Focus 580; Potus Speaks: Finding the Words That Defined the Clinton Presidency

While this is focused 580 it's our television television our telephone talk show. I get a gazillion I do television talk shows but this is this is the show that we do here on the radio every morning and in this hour focus we'll be talking with Michael Waldman he was President Clinton's director of speech writing from 1995 until 1999. He also served as special assistant to the president for policy coordination from 1993 until 95. Previously he was a public interest lawyer and writer since leaving the White House he's taught at the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard and he's authored a book about his experiences in the White House the title is poetess speaks and we should explain that odd word in the title. POTUS stands for president of the United States. So the title POTA speaks finding the words that defined the Clinton presidency. Simon and Schuster is the publisher. As we talk with Michael Waldman your questions are welcome. You can certainly join the conversation by calling the usual number 3 3 3 9 4 5 5. We

also have a toll free line good anywhere that you can hear us 800 to 2 2 9 4 5 5 4 if you call those numbers to call into the show. No one will expect you to pledge. We hope of course you will. It's not required to call into the program. So do join the conversation if you like 3 3 3 w. Wilde toll free 800 1:58 wy aloud and at any point you're certainly welcome to do that. Mr. Waldman Hello. My pleasure. Well thanks very much for that for talking with us today. One thing I am indeed curious about are around the White House do they actually use poetess as as a word. Do they talk to you. In memos about scheduling or things like that less frequently in actual conversation that the Secret Service to use that for example the room where the president is supposed any president. This is not just this president where the president is supposed to wait before going out to give a speech is called the poetess hold. So it's a little bit of a little

bit of mystery. I think the first time I ever I saw the first time I ever saw that was in reference to the vice president who was v protests. I saw that in a news story in it and it jumped right off the page it may just because it looks so sort of odd and I was definitely was curious about whether people actually you know they do it with a sort of a wry sense of humor they do and the first lady is sometimes called FLOTUS. And people in Washington actually do call the Supreme Court of the United States. In the book and in the afterward you tell a story of having invited to the White House Ted Sorensen who worked for JFK for John Kennedy to meet with the White House speechwriters and you explained that you asked for his advice and he said right off the bat Well I would get rid of the department of speech writing. And then he went on to explain a terrific round as I'm sure you bring in somebody else as well the first thing I would do is fire all you guys. And you asked him about about his experiences and and what happened in the Kennedy administration and he explained well if the president

was going to give a speech about agriculture the secretary of agriculture would write the speech and then you went on and said to him Well how many speeches were written for the president at that time. And he said oh maybe one or two a week. How many speeches were written for President Clinton. Well you know you're exactly right. In this day and age it would be wanted to a day. That's a stunning amount of material to have to turn out. Well it really it is it is a huge volume of speeches that have to be written and it really signals a very fundamental change in what it means to be president. Increasingly this sheer volume of speeches and public appearances the use of the bully pulpit has become ever more central to what it means to be president. And there's a lot of reasons for that. You know we said to Ted Sorensen Will didn't.

Didn't Kennedy go out in the Rose Garden. We know we shook Bill Clinton's hand there you know. He did go out to greet visiting groups and Sorenson said sure but he wouldn't you know we wouldn't give him written remarks for something like that. Well right now because of the change in the way the media operates if Clinton or any other president walks into the Rose Garden His remarks will probably be broadcast live nationwide by any one of the four competing 24 hour cable networks dozens of Internet sites. It's a complete change in the way a president can try and lead. I suppose that is is both a curse on the one hand and perhaps also one of the tools that their White House has. On the other the fact that anything the president says at any time you know is going to be news and will be reported on and repeated from coast to coast. It well yes that's true. It's kind of have to take the

media environment the way it is and not worry about it too much but you're right that it in some ways it's. Positive in that it's still the case that only the president has the ability to speak to the entire country so that I remember for example during the budget negotiations in the government shutdown in 1995 Clinton was able to do a lot of his negotiating in public through over you know a terse statement that he would give that would be broadcast live in Congress really would have a much harder time because there are still 535 members of Congress. But at the same time it really makes it much harder for. It made it harder for Clinton and it makes it will make it harder for any president to speak to the whole country at the same time. As you know CNN and FOX and MSNBC and all those folks are broadcasting this stuff. Presidents can no longer easily give Oval Office addresses to the whole country the TV networks

