Conversation 620-012

Transcript (AI-Generated)

This transcript was generated automatically by AI and has not been reviewed for accuracy. Do not cite this transcript as authoritative. Consult the Finding Aid above for verified information.

That's a pretty good picture already.

And then I said, did you meet with John?

I said, yes, we met over there.

We met over there in his office.

That's a good picture.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

politics.

I talk a little about it, but I have this as well.

You know, the fall is so late, and people still have some nice leaves when they're out there.

Yes.

You should come out and ask me, you know.

And, uh, we had an irate summer coming here, but you had a great trip, didn't you?

Yes, I did.

Yeah.

And with meeting those people.

Oh, shut up, guys.

Shut up.

Yes, he lives there, like a rock, still standing straight.

See, I forget the name.

Yes, and we got a car.

We got a car.

Do you have anything you want to cover on the forum side?

You should cover it on the television.

He's just a general, so we keep him out of it.

Well, you didn't get it all over with, Henry.

Why not?

All right, well, I didn't really report on this.

I know you're talking about it.

Let's take the trip stuff personal now.

All right.

Well, I'm in India, Taiwan.

I thought you should know the...

He came in, he was a little cool.

There were a few little amenities and so forth.

He kind of sat slamming away on occasionally turning me at the very beginning.

And finally he just blurted out that he did not understand the thinking that it was all.

And he said, I do not see red China as a threat to the United States now or for many years to come.

So, I said, well, I didn't know if my figure was right, but I used it.

I said, Mr. President, there are, I don't think that this trip was occasioned by any of us.

I said, if you stop and think that there are 140 divisions, Russian divisions on the Chinese border,

You have to, and they have had some people falling out.

You have to consider how much more aggressive Russia might be in the Middle East or Western Europe if that back door suddenly was closed and they no longer

He wasn't quite sure what that was.

So I said, one other point, maybe I shouldn't answer this earlier.

I said, I know that you understand American politics.

And I said, there are a number of senators, and some who inspired the presidency, who are, I'm sure you recognize, anti-Taiwan, who have been, I don't know, pro-China, Chinese, and so forth.

And I said, these men,

by appealing to the war-weariness, the desire for peace in America, have acquired a strength beyond which they normally could get.

And I said, by announcing that he came to visit me, the President's preempted that position and has taken that source of strength from them.

That's a good point.

And I must say, you know, if I may interrupt you, too, as he well knows, it doesn't make any difference who would be home free.

They were not only would they be going to these games of work, they would be breaking the treaty with Thailand and so forth.

Yes, sir, this is in effect catching a fellow out and has the gun on him.

Oh, how?

The coup, the move is right on.

I thought the move was right on.

It's not going to catch a corner.

This is going to be more of a...

It's all right for us, but it's even harder.

Well, this has been going on for a long time.

Well, that happens.

It's a very nice feeling.

Is it better for us or worse for us to have a military in charge here?

Well, it really isn't a basic case.

It isn't a basic case.

They've always been in charge.

Yes, but just people like them are bad guys.

So, here's some of our critics and chants.

And I said this to Chang.

He suddenly turned to me, and his face broke out into the warmest smile.

And he just said one brief sentence in Chinese.

And the interpreter, smiling broadly, said, the president says he understands this very well.

And suddenly, the whole conversation for an hour became very warm and very cordial.

This, he could see it.

Yes.

So then we got into investment and trading.

So we were trading with America and he was...

I told him that we wanted you to do that.

Yes, I did.

And he said yes.

I said yes.

I don't think there's any question.

As a matter of fact, I said he warned me.

that followed, and the fact that then, I went from there to the Vice President's tent, to lunch with the Vice President, and in the middle of the lunch, the Minister of Economics was calling the phone, and it was Chang, personally, who called him and said, I want you to get over to the Governor of California because he was talking about trade, and I want you to arrange it.

I guess they're getting a mission together to come to California.

We're going to set him up with some business men where I get to talk trade.

And then the Vice President, I must say, there's one thing on their minds.

