right. look, there are two metrics to see within those six weeks i mentioned before, comparing fred thompson and

wes clark, the democrat who is the other example often given. one is how much money does perry raise. there is talk that they plan to bank a lot of money in a hurry. thompson was not an effective fund-raiser. and didn't have the pedigree as a fund-raiser that perry has. the other metric is how hard he works. fred thompson did not work particularly hard. governor perry is a hard worker and a hard campaigner. to go back to the question of does he have a karl rove and a matthew dowd, perry has around him what history shows is the ideal balance for people who win their party's nomination. he has a bunch of loyalists who have been with him for a long time. and by some happenstance and some planning, a lot of them have national campaign experience. so you have got loyalists but people who know the game. and that's a big advantage over some of the oth people particularly for somebody like perry, even though he's running in a tough state, many tis, fit time presidential candidates are always at a handicap. and one of the advantages if you were doing a balance sheet, one of the advantages governor romney has over

rick perry is he has run before. and the improvement of romney 12 versus romney 8 is substantial. and again i think will be a big advantage for him particular as matthew points out bause of that thin skin that governor perry has sometimes exhibited. that is a classic multiplier problem for first time candidates. >> rose: it is also said by some that governor perry has the advantage that ronald reagan had in that people underestimate him and that always served his end. >> i think what perry has, he has had a bit of a teflon coating. he said some rather sort of off putting things at times. he talked about texas seceding at one point which i think today inhe republican caucus will be an asset to him. because there are so many republican voters so sick of washington and the federal government. you about he seems to have a teflon capacity. the other comparison to ronald reagan is he always seems to be in the right place at the right time in politics. this is a guy that has never lost a single race. i think he's 18 for 1

he ran as a democrat for years as a state rep. then he switched parties as texas was moving to a republican state. he won. and then he gets elected lt. governor in 1998 and bush gets elected president. and he becomes governor and now he has been the longest running governor. now he sits here, he says he is not going to run, not gointo unare. the fielddoesn't coalesce. the heat of the republican vote starts increasing, they are looking for a passionate candidate. they don't want michele bachmann. they really worry about michele bachmann and her able so all of a sudden perry is left, the field is left for perry to sort of surface in. so this guy like ronald reagan is very lucky and like ronald reagan has an unbelievable tefn coating so far as mark said. but we'll see what that spotlight does over the course othe next four weeks. >> rose: to romney, mark i have in front of me your grading of the debate last night. a minus for mitt romney. b plus for michele bachmann, pawlenty b. huntsman c plus, gingrich c

plus, sanatorium you gave a c. ron paul you gave a c minus, cain you gave a c minus. romney, give us a sense of this campaign which is almost a stealth campaign with much focus on organization and money. >> romney has purposefully laid low. he's done very few events this year. extraordinarily few number of events. and he's purposefully focused on being in the conversation when it suits his purposes but not bein dragged into every little debate or even every big debate. the debate on the debt ceiling, for instance, he laid low. as i said before he is a better candidate but he still has a glass jaw. and although he is the obvious and clear front runner right now, he is a weak front-runner. his support is neither deep r broad and there he is, the vacuum that rick perry is stepping into is created by a number of republican donors, politicians, rank and file activts who simply don't want mitt romney to be the nominee. either they don't like him, they think es he a a phoney

or they don't think he will be a strong general election candidate. just as romney has been running on obama and jobs and the failed obama economy from his point of view, rick perry is going to do the same thing. rick perry is going to do it with a couple advantages. one is his record as governor in terms of job creation is much better than mitt romney's recd was as govern in terms of job creation. and second, rick perry did not sign into law a health-care plan that republicans don't like as an individual mandate. those are big advantages. and undergirding all that, even though perry will not emphasize it, is there are constituencies within the republican party, gun owners, veterans, home schoolers, states righters, tea party activists, religio conservatives who perry has huge support from. and where governor romney struggles. governor romney is going to have to figure out a way to stand up to what will be, i think, a focious assault from rick rry. and it remains to be seen how he can come back. perry's vulnerabilities in a