won't. Test them or negotiate endlessly over the topic well you know if it's a war that you know maybe will broadcast that or that the sex scandal certainly but you know other than that it is no guarantee at all that they'll run an Oval Office address. You probably could no longer do a fireside chat even if you wanted to. Oh that's right well you know. For example earlier this year Clinton wanted to give an Oval Office address on U.S.-China relations. Everybody knows that that may be the most important foreign policy question of the next 30 years. That rivalry in the lation ship between the two countries and two out of the three networks said no you know what he crazy sweeps month. You. It's apparently you worked on either you wrote or edited something like 2000 speeches including Or perhaps in addition to that the state of the Union addresses that Mr.

Clinton gave and two inaugurals. This is a tremendous amount of material and I'm sure that that it's a challenge to make sure that these speeches have a consistent voice both in terms of content and style. AD I wonder just how much the president himself is involved in this process. Oh yeah. Well you know a presidential speech is more than just a string of sound bites or applause lines. It's really where presidential personality and politics and policy all come together. And that was especially true with Clinton because he was so very heavily involved in crafting his own words and deciding what to say which which is one of the things that I think it's been a benefit in terms of writing this book because it really gives a window not just on Clinton as a distant figure but really up close. The he he you know was giving speeches long before he ever

made a speech writer and. Would probably would be very heavily involved in the writing of speeches especially the big speeches like State of the Union addresses. If we if we were going to give him a if he was supposed to deliver a 30 minute speech the draft we would give him usually would run about 15 minutes. In other words he would double it. He had to tell the new speechwriters you know we give him Hemingway he turns it into Fokker. And he would. He would. And he would add a lot and he would especially at the podium extemporize and and ad lib and read the crowd and sense when people were not persuaded of something or maybe when they agreed with something and and really put his put himself into it. And I know that that's something that I probably at least early on in

his presidency some people depending upon how you felt either that was a subject of ridicule or perhaps some people thought of it as constructive criticism that he would have said to him Mr. President I think perhaps you've you've gone a little too long or you have this tendency to give speeches that are that have too much in them. They go on too long. Were there times when when you said to him I think perhaps it would be better if we made this shorter rather than longer. Oh. Sure and the joke of it of course is that he he professed he was very aware of it too just when we would give him give a speech with with when he would come across what he regarded as just some empty rhetoric some high flown language he would cross it out and say words words words and he used to walk in after working all late at night on the speech. It would be counting how many words he cut out and then of course he did it in twice as many. But you know it's interesting. After the first few years he

really found his voice and found a way to give the speeches that were long and chock full of policies and some people said they were a laundry list but which actually worked very well and which really connected with people and with Clinton. It was always the case that his speeches were long and had a lot in them. And the commentators. And it's afterwards very frequently would say oh that was terrible it was. It was just a laundry list. But then it would turn out that the public loved it. And Clinton sensed that what people wanted in this kind of post-Cold War era was that there was not one big issue. What people wanted was a real report on all the things the government was doing and that often meant going in great detail into policy. But but he had a pretty sure sense of how to connect with people on that level.

The I think that maybe this is it. This is of course a gross generalization but if you look at at some of our recent presidents and you look at their their rhetorical style their manner of presentation we have had some that were really detail guys. And I think that President Clinton is is one and some that were perhaps better or more inclined to articulate a broad vision sometimes maybe a little vague but they were definitely not detail guys. And and yet both of these styles can be very persuasive and I think perhaps one or two good examples are where Ronald Reagan on the one hand and Bill Clinton. On the other both of them. Oh I don't know if anybody's call Bill Clinton the great communicator both of them I think very skillful communicators and good speech makers but of course both of them very different. Do you have some sort of sense about. How it how one steers a course