And at one point, you know, Chad, he's got this interpreter, Nancy, and Matt Chang were sitting over there.

And he then would occasionally turn to her and bring out the data of what we were talking about, and she would then interpret and talk to me.

And they made it very plain that

if there was any effort of the mainland to come to Taiwan.

Big fight.

We just had lunch for after lunch.

This is before lunch.

Oh, yeah.

And before lunch, what it really boiled down to was their fear of him, I suppose, in the form of the way we treated him in the past.

It was born of the belief that you might be going to Beijing and in an effort to negotiate a date or something with them, that you might try to put pressure on Taiwan to somehow come to an agreement, you know, an incorporation with the mainland.

And he said, this would be a bloodbath.

He said, we would be killed.

And he said, this we will never hold still for.

He said, we will fight to the death.

And, General, I don't want to sound offensive and I hate to say this, but I must say one thing.

My God, I wish some of the American soldiers I've seen lately looked like those Taiwan soldiers.

For sure.

And the sticker that they seem to have.

There's no hiding it.

This...

These guys really have an esprit de corps.

You wonder how they keep it, don't you?

They do.

They all look at me.

I've seen reviews out there a number of times.

I haven't seen one for five, four years.

The last time I was there was in 87.

And we've had a couple of very warm messages and letters.

So I was quite sure they did something.

They did their leave.

They always said, how is she?

How is she now?

She's been very ill. Well, I heard that she was seen very well.

She never showed that both of them came in on parade.

But this was their great fear.

And again, the president, I believe it or not, just by what I was supposed to say, I told them that.

that I felt that I'd been authorized to assure them that this country had absolutely no intention of changing a treaty relationship in any way, nor would this country.

I said in the first place that I had never heard this trip discussed in the line of negotiations at all, but simply open communications and talking, and that I did not believe that the United States would ever consider forcing Taiwan to submit itself to the mainland.

And, uh,

As I say, the whole atmosphere went very well.

Singapore, the whole thing got pretty commercial, I must say.

I get pretty excited about some things.

And you go out and see their country park.

I have a hell of a park.

We had to say, isn't that something?

And let me tell you some of the things, though, that they said were problems with us about this.

They said, for example, the Japanese radio investors, the Japanese, we can't match them in construction.

The Japanese are building refineries and things of this kind.

The Americans can't compete.

And they said one of the reasons they couldn't compete was because the Japanese, with the help of their government, are able, the contractors, so many of it is, able to put together an entire package.

up to and including uh distribution you might say of the product afterward or how it would be handled and the americans bound by our antitrust laws cannot put together the same kind of a package and he thus can't compete and i just wondered if there is an area where we're not in violation of our antitrust laws in a far away place like that

and we oversee the terms in which it is done, that we let an American contractor put together the same kind of package in order to get one of these contracts.

for a problem that's been in existence for a long time.

It's not only such a sacred honor, it's not just an honor grant I trust you, it's the lack of imagination of some of our own companies to deal on these issues together, and also the lack, I think we need a more forthcoming government policy of subsidy, et cetera, to produce the most truth.

Who the hell is working on that?

Here's the challenge with the government.

The government subsidies are the big-ass part of the bill.

Let's see what we can do there.

It's really true, the Japanese are eating our pets off all over Asia.

Because they do come in and offer a full package.

And here we are, with all this time, so for this kind of project, we have offered a full package.

That's not a bad offer, but it's the pieces that can't just be done.

We can't put together the package for construction, so it wouldn't take in every person.

That's for sure, John.

Let's see what we can do about that part.

I told him to digress a minute.

We had that 4-3 decision on that TV, but, you know, 5-6, the Coast Guard checked her out and said we couldn't fire a blast.

I don't even know if we had any harvest mail on her.

I wasn't the one.

That's just...

Anyway, we got $25,000 against her.

$35,000 for it. $35,000.

a 1,035-year deal that hasn't organized anything.

The environmental survey, what has happened here, is that the Supreme Court of the United States comes out 43 on that issue.

Now, I would have had, and you can see the customs here, there would have been a hell of a difficult problem if they had ruled the other way.