general election are manifest. his vulnerabilities in the context of a republican nominating contest are difficult to see at this pot. >> i was going to say even when he is at the debate he doesn't really seem like he's debating. i mean last night-- . >> rose: he sort of stood above. >> stood above it. he didn't take the responsibility to respond to pawlenty's crack at him at one point. romney is running a general election campaign up to this point. very methodical campaign. he's running much closer to who he was as massachusetts of governor which is a fairly moderate republican, even though the republican party has shifted to the right over the last few years, romney himself is running on a more, as a more moderate mitt romney. >> rose: so looking ahead to the general election in a way. >> that's right. we're in the stage of the campaign where the grass roots really defines the top candidates. where someone like michele bachmann who is far, far to the right will be ahead in the polls and there will be a lot of energy surrounding a candidate like that. you know, the dating phase of the campaign. i think we're going to move

into very quicklyhere, the who do you want to marry phase. and ifhis election is similar to other republican nominating fights the electorate will start, the conservative point of view will no longer be who is the purist on this issue or that issue, the conservative point of view will be who can beat barack obama. because from a qon serve difficult republican perspective that is the most important accomplishment at the end of this. and so i sincerely doubt that michele bachmann given her background and views will pass that test. and perry, you know, open question, you talked about how he was forced secession t that si fairly radical position to have. i don't know what he ss about it today. but i think elect ability at some point will come into play in this campaign. and the test, the purity in these early debates will start to fade a little bit. >> rose: matthew, is there a sense that this is a republican year ter of republican candidates. do they believe that it's theirs to lose? >> i think what they believe, in the last two weeks, you

could feel the change in what their thought was. i think two or three weeks ago and for the first six months of this year they thought well we should get the nomination. there is a possibility that we could beat barack obamament it is probably a long shot because he's a great campaigner. and probably the economy may come back. it's a shot it would be good to do. but now i think there is a total sense that whoever is the nominee, has a higher degree of probability of being elected president today than it was two weeks okay or a month ago. and that has changed, i think, the dynamic of the field. and while elect ability i think is always iortant, i think today because people think barack obama, republicans think barack obama is so bad off today that lech ability while important has diminute shalled. and ability to speak to the passion of the voters has increased. d i think that hurts mitt romney. it's why michele bachmann has ris be in the polls. romney still among voters, he has100% name recognition but only 38% of republican

voters are willing to vote fohim today. because they don't see a passion, they don't don't get a sense of his core. they know he has experience, has a good staff and know he has money but there is still a see that maybe he's not the guy. and so to me today is right now republican voters think man, we really have a shot at beating barack obama. so let's look around and figure out who has got the most passion and who has got the highest degree of possibility of wins that is why everybody i think today after the debate the interesting thing was many people thought rick perry won the debate by not being there and that he is the subject of conversation with many people talking about. as everyone has said in this program, we have to wait and see how he performs but that's where the environment is. it's a different environment, charlie, than it was in 23008. i don't think many republicans honestly thought they could beat barack obama or beat the democratic nominee. and we had the eight years of stuff people were tired of. so the electorate was slightly different. today it is a much more passionate, engaged electorate that thinks they can beat barack obama.

>> rose: mark? mark, as you have written i think not that much difference between the candidates in terms of what they show in the debate and therefore the decision will be based on these other things in terms of passion, in terms of elect ability, in terms of othe factors? >> i think matthew is exactly right in fming the mood of the republican party. they think now if they don't blow it, if theyind the right person to nominate a lot of republicans, rk and file voters but also a lot of elites in the party think they will win this election. not just that they can. and that is a big change from just a few months ago as matthew suggested. the challenge for the other candidates, again if perry launches strong, in terms of financial resources and in terms of an ability to be in the conversation every day, at's going to be very difficult for anyone but maybe michele bachmann to play at that level. because the debates will be focused on romney and perry and perhaps bachmann.

