>> hello i'm llewellyn king. the host of "white house chronicle," which is coming right up. but first, a few thoughts of my own. one of the things that has come out of the absolute paralysis of air traffic in europe because of the volcano in iceland is some sense of how much oil is used just in air transportation, let alone the millions, hundreds of millions of cars and other devices that suck up oil. so it is very correct, neat

indeed that we are going to try to get off oil with alternative energy. windmills, other marvelous devices. but just when you thought it was safe, that you were going to go to the uplands of energy supply for alternative energy comes a problem. the turbines in the windmills need what are called elements. and 97% of those come from china. there are other supplies in the world that have not been developed. well, don't worry. we will have little batteries to get us through. you know, the sort of thing that you have for your cell phones. don't get too happy. they demand lit yum and 50% of lithium is in bolivia.

most of the resh is in russia. just when you thought there was going to be a happy future in energy, we may stale be dependent on foreign supply. i have a special show with great guests coming up and we will discuss possibly that. but many critical issues. and i hope have a giggle while we're doing it. cheers. >> "white house chronicle" is produced in crab lation with khut, howard university television. and now the program host, national sibbed kated columnist llewellyn king and co-host linda gasparello. >> hello again. thank you so much for coming along. i have three great guests, and linda gasparello on this program has been warming them up in the interroom. so we are ready to go.

and i am joined by chuck lewis, lovely to see you chuck. by robert slesinger. delighted to have you. you're into bow ties i see. and an old friend tarence samuels, with a new book coming out. >> yes, sir. >> is this a piece of comedy, your new book? >> it is not a piece of comedy. it is a book about the united states senate. >> comedy! >> a journey behind a close doors of the senate, a look at how difficult it is to make the senate work in these particularly partisan times. >> does it have kitty kerry type revelations about senators, dining rooms, stuff like that? >> it looks at the 2006 class that took over the senate, the democratic class that took over the senate in 2006 and how they try make their way over trying

to live up to the promises they made in that campaign. and how difficult that is because the senate is such a strange institution. >> but also referred to, untold. that collection is college -- >> that's the comedy. it is particularly not. for a long time it was partisan and continued to be that. when the majority leader is accusing the minority leader of the united states senate of having a meeting with wall street bankers and using it as kind of a slur, you know something's combon seriously, seriously wrong. >> especially when those bankers helped them enormously to get them elected with money. >> that's what we're talking about. >> chuck lewis, do you get the feeling the president has turned some kind of corner, that his

star is rising? >> certainly the white house likes to think that is the case -- >> i was wondering what the newspapers think. [laughter] >> i think ever since the health care vote and the signing of the health care bill, the white house thinks it's got the momentum on its side. now we're going to see this next week with the financial reform package. i think the democrats and the white house feel they have maneuvered senate republicans into a very tight corner. you mentioned mr. mcconnell going up to the wall street. i think he came back without an answer, which is how can republican senators vote against the bill without appearing to be in the pocket of the big banks. and that question is not answered. >> isn't it also a fact they have to start looking more cooperative because if they win, both the senate and the house, or one or the other in november,

suddenly they have to get something passed. and the democrats will be laying for them, as if nothing has been passed through the cooperation of the republicans. >> cooperation is not a word that usually is associated with congress these days. it reminds me of the rhetoric that seems to per said the senate. often used right before a new republican puts a knife in a democrat. or a democrat puts a knife in a republican, as my distinguished colleague. >> i've known some newspaper editors who relied on the same thing. >> i don't think there's any feeling on any side that bipartisanship is a commodity. these guys know what they need to do, and women, is get 60 votes.

every time you hear about a vote requiring a 06 vote margin it's because we're talking about ending debate. essentially what is senate has been reduced to is arguing about how to get to the next thing. and how to stop one side from filibuster. not a lot getting done. and so i think part of the reason the white house feels so optimistic that things are turning around is because they have a couple of things to point to. they have health care. it looks like they'll have financial regulation. and in kind of a burst of enthusiasm that is completely unexplainable, they're talking about doing an energy bill and an immigration bill. so, i think we're looking at a fun summer. >> also in the case of the banking bill, unlike health care the white house actually has a winning issue here. so the republicans will get

penalized for being the party held now, as sarah palin likes to call them. where as they have public opinion on their side and they can stand firm. now they can either give obama and the democrats a bipartisan victory or be portrayed as siding with wall street, which is toxic for them. >> you did something on white house ghost writing. what was that called? >> presidential ghost writing. >> i have a book! [laughter] >> we all have books, and he's

very good when he's giving his speech. but we don't seem to remember anything he said afterwards. sort of have this feeling when he's speaking, if it's at the white house, and the press is in, or at the press conference. you're thinking my goodness he really speaks beautifully. then on the way out towards the gate i find myself thinking what did he say? is that a weakness in the writing or is it the delivery or is it creeping senility on my part? >> i think it's characteristic of obama. that less man most politicians, where he speaks less than most politicians in sound bytes. "the associated press" talked to the editor of bartlett's in