in a sense between those two because you have to have a little bit of. Ideally I guess you'd want to have a little bit of both. Well I think I think that that I think that's actually it I think we I think Reagan speeches are were far more prosaic than we remember. And Clinton speeches when you go back and look at them were more had more beauty than we remember. Even when I go back and think about some of the speeches and then I hear them again I think of that that actually was quite uplifting not just all the policies I used to go back and look at Reagan speeches quite a bit. And you're right that he was masterful in so many ways. And I remember. When when we were having the government shutdown in 1995 I wanted to see how Reagan had handled the same issue. And I looked in his speech his remarks the day the government shutdown instead of being something you know very high flown shining city on a hill he said. Today I have returned to the Congress without my

signature H.R. 2 9 1 1 the supplemental appropriations legislation. For the following five reasons. In other words he recognized that part of what a president does is speak the language of state he's really speaking for the government as well as trying to capture the country's ideals. I think that the need to have both elements really has been shown in some ways by the debate in the past three debates. I think that Clinton both had the empathy and the policy and I I think that in some ways especially say in the first debate. Gore put out the policy but without as much of the human touch. And Bush was all human touch with it without a lot of heft on the policy. And you makes you realize you need to do both. Well we have some callers and I want to give them the opportunity to talk with us. Let's start right in with someone and Aurora and this'll be line

number four. Hello. Yes. Hi good morning. I often wondered about that and I'm really glad to be able to speak with you prowl. Do you formulate a speech that has is going to be given by the president. Did he come to you with a outline of what he wants to say and then you do the writing or is it half and half just about how how do you do it. Well if it depended on the speech. In other words after 2000 speech isn't working for him for seven years. We had a pretty good. I had a pretty good sense of what he was going to want to say on most things and he knew what I would need help on and less so on other things. Usually we would meet with him once a week and go over what the what the policies in the messages in and the arguments he wanted to make. And there'd be a lot of notes back and forth. But for some for an

every day speech he often wouldn't take a look at the draft until 10 minutes before he walked out the door to deliver it. Now he wouldn't then go out like a like a robot at Disneyland all of the presidents he would rewrite he would scribble in the margins he would rewrite it and he would ask a lot of questions of the policy advisers or the speech writers it's a real chance for him to dig in and find out what the issue is. That's true for an everyday speech but for something like this to say a state of the Union Address Quinn would block out weeks at a time and schedule to work on virtually nothing else. Lots of go to trade trading outlines back and forth drafts. He would dictate quite a bit and then in the last few days before the delivery of the speech he would rehearse at a teleprompter at a podium in the family theater of the White House and read through the speech and rewrite it as he went along. Say you know I don't want to say this paragraph this way let's say it that way.

And in that way make it all his own. Basically my job during all of that was to sit at the keyboard have and try and capture all the changes that he was making as a historian go over it to see that it the fact I historically correct not so it was some. Times if there is a historical fact every fact that is put in the speech for press for a president at least in theory is very rigorously checked. You use the Council of Economic Advisors or the budget office to check the economic facts or you use. There are a lot of. One of the nice things is you can imagine about being in the White House as you have the huge array of resources in the government. I sometimes think one of the problems for people on the campaign trail who get caught with anecdotes that don't check out is they just don't have the backup that a president has.

But it doesn't tell you that it doesn't always work. There was one speech which I write about in my book which was the speech where he launched his fight for NAF that remember the free trade agreement with Canada and Mexico. And he gave this big speech in the East Room of the White House with Presidents Ford and Bush and Carter standing there. And what happened was. He was handed somehow the wrong version of the speech. There was a version where all the facts were checked out but he was handed the first draft with basically placeholder numbers. And he kind of realized about halfway through that something was wrong. But we spent quite a lot of time trying to clean up that mess. I'm going to jump in here and hope the caller will forgive me and I appreciate her call and her question will go on to some other folks in just a moment I will continue to talk with our guest Michael Waldman. He was President Clinton's director of speech writing in 1995 until 1999 and has written about that in a book titled poetess speaks finding the words that define the