the profile, the investigative reporting for better or for worse, all of that is really i think going to focus on romney and perry. and we'll see if the field does win out. if you do see people dropping out after ames. alough i am not sure that is actlly going to happen given certain results. we may not see people drop out. but the debates which going to become more regular as we move into the fall, they could play a role, particularly for perry who one of the ways he does nee to prove himself is can he perform well in a national debate with national scrutiny on international issues that he's not dealt with before as a politician. >> rose: speak of international issues, where is jon huntsman in this race. >> jon huntsman to me last night was the guy that the republicans pi if they get crushed in this election. and they have a sort of soul-searching four years and then you go back to someone like huntsman. but it's clearly not huntsman's time, right. heantses to talk about china. he wants to talk about foreign policy. he's been away for the last

two years when literally the republican party has dramatically change, right. so he was off in china as barack obama's ambassador while the tea party was rising, while the backlash against obama and his policies was happening out in america. and he comes back from china. has a campaign staff that's put together a plan for him. >> rose: a lot of former mccain. >> a lot of former mccain guys who are hoping they can bottle that magic one more time. and he looks very much out of place in this party. >> rose: matthew, what did you think of jon huntsman performance so far as a candidate, not just in the debate last night but so far as a candidate? >> in my view, he just does not fit the temperature of the republican electorate at all. i think he was an impressive governor i think he comes across well and even tempered. but he is too cool for electorate that's very hot. he's just way too cool. it's part of tim pawlenty's problem. but jon huntsman is well-spoken. he's well informed in all that.

he just does not fit the time and the moment that exists today. and he had a great few days when everybody thought oh this is going to be interesting. for all intents and purposes he's been off the radar screen of everybody's consideration. and last night wasnother factor in that. but he just does not fit the temperature ofhe electorate at a time of h, he's too cool. >> finally there is sarah palin, mark. >> she showed up here in iowa today, the third time she has put herself in a first in the nation state in order to apparently step on someone else's message. she did it to mitt romney's announcement. she did it to michele bachmann. i always thought theres with a good chance she'd run. it remains to be seen if she did run unless she had a quiclaunch, could she recover some of the poll standings she had given governor perry and michele bachmann take up a lot of the same space that presumably governor palin would try to occupy. but if she wants to be a player in this, if she wants it to have her voice be in the conversation in a big way for the next year, i

think she will run and she should run. because in a presintial year, if you are not a candidate, you are just not going to get the same kind of attention. she has become-- a year ago she was the most powerful person in the party. she no longer has that standing by any mean. but if she put people around her, has good instincts, and makes smart decions, she could do what michele bachmann did which is in short order build herself up. too many republicans for her to be the nominee a this point, think she's not the right horse to bet on. that she would to the do well in a general election and that lech ability thing as matthew said is always important. and i think it is particularly important at a time when the pties collective attitude including senior aides of a lot of these candidates is if we don't blow it, if we pick the right person we win the white house back. >> rose: you have a prediction on the straw poll? >> as mark said, my pre -- it's going to be three way, ron paul, tim paw lenty and michelle backmann. as of right now because she's got passion, prediction as of right now michele bachmann wins the

straw poll. she just has the passion, that movement behind her before rick perry gets in the race so my bet is michele bachmann wins this thing just because she's got that emotion behind her. >> rose: mark? >> i agree exactly. and i would not be surprised, i'm not predicting it, but i would not be surprised if ron paul beat governor pawlenty. he's put in a lot oftime and effort here but his crowds have not been that big. he's performing well sometimes, not well other times. so i think if i had to predict i would say bachmann and those other two guys could be close. i think she could do quite well. she may not just win but by a decent margin. >> and then what would that shall did -- suppose she does. what does that do for her. >> she wins it is almost set up where she has to win now. and it will be a big deal. she'll get another round of publicity and morning shows. >> on the cover of "newsweek" last week. >> she might not want to sit for another portrait on a news magazine but it will be important to her in terms of nd-raising, in tms of perhap you know, putting a stake in pawlenty's

campaign. and yeah, she is the only one at the end of that debate last night that said that made going to the straw poll and voting for herr closing message. she's got her eyes on that. >> and if she gets big f she wins this, could it scare palin off? >> well, i think to me palin already has been jumped over. i means that's the thing today. and i think palin what she has done in iowa in the last 24 hours is a sense that michele bachmann's jumped over here and now rick perry is about to jump over her. and she still wants to be heard. and she still wants her voice to be heard. but as a real credible candidate for president this area, i think she es her time passing by with these two other attractive candidate was speak to the conservative movement very well in a very disciplined way. i think she's seeing her time going by. >> rose: thank you, matthew, thank you, mark. i wish i was i iowa but there you go. within thanks. take care. >> rose: thank you, ryan. thank you. within gloria steinham is here. she is a writer, an activist,