That day, I would have

in the public mind and have it followed.

Although, on national security grounds, I would overrule it, but you can imagine the storm that would have arisen all over this country if the President would have ruled the Supreme Court of the United States, which I was prepared to do.

I ordered a test, you know, John, that morning.

I told you, I told you, I said, you told me it's going to be post-decision.

I said, I don't give a damn.

I said, the test goes forward.

We were prepared.

But I, uh, you heard what I said on the dinner, at the dinner, about that.

I said, oh, I have to keep it for the endorsement.

Well, we had to do it.

Yes.

But here's the, the problem we got here is that we would get, I digress, with the court, with Rehnquist and Powell there.

Instead of being born to free that decision, it would have been 63, wouldn't it?

You see that right there was a straight close-up of the people that voted against us as to what you'd expect.

Brennan, Marshall,

uh, that great power of liberalism just comes.

Yeah.

I don't know.

I just, I just need to get a younger girl for it.

Thank you.

I'm glad you heard this.

This has come up.

I'd like for you to have your, I don't know who, but we can't be looking, but we have a government one.

We have everybody working on it.

I would like to see it now.

I mean, I really want to see some call through in terms of taking specifically a place like Singapore, which is growing like, it's a bustling place.

And the cleanest, it's really what Chinese can do.

It's a Chinese city.

It's the cleanest city I've ever seen in my life.

They start, they find $966 if you throw a gun right over the street.

It was just amazing.

We got out for dinner at the embassy at 9 o'clock.

Out there on the porch.

Wild.

All the lights.

Not one insect buzzing around the light.

I know no place in the world you could say, well, the sea will make the program, and it must have killed everything else, too.

It's the damn thing.

One other thing I just have to tell you about.

It struck a nerve with me, because 10 years ago, I made a speech, and I touched on public housing in our country, and the failure of public housing.

And I said, why have we never thought

of the one gimmick that makes suburbia work and public housing fail.

You know, using the corridors for latrines and the, breathing down the elevator shaft and so forth.

The difference between suburbia and public housing is the private ownership.

It's Singapore in their public housing.

They make it very easy for even the poorest of the people.

to buy their unit even if it's a unit in an apartment building or of course it's a single house but they buy it and acquire ownership and they've gone so far that they allow their people to borrow against their social security the same as a private citizen would borrow against an insurance policy so that they now own this

And as I say, 10 years ago I said this, why couldn't we in public housing get into this private ownership thing?

By letting, making it possible for even the welfare system to divide.

Now what you have to do is, you can't do it twice.

In public housing, what happens is, in other words, the government is not permanently in the public housing business.

They encourage the people to fly so that the government gets out of the business and help.

The apartment building becomes a cooperative that is theirs.

And the thing that we have, the problem, the guy in New York, he's in housing for a great reason.

He gets a chance at a promotion or a better job, but that puts him above the limit.

So that if he takes this, he's got to get out of the public housing.

He's worried about finding a place else to live, so he stays below the limit instead of progressing.

But if this guy owned his unit, and he said, my God, with that other job, with the equity I got in this thing here, maybe I can live in the suburbs.

Maybe I can put this up or sell this, and I can wind up...

That's why Nelson Rockwell is a co-op program.

What?

Nelson Rockwell is a co-op program where public housing doesn't work, while the federal program of government ownership hasn't.

I didn't know that he ended it.

He has one at the state government office.

But anyway, they were doing it, and I tell you, it's not just me.

Well, this program's been going on for quite a few years, but they're never really pushing.

Most of them have made it work.

I'll push it.

I'll get it running.

There's no one who believes in private enterprise and all the rest.

I just don't believe in everybody being a tenant of people.

I mean, you go into public housing in Miami,

My God, I took that the other day.

I went through there the other day, about three weeks ago.

And I asked my primary closer, how old was this?

Five years.

It was a big sky.

Unbelievable.

The wind was blowing up.

It was absolutely black.

I didn't want to say, well, the rest is in a different place.

I'm not going to test it.

It was to have it.

That's what you had in your eyes.

Oh, yes.