Clinton presidency published by Simon and Schuster. Well we're going to hear is pause for just a moment in fact we're going to do something that we never do the rest of the year. We're going to interrupt this interview for a moment or two. One of things that I appreciate. Maybe most about doing this show is that I don't have to do this. The rest of the time we generally have a 50 minute interview these two blocks do two of these every morning and we go straight through the week. We don't stop we don't pause. It's just you and me and the guest. We can do that only because this is public radio meaning it's listener supported. We don't have commercials we couldn't even if we wanted to. And we're glad that we don't because it gives us an opportunity to do all these things without interruption but that that is possible because listeners supported and now right now this morning would be a great time if you haven't yet done it to make a contribution to 4 4 9 4 5 5 especially important here because this is the last week day and we

have a way to go to the goal. We were pretty confident there we're going to make it. But that means that we also need to have everybody call who listens and if you haven't done yet one of our producers Jack Brighton is here with me in the studio. Hi David. And also in pledge central Heather Miller and we can check with her and get a progress report in a second. You know I wanted to say that the goal for the week first of all is $100000. By Saturday and we hope to meet that goal but we can only do it if you call us with your pledge each specially today is the last day that you can support focus 580 very directly by making that pledge call to 1 7 2 4 4 9 4 5 5. There's also another way that you can pledge and that is online we have made a lot of progress in developing our website over the past year. And I wanted to mention the election website which maybe we haven't talked about enough but you can go there and get everything that we produce related to the election is on that website. All the interviews all the news features even some

television content is there all the debates the editorial board interviews there's hours and hours of stuff that you can listen to. Information about the candidates links to further information about campaign finance various other you know voting records all kinds of things you can get to through our election website and it's very easy to find that if you go to our website the home page you see dot edu. And right up the top of that is election 2000 click on there and it'll take you to this separate election website that we're producing. I'm really interested in people looking at it and telling me what you think if you find it useful let me know. You might like it. You might not. If you don't like it let me know what's wrong and what we have to do better. But while you're checking it out also pledge online there's lots of links to you know to the pledge page A6 you secure a server. And every time we talk about this we get people to make online pledges so I want to make sure that we talk about during this hour and also just mention by the way

an example of a station in Seattle held a one day Cyber pledge day on Wednesday of this week. In that one day they raised one hundred nine thousand dollars just from online pledges. I don't expect we're going to do as well as Seattle station we don't have the population for it but you know this is a very wired city this is this area around here a lot of people are listening to us online. And if you're doing that right now please consider pledging online and just simply do it that way. Let's talk real quick with Heather Miller who's in pledge center maybe again you can kind of tell us where we are at the moment. Hi David. We are over sixty eight thousand dollars on our way to 100000 by midnight Saturday night. We've taken two calls for a.m. and we're waiting to hear from you. Martha is on line and she's waiting. Kathy's waiting and waiting and is waiting. So I hope that our listeners will stop their waiting and go to their phones 2 4 4 9 4 5 5. Make a membership pledge of 40 or 60 dollars per focus 580 and that will be great Jack I would just mention

to go there. The amazing results that the folks in Seattle have have had and I don't want to make a point again that we did right at the beginning is that it has always been the case that for a station our size our listeners have responded in a fabulous fabulous way and that we've always had very healthy fundraisers and it's something that we're really grateful for. But we need to have that continue and continue to grow the base of support and every time we do one of these things one of the things we do is say we have this goal for new folks people who have not contributed before so we're really looking for people who if you're a supporter of the station you can give us a call and make a pledge and be joining us. Join the group we call the friends of W while. So let me give you the number one more time and then we'll get back to our conversation here with Michael Waldman. It's 2 4 4 9 4 5 5 and we will talk again at the end of the show. Thanks Heather. Our guests let me mention one more time Michael Waldman he was President Clinton's director of speech writing