for social and political instices. she's become the face and thsymbol of the women's liberation movement of the 1960s and '70s. hbo has documented her life in a new film "gloria in her own words" here is a look at the trailer. >> what we are talking about is a revolution, and not a reform. >>t gives me great pleasure to present to you doaria steinham. >> are we going to win? yes! >> there's something in us who knows that are you not the boss of me. and i began to seek out what was then the burgeoning women's movement. wherever we went there would be these huge owds. >> just let them stop era and we will become those radicals. >> the idea of a feminist magazine seemed crazy to people it sold out, hugely. as i look back, feminism starts out being very simple. and it ends up being a worldview. that questions hierarchy all together.

>> rose: welcome. >> thank you so much. >> rose: it's been too long. tell me about the documentary. how did this thing get started? there is a guy named philip coonheart. >> when they toll me this was the time, i thought well-- . >> rose: time for what? >> yeah, rht. no, i thought actually i'm going to live to 100 but still, i am 77 so maybe it is. but it was kind of like leaping f a cliff, yo know. or maybe it is more like gog to physician because what i did was simply to sit there through too long-- two long interviews and answer every question as honestly as i could. because i think it's superimportant that we tell our stories honestly. and that was it. and then they did everything else. >> at this stage of the game is it sort of interesting to dot, to think about it or is it still an element of i'm a private person and i don't really want to go there? >> well, there's not much left in my life anyway wah.

and also i trusted them. and i do think that it's really important that, that we tell our stories. because our, the human mind is organized on narrative and on imagery. we don't learn really from statistics and again rallities, we learn-- generallities, we learn from stories. and if we don't honestly tell our story, other people think that we are somehow different if we did anything. and that disenpowers them rather than empowering them. but i don't honestly think we can see our own lives very well. we're looking at the trees. and i had to debate on them to see the forest. i had no idea. >> no you never do. people come up and tell you what you mean and you don't really understand it because are you worried about the next five minutes. >> yeah, and it's what you mean to other people which you can't possiblysee. so you know, they have found things i didn't know exted. you know, that richard nixon talked about me and the oval office, hello. >> what did you learn about yourself that perhaps you

didn't realize? >> well, the most, one of the moving things for me was looking at myself inmy late 20 and just feeling a compassion, you know, because this young woman was so vulnerable and so not understanding. >> yet you seem so, at the time, confident. you seemed so eloquent. you seemed so talented. >> wait until you see this documentary. i'm not so sure. >> i am ironing while being photographed by a canadian document arian, you know this vulnerable person. and i just, i found it very, very moving too. and i don't know what other people will get out of it. but i hope very much that they think about how far we've come in 30 or 40 years. and how far we have to go. and where they would like to be in 30 or 40 yearsz.

>> re: let's speak to that and come back to the personal. >> where are we and where do we have to go? how long do we have. >> take a bird's eye view, i would say if the abolitionist and suffrageate movement took 100 years to gain for you know, women of all races anden of color, a legal ideity as human beings and citizens, that took 100 years. now we're striving for legal and social equality in the women's movement, the civil rights movement,ed gay and lesbian movement. that is likely to take 100 years too and we are a little more than a third of the way into it we changed our ideas hugely. we no long think that women's position or racial charteristics are natural, you know, we understand. we're all human beings in these rolls are azy. we know we have shared-- we've changed consciousness and that goes

very fast because it's within our control. then we start to try to make the laws have some relationship to justice. and that takes longer. then we try to change institutions and the way power is distributed and that takes longerment so i would say we're kind of through the consciousness raising stage so we still realize things every day. and that's the fun part. the big aha. >> and where do we stand in terms of the rest of the world? as a nation. >> well, that's amazingly not good. and i think the american exceptionalism tradition is used against women and other groups because the idea is we-- america is better and more equal than any other place. actually we're 234780, 70 in terms of representation nationally for women. >> in parliaments. >> in nationalovernments. >> and we're way down the list on everything. i mean we're virtually the