january, and he lined up 12 obama quotations for the next edition. one of them was from the obama presidency. everything else was previously, presumably from the campaign. obama's style is much more the long ex explained thought, unlike a lot of politicians, i'm going to treat you like an adult -- >> very rarely you get arguments in his speech. >> i think you're onto something in the obama resume here that completely escapes public scrutiny and that he's a former law school professor. and that's the way they talk in law school. he'll take a thought and slice it this way, then throw it back at the student and say, what do you think of that? well, what's your answer to that? this is the method. >> are we saying here that he

overwrites his speech to produce this homeginezed speech? >> i think they're ones that people will look back and say they are memorable presidential speeches. >> so, what do you get for an argument? >> he's very good at leaving you with an argument, but not leaving you -- what's the wrong thing? that's not even his. >> yes, we can. >> i think he continues to channel abraham lincoln. and lincoln was a lawyer, of course, a trial lawyer. and he spoke much the same way. making an argument, logically,

progressive, and that is a punchy sound bytes. >> but, i also think if people thought of bill clinton as a great speaker as well. but we don't remember anything as well. another part of that is that we live in a time where it's harder to break through. we get three our five emails and 16 tweets. >> there are frieses that have broken through in time before sound bytes. the great society, the new deal, that sort of thing. kindler, gentler. when these are written, are they written for that effect? or do they just come out? i find great frieses come out. >> you deal with something that was in there and the next day someone ran a cartoon of an airplane flying over with a new

deal coming behind it. that's how it kind of came. sometimes a speech writer will say wait, this is definitely. gerald ford went to his speech wriletter and say said i don't know if we can use that line. it's kind of hard on dick. and he said s of evil, which is debatable whether you can have a three-point axis. but it's remembered about the bush presidencies, george bush that is. >> actually started out as axis of hatred. one of them said that's terrible. let's make it axis of evil. and sort of patted himself on the back for saving history from this awful phrase. >> can i just have a moment for the benefit of our wonderful

listeners on sirius x.m. radio, i would like to identify the program. it is "white house chronicle," with myself llewellyn king, linda gasparello of this program. chuck lewis, roger slesinger, and terrence samuels who is a book writer and journalist. lovely, back to the subject. who do you think has been the great speech writers? some have gone onto success. i was once asked to write a speech for a particular president. i didn't think he could deliver it and i'm not going to tell you who. i don't think it would have gone down in history because i couldn't imagine this particular president saying what i'd written. i just couldn't imagine it. so i thanked himor of the thing. >> that would be an obstacle if

you can't imagine it. >> i think writing speeches for other people is very hard. >> you have to get in their head and get their voice. the best speech writers, i think sorensen, kennedy's speech writer is the best. sorensen and kennedy had that kind of mind meld -- >> to finish up on the subject, when did speech writing become a recognized part of the apparatus? >> the first speech writer is considered to be justin wellver for warren harding. no surprise at all that the first speech writer comes as mass media comes on the scene and presidents have to speak much more. when calvin coolidge was president, he made speeches roughly eight times a month. kennedy, in his thousand days it was 19 times a month. clinton in his first time was 28 times a month. and i haven't seen any numbers

for clinton's second term, w. bush or obama. you have to believe that time keeps going up. >> linda, we've been talking about interesting, but off the news things in a way. what's going on internationally? we say the president's chances are looking up domestically, or in some sort of rise. international, doesn't look so pretty does it? >> i think depends really where you look. afghanistan is still so problematic. there are some signs that things are happening there that are very sures. the afghan parliament turns out to be one of the major challenges in challenging its president, president karzai. there's a life in the parliament that says we're sick of the corruption. we want a voice. we want the people to be heard.

we don't want the president to have the kind of power he has without listening to us. there are about 30 members of the parliament who have been very, very vocal. i think that breaks in our way as we try to establish some stability there. >> but there is a lot of anger at the international force led by ourselves and afghanistan, because of the -- >> but at the same point let's look at the other things. and the interesting mood in the parliament is something we should keep an eye on. it also includes women's voices. i think they should be listened to in a place like afghanistan because they really have the most to lose. >> one of the reasons that you can justify our being there is if we leave we abandon the women of afghanistan. totally abandon them --

>> how is that when the american people just simply want this thing over with and think we ought to get out? not paying too much attention to it. but at some point, this is not something the president wants to be talking about. >> in the end countries do walk out when it's no longer sustainable domestically. as the brits walked out of india with millions of deaths, maybe one million, maybe three. we don't know. didn't bother anybody in england as much. things were better, there was less of a drain, troops could come home. >> these voices in the parliament unfortunately want us to stay. they believe without us there can't be the stability they need to get back in our feet again. they don't want to see that again. they want to see us stay. i know it's very hard for the president. but at the same point, it does look like it's paying you have.