between 1995 and 1900. Mine He also served as special assistant to the president for policy coordination before that between 93 and 95 and he's written a book about some of his experiences working in the White House. The title speaks POTUS which stands for president of the United States. That's published by Simon and Schuster questions are welcome all you have to do is call us 3 3 3 9 4 5 5 toll free 800 2 2 2 9 4 5 5. Next go up is Freeport. And that would be line number one. Hello. Oh yes. Probably the greatest most historic discourse was not written by any presidential call presidential speechwriter Lincoln's Gettysburg Address. A classic our ration you might say that will stand the test of time for hundreds of years. Yes. And a Senate that's a time for hundreds hundreds maybe thousands of years and classics some Asian-American history. I also want to mention

in passing that during the past week. They figure a long time figure of U.S. public life is gone. This was God Saul head of the Communist Party USA wasn't hardly anything in the media about it although ABC did it two minutes ago. Program on it after the end of their newscast and they mean it. Right. Let me comment. Well on the second point is it just as a matter of I'm always disappointed when I read obituaries of people Gus Hawes poses as one but just how many people from the. The most interesting era of recent American history in some ways you know how many figures from the New Deal in the Truman administration are still with us and are passing away more or less unnoticed and realizing that a lot of these folks are still here and you know I could go talk to them but. Because right that they didn't get that much attention.

The Gettysburg Address is in my view along with King's speech at the Lincoln Memorial lead to the greatest American speech. And as far as we know Lincoln did write it himself. Two interesting points. One is that Lincoln. And this goes to how the presidency is changed. Lincoln really only gave three major addresses during his entire presidency. His two inaugural addresses and the guestbook address. He was very careful about not speaking in public unless he had something very specific to say. But even Lincoln in his famous first inaugural address had help from from his speechwriter as it were who was Secretary of State Seward who wrote the first draft of the pair ration of that speech which Lincoln was one of the greatest prose stylist in American history. And there have been many presidents or speechwriters for that matter WHO ARE HIS

who are his who come. Quote When when President John F. Kennedy was preparing for his inaugural address he asked Ted Sorensen to go read the Gettysburg Address and find out what was its secret. And Science reported back always. Never used two words when one will do. Never use a two syllable word when a one syllable word. I think that that's that is it and it it was it was made at a time when elaborate high blown high flown overblown sometimes rhetoric was that was the order of the day and perhaps what makes that speech stand out is that it's it's elegant but it's also spare and probably for the time was almost conversational. Wes was really playing sort of very plain spoken which whether it's true or not is I guess when you think of Abraham Lincoln that's the that's the quality that you think off. Well there's another thing which is changed and not for the better. And this is something I

write about in my book. Back then the audience that Lincoln was speaking to had a very clear set of common knowledge. Of great texts that Lincoln could make reference to. You know when Lincoln said house divided against itself cannot stand it in spring when he gave that speech in 1858 in Springfield. He wasn't coining a great soundbite. He was quoting scripture and everyone in his audience knew that. You know out on the frontier then a lot of people didn't and they had very few books and a lot of people were illiterate but they knew their Bible and they knew their Shakespeare. And nowadays the only kind of common culture that we have perhaps is TV in movies. When John McCain says I'm Luke Skywalker fighting the Death Star everyone knows what that means. Clinton has a very to me. Impressive.

Understanding of the texts of American History of Scripture of literature he often doesn't get a chance to use it. I remember when Ron Brown was on a mission to Croatia and his plane crashed You may remember that along with a lot of other people whose lives were lost. You can imagine it was very upsetting to those of us who drowned in the White House and Clinton rushed up to Ron Brown's house and we got a phone call from Alexis Herman who was then a member of the White House staff before joining the cabinet and she said the president's going to the Commerce Department a few minutes to speak to the employees there. Do you think you could write something up. And we said well sure we'll try it. Did or does. It's one of those moments where you you don't know what tense you supposed to use. The Ron Brown have a favorite Bible passage for him. And she said yes he does. The nativity got to go quick and we had what she said with a Bible passage