only industrial democracy in the world that doesn't teach sex education that doesn't have child care that doesn't have a much better health-care system. >> and what part -- >> those affect women more just because of chi aring,hey affect men too. >> biggest changes in the workplace? >> yeah, women certainly have transformed the workplace flooding into the workplace. but if you consider say a woman with a ba and a man with a ba, the man will over his lifetime earn 2 million dollars more. >> but if you look at those coming out today, do they earn the same? >> in terms of equivalent places. >> no. >> nottover a lifetime because it takes in periods behind it. >> no, they still don't earn, i mean you know, you have to look at each profession. because some are better than others. >> i understand they are coming out of harvard law school that they would pay a man or a woman the same, the best law firm. >> the advancement is not the same, even absent the

question-- . >> rose: is that still part of this questionwhen i was coming out of law school as to whether a woman would stay with theirm, or whether she would snd time working a the home with her children. >> but the question is now why men are not parents. and men are doing mucmore than their fathers, much more than their fathers. >> rose: in terms of being a parent. >> a real parent, yeah, a real parent. and many love it and fight for it and fight for parental leave and you know, but women are still doing twice as mh. so we're getting there. but that is such an important point not only for kids who otherwise don't grow up knowing that men n be loving and nurturing, but also for our political life. because if we think about hillary clinton, for instance be, as a candidate, you know, she was an excellent candidate but it seemed to me to be too soon because we associate female

authority with childhood still. >> rose: what do you think would happen if hillary was running against barack obama today? >> well, i don't want to see people running-- i mean i think it was hideous plot that two firsts had to run against each other. >> rose: i agree. aeally interesting question was whether gender was a part of what happened in that primary. i know lots of people who wish she was president today. partly because they have come to admire her even more. and in some cases because they have come to question policies of the president. >> she has had more experience with the trawl right wing. she had eight years dealing with the trawl right wing. >> rose: the broad right-wing conspiracy. >> which turned out to be true. all right. now let's switch over to you. first of all n terms of the world, where is the world the most behind? is it the mile east? in the growthf women's equality and the growth of feminism in the sense of closing the gaps? >> well, you know, it's

wherever there is the least democracy, because obviously democracy means everybody. it doesn't just mean half the population. and it is wherever women are least in control of their reproductive lives. because you know, whether you can decide when to have kids or whether to have kids is the biggest determinate of everything el, you know, are you healthy or not. you know, there are places as you know where there is child marriage where there is female genital mutilation in order to keep-- you know, so you know it dependses on whether or not certain basic rights are present. the ones we know, freedom of speech and so on but also productive freed as a basic human right. >> but you said in 2080 was too early for a woman to be president. do you think 2016 is too early? >> no, i don't. actually i think that hillary clinton behaved so well under pressure and fire and was so courageous and so smart that she kind of

changed the molecules in the air and many me people now can imagine a female chief of state than could before. rose: and what of the fact that two of the most talked about candidates among women are the two on the republican side. >> well, that's inevitable too. i mean i won $50 because i bet that as soon as hillary clinton got all those, you ow, votes in the primaries, that the republicans would put up a vice presidential woman candidate. and that they would not be smart enough to understand wasn't biology t was issues so they would get anybody. and that is exactly what they did. they got anybody, sarah palin. >> rose: so if she was elected, palin or bachmann, it would not advance the cause of women. >> no, no. >> rose: because they don't stand for the issues that are important. >> no, it would-- it would put it backward. but i means that's not going to happen.

because these women are in the news but they're not in the majority. if i had to title a st of-- i would say the women only a man could love. because the voters are more men than women and much more white than-- z. >> rose: they have a lot of women that support them. >> but many more men than women support them. and the women who ar doing the work in congress whether it's you know, barbara boxer or max even-- whoever is, they get-- you know, it's about-- it's not about getting a job for one woman. it's about making life better for all women. and women sense who is going to do that and who isn't. >> rose: you talk about how they found things about your life that even you did not necessarily know about or realized the records were there and how much they dove deeply. if i went back to toledo and iould talk to your dad and your mom, do you think i would find all the qualities that you reflect today back