Very, yes.

There are some places in there.

Yeah, that's what I mean.

There are some places in there.

And if you check those great housing lists like that one,

Highest crime rate in the nation.

It's minimal.

But this is what gets you.

This thing costs $34 million on the still.

They're gonna bulldoze it down and just start over with another one.

You know, how many times do we have to learn?

Well, anyway, we got to... Why don't you look at... Did you meet... You saw the meeting on, I believe, why don't you?

Did you... Oh, yes, we had lunch.

It was quite a call.

Yes, he... Have you seen him before?

Have you seen him in California?

No.

He's bright as hell.

Yes.

He's a hell of a guy.

And he... That was on Bangkok, where now they've had a few changes.

And all those people, they were concerned...

very concerned that even the King expressed this to me in the meeting with him about that red, shiny road that's going across London, Arlington, you know.

And they were concerned again.

It'll be nice and impressive when they find out that nothing good has been given away.

And when it's all over, they're worried.

They said that there was a drop of morale with the people they've got fighting the insurgents in the North.

The communists have certainly really doubled before we fight them for it.

Is there anything that could be given away while we're here?

They were also very concerned about the textile problem.

Japan, yes.

But the thing was, you see, they got specific.

They built a factory.

And you probably don't know the details, but the thing was that they were given an improvement, and they just went ahead and said to this country something like ten times the amount of improvement.

And so it was shut down, and it's hell there.

And now all that our country's asked them to do is to come and negotiate a settlement.

And they want the millions of bananas and so forth released for sale before they come.

I think I persuaded them to come.

I said, look, it's as simple as that.

Now, I said, go.

I'm sure that the settlement will be worked out.

They had a demonstration.

Most polite thing in the world.

Send us flowers, the workers.

But at the same time, politely requested, please don't take our jobs.

They work in this big factory.

We'll go for it.

They had a couple of others.

They said that we dumped some of our rubber from our stockpile and depressed the price, and that was a blow.

And then they had a specific, under public law 480, they said that we had demanded $20 million in addition to their budget to match our $15 million of aid.

But their problem was they wouldn't mind doing it next year with a new budget, but they'd already passed their budget.

And if they had to do it this year, that the $20 million that they just had to cancel out other programs and so forth, they sounded like California for a minute there.

Write some notes to each of these.

It's all in this place that's changed.

We can reassure them on this change.

Because we don't have it.

Yes.

This is, yes, this was a problem.

We got to Korea, and they were uptight about the Texel thing, but it seemed that what they, it was beyond that.

What they really meant was, and this was the present part, was this a beginning of abandonment by the United States?

The problem, they must have been concerned about it.

The vote, I don't know.

Remember, you were back here.

That's right.

Thank you.

But in Korea, we really are doing everything we can.

And we do have a lot of help at times with our congressional members.

Those bastards, you know, they want to continue the, quote, humanitarian aid, which is effectively, you know, without, you know, we cut 50% without hurting anything.

Of course, it's nice to do it, but they want, on the other hand, they want to cut the military aid, military support assistance to Korea, some of us to Taiwan, a great deal, of course, to Vietnam, to Cambodia, to Laos.

I thought it was a direct end of time.

They want to test it out some of that, right?

That's wrong.

Now we, you've got to get old John Sennestredt for getting that amendment approved.

So we at least, we're in a ballpark now.

If they get through with the bill, I think it's starting to be, what do you think?

Can we live with this in the military system?

Because I get that they can send a bill or something, but it's not quite in the House.

The boy has come.

The senior senators up here, our senators, including your two, our two California senators, they've been told they're kind of, they're not lying.

No, that's right.

They're not making a contract with Arizona to use theirs.

That's right.

It's the California.

They do a lot worse.

God, those are two dead good senators.

Yeah.

They all want to cut that.

They're cutting it.

I mean, it goes far beyond getting out there.

They're just pure politicians.

I understand.

There they want to get ahead.

They know that.

Well, we're heading for war.

We're heading on our way.

They want to get ahead.

So they can say, well, we said we were going to get out of multiple war.