but we hoped we'd copy that down right and we didn't really know if we had it accurately we didn't know if we we had a real bible to happen so we only had a few minutes. So we looked on the Internet we thumb through Bibles we called priests and ministers and we just could not find it. So we had no choice but to go over to the Commerce Department. And Clinton came in a very emotional scene. We went up to him and one of my colleagues handed him the speech and said Mr. President we have something for you. There's only one problem. This Bible passage at the end here. We don't know if it's a real bible passage. And Quint looked at it and said Oh Isaiah. This is the new English translation. I prefer King James. That's the one I'll use. And you know you don't really need to do that as president. I think the only time Clinton would walk into a room and not have to in some measure dumbed down

his speech. The only time he could walk in and know that the audience would get all literary references and all of the historic and scriptural references is in an African-American church black church even in the horse community I think there you put your finger on something that. That sets people shaking their heads about Bill Clinton and whether they are supporters or detractors that it just contributes the feeling that one really doesn't quite understand this man that here we have someone who is a very intelligent man who while he was in the White House did some things that weren't very smart. And I think people just just find it very difficult to come to grips with just that. That basic sort of contradiction as someone who spent a lot of time with him and and probably came to know him very well. Do you feel that you understand this man.

I think that he's hard to understand in some ways. I think you've you've put your finger precisely on on it which is how could somebody as smart as him have done something as dumb as that. And it it it's not as if he wasn't put on notice. In other words I'd. But having said that. One of the things that I saw over the seven years was actually I think quite a bit of growth on his part. He really learned the job of president. He really was quite orderly and and very conscientious. Over the years especially as time went on and how he did the job and in some ways that was that was why when this personal stuff came crashing into the room it really was a it was quite a surprise to me into a lot of people who work with him maybe maybe people who spent the time who didn't know him up close but only knew the

caricature were less surprised. But I thought he put a lot of the personal turmoil behind him. You know I do think there's two issues on character and in the book obviously these issues come up. One is that he. I don't think he should have done what he did. I mean I certainly don't approve of it but I also think that in some ways the main difference between him and other presidents is that we know of his flaws. In real time where as with the others we wait 20 or 30 years to find out from historians. Which is not to excuse them but I. I think history will put it in some perspective but then there's the other issue which is sort of interesting is you know there's a lot of talk about character. But there's an aspect of of real character that I saw which was given the situation even a situation he had a lot to do with creating. He he

kept going. He really focused on his job and conveyed that very much to those of us around him that we had to focus on our job you know and doing the public work. And that was actually quite something the see especially in those first weeks of doing for the scandal when the whole presidency was teetering how he would sort of put his game face on and just work on the speech or work on being president was quite something. So I don't follow it. You know that's a long way of saying I don't entirely understand it but I think I do think that look there's a million books that psychoanalyzing you know try to psychoanalyze him and and in on they will ever know that. But what there hasn't been enough attention on is what did he do or what didn't he do. Did he just coast through eight years the way George Bush said or did he have a successful presidency. And I think that's probably where my book makes more of a contribution. It's one of the first ones that actually looks at some of those questions.

Will we have some other color so let's see what's on their minds what they would like to ask will go to ban a person who had been patient with me. Line number two. Hello. Hi. I ought to appreciate the opportunity to talk with you and I think I'll buy the book. I always thought Clinton was a wonderful speaker. And I think my sense is that he has a wonderful memory and that that helps a whole lot. I have two specific questions one is related what you were just talking about. I think it was his 1998 state of the Union address that he was addressing a joint session of Congress and that was when the Lewinsky scandal was it was just breaking. I still cite that speech. I teach public speaking. Among other things and I cite that speech for the sheer courage and effectiveness I mean he was wonderful in that speech looking at an audience that was certainly hostile much of it was certainly hostile. And as you just said the presidency was teetering and I wondered if you could comment on that and and how he approached that how he felt about it what you all were doing to try to.