then. >> that say great question, isn't it. i think probably a lot of them were there before i was 11 or 12. as a nine or ten-year-old, and i think this is true of a lot of women, with boys it's earlier, five to eight or something but i really, you know, i wanted to be a writer. i had, you know, all kinds of ambitions and i knew what i wanted and i knew what i thought. and then the fem nin role comes down upon you like the iron maiden. and suddenly are you saying how clever of you to know what time it is. (laughter) d you're thinking, you know, you are thinking you can't be it, you have to marry it. and that-- . >> rose: did you think all those thoughts. >> of course i did, yeah, i grew up in the 50s. >> rose: did you reject them because you were different. you clearly didn't marry to be it. >> i just kept putting them

off in the middle distance because if you really think that marriage is your only life changing mechanism, as they say, it's a lot like death, you know, because it's the last choice you can make. >> rose: speaking of that. did you quite well. you were marriedhen you were 66. and what did that teach you, what experience, it had to do with the individual man. >> yeah, no, no t taught me a very great deal. and it wasn't, you know, we were in love and we were together, the idea that we would get legally married was made possible by 30 years of changing the marriage laws, so i was no longer giving up all my civil rights by getting married. but necessitated by the fact that he needed a green card. and also there was the great prize blandishment of a cherokee wedding ceremony offered by wilma mankiller who was the chief of the

cherokee nation. >> rose: was that because of you or him b because of her. >> because of her and also because he was from south africa i would get to be a citizen of the new south africa, you know. so a of this sounded great. that's the legal part, obviously the personal part would have been the same no matter what. but after we h been married less than three years he became l. he had brain lymphoma, a kind of lymphoma that is only ithe brain. and sow was ill. >> rose: and you became a caregiver. >> yes. >> rose: and you learn from that as well. >> and i learned from that. but first of all, i have to say that he was an incredible teacher. because he lived 100% in the present. and i live in the future, you know, so he was just right there all the time. he -- care about money. he didn't care about possessions. he would stop his car to rescue an animal no matter if he was an hour late. you know. and that was such, so

helpfuto me, you know, because you know we can only live in the present. >> rose: when you look back on the movement, you had great friends like bela, who almost seemed like a sister to you. is that what it felt like. >> yes, well, i used to hell ter that she was the mother i wished i had and she would always get extremely annoyed and say but i'm not old enough to be your mother. but she was-- . >> rose: when you say the mother you wish you had, meaning? >>. >> well, meaning that-- . >> rose: your mother was an artist. >> she was a journalist. blue that was before i was born. and by the time i came along, she had been kind of defeat bid life, i would say, her spirit had been broken. >> rose: by the time you were born. >> uh-huh, before that. she had had to give up everything she cared about. she had a nervous breakdown as it was then caed. and so she was somebody i looked after and loved and you know, but our roles were

reversed. she was more my child than she was my mothe bela was the protector. she wanted to have. bela was definitely funny and smart and outrageous and also she loved conflict which i desh-- . >> rose: no kidding. >> and i was so grateful for that. >> rose: and was rather good at if. >> yes,and creative. and i hate conflict. i'm conflict averse. i'm in the wrong occupation. >> rose: you were perfectly prepared to skewer with your words. >> yes w my words. >> rose: you were perfectly prepared to engage, to push forward. >> but as a writer you do that and you send it out the door. you don't go out the door with it, you know. >> rose: there was also this the conflict within the feminist movement. what hasn't been said or should be said about conflict within the movement whether it was an imagined or real conflict between bette ferdan and you. give us a sense, unwrap that for us. >> well, she w a decade or

15 or something bore me. and in terms of age. and the book that she wrote, a very valuable book which was enormously valuable was really directed towards helping women well educated quite women in the suburbs come into the labor force and play the role they were entitled to play. and it had a huge impact. but it was more about joining the system as it exists, you know. and so me and bela and national welfare rights organization and lesbian organizations and all these-- you know, we weren't extly what betty had in mind. because we were kind of embarrassing. >> there is a sense she had lost control of what she thought she had helped find? >> the main problem is that nobody can own a movement, as you know.