everyone knows that al qaeda leaders have been killed there. we're still there. on the other hand there has been an election that seems to be a satisfactory one. and we'll just have to see. >> in britain we have something unusual for britain. we've had debates between people who potentially would be prime minster. remember, they don't directly elect the prime minster. he eats's the leader of the party. until the party gets fed up with him and kicks him out. it looks as though there's a chance that there will be a big role for the liberal democrats. but they have been very different in foreign policy from all the torry's. one of the thing that their leaders did in these debates was to not trash the u.s., but say

we're not going to be necessarily in lock step. and reexamine the relationship which has been very solid since 1956. where do you think that's going? if he has a say, it's unlike to be prime minster. but he may be the able to control the power after the election. what do you think that does for us? for troops? afghanistan? >> you sort of answered it. he has a say. but it's not going to go anywhere. >> how do you mean it's not going to go anywhere? >> in terms of british policy. >> oh, i think it's going to have a huge effect on british policy. >> do you? it >> it's the beginning of the end of british troops. and various peacekeeping missions. >> they already have had the beginning of the end. they did pull out of iraq.

but where it goes from the rest of the policy, i'm not sure -- >> the british nuclear defense is obsolete. and in the age of terrorists, you don't need submarines. have you been looking at this at all robert? >> i have not. >> i think it's interesting that what a difference 230 years make. that after all this time, what do they take from us? these horrible debates. they're awful! and it was interesting to watch, i mean the sets, and the walking -- >> and it was very much on our pattern. and i thought they wouldn't work because they debate in the house of common sense and prime minster is questioned there once a week. yet this did bring out things that we're not otherwise apparent. >> television. >> seems like every british

election there is a threat or the promise of liberal democrats on the liberal party. combu it really never seems to go too far. >> i think the weakness of will appeal to the brits because it's a radical change. but the big concern for some people is that he has promised to go to proportional reputation which was a labor party position and they quickly abandoned that when they won. it has a lot of problems. it bedevils italian politics, it bedevils israel's politics, irish politics have been bedeviled, but it bedevils them as well. >> when was there a last liberal prime minster? >> it goes back a ways.

yes, a hundred years. but elements of the liberal party had moved elsewhere. into the right wing of labor, and then the right wing of labor moved back about 30 years ago into the liberal party. and that's why they called them the liberal dems. it's interesting. it is indeed a new voice in western politics where there hasn't been a new voice for quite a while. >> you don't consider the two parties a new voice? >> i consider them a loud voice. that's an interesting question. they're not all nice. there is no roster, there is no leader. there is no secretariat, so the tea parties, if they're going to be effective, beyond a lot of middle aged people who missed the barricades when they were young, now enjoying all the thrill of the barricades. there's no new ideas really.

they're angry with washington, apingry with the status quo, but they're not offering any of our domestic politicians a radical departure from our status quo. >> you don't necessarily have to be organized to do either harm or help. i think both parties are looking at the pea party, particularly this intensity at the local level. and are worried about how much harm they can do come november. particularly for the republicans. >> we don't even have to wait until november. we've got a senate primary and in florida where the tea party movement has created a threat to sitting incumbent presidents. in the case of senator mccain, and governor crisp, though he's an odds on favorite until the

tea party movement. so they're looking over their shoulder at the tea party and thinking we've got to watch these people. >> they do introduce something different, they take their legitimacy from the last poll, the last local election, not the big one, in november. i meant they're very opposed to the obama administration. but it won handily in 2008. in both the congress and the house -- >> i have to interrupt you. could you please write and we'll send out the note to all of our readers. it is time for our high notes and now low notes. linda gasparello? >> the recent supreme court decision that affected animals all over -- it's just horrible. it's the only time i have ever agreed with sam yilt -- samuel

alito -- >> that part of your italian heritage that you're coming around? >> it's an amazing fact that as a pilot you may create. air force one made it from j.f.k. to andrews air force base yesterday after the president spoke on wall street. they made that trip in 35 minutes. that is really putting the pedal to the metal. >> there were no holding patterns. somehow the president gets help there. terrence? >> i know, earth day this week, lots and lots of attention. people paying attention to the health of the planet. and the senate actually talking about taking up an energy bill. >> and last but certainly never least, robert. >> one of the house democrats raised the white flag this week on voting rights for citizens in

the district of columbia. half a million americans who are sub citizens simply because they live in the capitol of the country. it is an offense against the basic values of our nation. >> ok. that's our show for today. i would mention the great civil rights leader has died at 98. she will be missed because she was a beacon, almost all of her life for justice, goodness and old-fashioned decency. we will be back next week. meanwhile, catch up with us at whchronicle and where you can read some of my scribbles. all the best. cheers.

>> "white house chronicle" is produced in collaboration with whut, howard university television. from washington, d.c., this has been "white house chronicle." a weekly analysis of the news with insight and a sense of humor, featuring llewellyn king, linda gasparello and guests. this program may be seen on pbs stations and cable access channels.

to view the