You certainly will. You're absolutely right I mean I do think that that was probably the most vivid week of the whole presidency for me for better and for worse. The other listeners might not remember that you're exactly right. The the Lewinsky scandal broke one week before the State of the Union address in 1998 and it was the most intense and surreal thing driving to work and having you know camera crews follow you in. And it was a sense of siege. And. I remember walking down the hall in the West Wing. On the second day of the controversy and. The TVs were all tuned to the press briefing by Mike McCurry. The press secretary he was getting pummeled he was just getting flayed and my pager went off and if they call the Oval Office and there had been speculation in the media that Clinton

would resign and I think in the first day he seemed pretty shaky. I called and he didn't want to talk about what was on TV he said Have you seen this memo from a professor about with language for the STATE OF THE UNION. I really like this on page two and. We have a conversation hung up and looked back at the TV and Kerry was being pummeled up there. And but bit by bit after being shaky Is it the first day or two he really pulled himself together and conveyed it conveyed to those of us around him I mean I do think there probably was one of the reasons why he called me was to very ostentatiously show me a staff member. He was still working on it and one of the this was a speech if you remember the budget agreement the balanced budget agreement with the Republicans had just been reached in 1997.

Just a few months before but already we realized there would be surpluses for the very first time in decades. Nobody had seen the surplus and already in Congress the Republicans who controlled the Congress were determined to spend the surplus on tax cuts. And we thought Clinton thought that this would be a bad idea that it would potentially cripple the government well into the future. Especially if the surpluses didn't turn never materialized. And so we had a long process which amazingly never leaked at the time of deciding what Clinton should say you know with Bob Rubin and the other cabinet secretaries. And so that when he walked into that chamber. And you're right it was the lowest moment of his presidency. Nobody knew what he was going to say. People were wondering if he was going to resign or what were the. How could he just stand there how could he do it. He got up there and he said what should we do with our brand new surplus. I have a simple forward

answer save Social Security first. And the Democrats stood up and applauded. They were applauding semi-colons by this point. And Gingrich Speaker Gingrich thought about it for a moment and he stood up and applauded and the Republicans in Congress looked at each other and looked at Gingrich and then they stood up and applauded. And at that precise moment a trillion dollars in the budget shifted from the column marked tax cuts to the column marked social security and that's where it stayed ever since. And this is at the lowest moment of his presidency in terms of personal controversy and weak weakness of his own authority. It was it was and it was one of the most effective uses of the bully pulpit I've ever seen from a president. So it really was a time of great juxtaposition of extremes and I do I read about it quite a bit in the book. OK. My second question concerned Al Gore and I realize that you're not

writing for him but I'm getting fairly annoyed with him because he refuses to say the c word. Yeah I mean it's he's been in this administration for eight years he's been a part of these policies which have lots of people are very proud of and increasingly frustrated with his unwillingness to mention President Clinton in any way shape or form. I'm wondering if you could comment just a bit on who is advising him about that or rather what kind of advice do you think he's been getting that this is just it's just yeller. And do you have any comments with regard to that I'd appreciate anything out and unfortunately we don't have very much time to be able to give you to respond to the question there Mr. Wildmon. I'm aching to give you a minute I guess. Sure. Well then I should say that among other things is a very interesting article on this in The New York Times today about the relationship between Clinton and Gore has apparently the deterioration of it. He's got very good advisers. You know I

think he is. Obviously he he wants to run as his own man and he and he says he wants to run in a way that he does not get somehow fingered for Clinton's ethical problems. You know I I I think that he was most effective in the third debate when he did finally start to say you know the past eight years has been the strongest economy in the in generations. Tremendous social progress and the administration had a lot to do with that. I think that's not making it a referendum on the past but it's saying for example a strong argument is that the size of Bush's tax cut is so great that it would threaten to bring back deficits and we saw what happened before that before the past eight years. You know when they were out of control deficits. So I think he's beginning to say that but by that I can't tiredly explain that. I can barely explain it myself.

Well you know I'm I'm afraid we're going to have to stop and I should apologize we had a couple of callers who just couldn't take but here's where we will have to leave it. You can certainly if you're interested in reading more in this subject look for the book that we have mentioned it's titled poetess speaks POTUS which stands for president of the United States by Michael Waldman who was President Clinton's director of speech writing from 1995 until 1999 and published by Simon and Schuster. Mr. Waldman thank you very much for talking with us today. My pleasure.