so and she really felt that she, that she owned a movement. but you know t is something thathere is the thing. if you are an older style person as she was and you have been damaged and not able to do what you ought to be able to do in life, and something comes along that is yours, you say it's all mine. if you are were a younger movement, woman who with equal, same kind of damage but in the w left old left, you know, then you said okay, i've never had credit for anything. nobody going to have credit either not last names. no, you know, it was just two different styles of dealing with the same damage. but the initi damage is the problem. >> what's the misconception about gloria steinham that you think lingers? >> you know, it's hard to see yourself from the outside. >> you just have gone through this experience of being asked. >> yeah. i suppose that the

misconception i mean one is being anti-male, you know, because that comes with the word feminism which it's not at all. become humorless. actually i used to be a comedy writer, but still, you know. all i can say, i'm not sure. we'd have to ask people. but here's what happens about once a month, somebody says to me you're not as bad as everybody says. >> rose: and why do they think they say that? >> i think it's because the image of a feminist is-- . >> rose: strident. >> is strident and i think it's people have been seeing as a normal relationship between men and women one that is-- imbalance, to talk about balance it be very threatening. so it doesn't come out as nothing. >> rose: having your mass coup lynnit ot prove is still a big part of most people's lives. >> well, i can't speak for most people but all the studies that show that a

group of men together are more likely to pick the most assertive or aggressive solution whereas a group of women together are more lily-- . >> rose: which is always an interestg question, and there are some easy answers that are not accurate. people will look at golda mayer or the former president of-- prime minister of india and say see there, when a woman achieves power, they tre power the same way. on the other hand, there is i think some scholarship that suggests that women do bring something different to conflict resolution. >> uh-huh, yes. >> what is that? >> and as journalists, for instance, women all the studies show that women are more likely to report on the civilian population on the post of where they stay longer after the war, for instance. i mean there is a cultural difference it doesn't apply to everyone. but you know, it is a profound difference. and we need to take advantage of it. i mean we have plenty of

conflict in the world. and if we, you think about lie per ya, that was an amazing situation where it was a completely destroyed rogucountry with president-- who was himself a rogue president. >> rose: . >> and it was the womenho crossed the line of religion between muslim and christian, just sat in the roads in their white t-shirts for years. you know, got president taylor sent off to the crimal court. got the war lords in the building where they were supposed to be putting forth the preconditions for the election, it wasn't happening. the women surrounded the building. they wouldn't lethem out of the building until they-- you know. so. >> rose: that's power. >> there is a populist force that we should use. not exclusively but we have to stop looking at the world with one eye closed. we have to open both eyes. >> i think when history was written one of the things that will clearly be said is what might have been if we

had not closed off the talents of half of the population. >> right, right. >> and how much will it-- maybe you can look forward to if, in fact, that talent is energized. >> and of course we've closed it off a bit more. i figured out once that we had been choosing before obama we had been choosing our presidents from six percent of the population. no wonder we were-- . >> rose: exactly. >> right. >> rose: you seem not to have any great regrets. you've lived this life. you've envoyed , it's been fulfilling. >> absolutely. >> rose: you made accomplishments that affected the lives of other people. >> i have regrets. i made mistakes. i have regrets. >> rose: like what? >> i kept on doing the same thing i already knew how to do instead of trying to do something new. i didn't write enough. maybe like a 15 year commitment to some publisher. they reminded me. but at is interesting. things that you didn't do -- >> of course i -- >> you didn't change enough in terms of going to some other place.

>> well, yes, just -- >> that's interesting. there is a great motto for growth. >> followed the fear. >> rebooting. >> followed the fear. >> to grow. >> right. so i becausi could see that what i already knew how to do might be useful, i think because i felt invisible as a child and to make myself adviceable i needed to be useful. does that make sense. >> sure. >> so i did that too much. >> no, i have regrets but i feel incredibly lucky to be doing something i love and care about and a community of huge diversity around the world. >> sure. >> i'm lucky. >> a collection of friends whose life view you have shared. is there anyone that you, and i'm not asking to you tell me a specific person, but do you wanto pick up the phone and say i'm sorry? >> hmmmm, well, i did that with an old lover or too, yes, i did lz did you

say old lover other two. >> yeah, two, yeah, right, ght, especially one, right. i took him to lunch. >> rose: i think we know who. >> no, you don't, no, huh-uh. i think you're guessing wrong. i didn't tell that one. (laughter) >> rose: much success to this, gloria in he own words will air on hbo on august 15th. the incomparle gloria steinham. thank you. >> thank you. >> rose: pleasure toee you. >> thank you.

>> funding for charlie rose has been provided by the coca-cola company, supporting thi program since 2002. >> and american express