So what the hell is the difference?

But here, and this goes further than that, they want to cut it in Turkey, they want to cut it in Greece.

Here, and they say that on the basis of, because of the type of confidence they have in their totalitarian, the does really not only want to handle war in Vietnam,

They want to turn the United States to a totally isolationist viewpoint in terms of any military programs at all.

You see, you know, they put it on the ground, but we'll get sucked into another Vietnam.

That's bunker.

I mean, what we're doing in Korea is giving Korea more military and economic assistance.

at at korea takes over more of its own events we can bring home a few americans which is good they're those koreans that fight too they look really good i know yes yes but i watched him we i will cover him on the letter too but yeah he was worried about this he would also very soon taiwan's attitude and i told him i thought that they would reassure somewhat i told him that um

So we were very grateful for what he had been doing, but regardless, some of the countries he contacted, we ended up confessing or something like that about the vote.

About the vote.

Yeah, and they were going to show up for it.

He said, while I was there, it was when they handled their educational problem.

Quite a, quite a sideline.

The day I was there was when they just marched in.

That arrived on campuses.

Boom.

They, you know, they posted the border and they uncovered it in this.

He was amazed to discover the parallel between that there and Berkeley, because it is directly communist across the border.

What did they do?

They just marched the troops in close by universities to try to draft the suits.

And they drafted him.

He's just here, right?

He's in the ERP.

And I was meeting him in Africa.

He got ahead of them for doing the same thing.

Oh, who too?

Yeah, he did that.

He did exactly the same thing.

Right.

So they just drafted him there.

He just said, we'll make them grow up.

That's it.

Well, now you imagine what would happen to you this afternoon.

Oh, yeah.

Listen, come on.

I'm worried sick about it.

I have people in their attitude.

We've got an educational job to do on them.

I think this, you know, when you were talking this morning, you said that if there's an American city, Berkeley, where the city council has voted that Berkeley should be a sanctuary for deserters, and the city council in Berkeley has just ordered the city manager to tell the police that they are not to cooperate in any way with authorities in trying to apprehend any deserters who seek sanctuary there.

Deserters from the arts and resources.

This is another example.

We had a U.S. attorney after a total public statement that the city hall was just like any other place.

And this was a case with the Coral Sea.

They would have been like my answer in my press conference last week.

They asked me, what view is this?

and how the war is coming to an end, can you tell us whether you would consider giving some of them amnesty?"

And I said, no.

He said, Matt, Matt, what am I going to do with it?

He said, well, it really goes down to the pressure of going to make golf.

Well, but you can't give them amnesty when there are 400 people, not just the 45,000 Americans.

The Lions, for example, which is a very good one,

which I have not used yet.

I haven't really had an opportunity to address it.

I didn't want to go into any detail.

I didn't like the guy that asked the question anyway, so I wanted to cut him off.

But I said, look, naturally I'm sympathetic to anybody who made that decision.

But I said, looking at the war in Vietnam,

Thousands of young Americans, when they were faced with a choice, chose to serve their country.

And thousands of them died for their choice.

A few hundred chose to deserve their country, and they will have to live with their choice.

Now that puts it right here.

But thousands, thousands chose to serve their country, they did die for their choice.

A few hundred served and chose to desert their country.

Now they have to live with their choice.

Now they can live in chaos.

Or I think the guy that hates, you know, the fellow that his time goes on and he looks back on what he's done and comes here and throws himself into mercy in court and says, okay, I was wrong.

I already turned to my country.

What is the penalty I have to pay?

That's a different case.

I think the guy that just said, well, I need to work for a channel.

I thought, I thought, I thought, I thought whatever it was.

That's one of the things about executive power, you can go out and see, we vote from time to time, we do.

If somebody comes in and says, look, I pulled out of the Marine Corps, I won't let her in here, you're taking it out, we're all out of the Marine Corps, he says, I'd like to come back, I'll be willing to serve or something like that.

Fine, I'd like to do that, but you, yes sir, and I think that should be our policy as well.

I'll be mad if you're just going to say that somebody who sat out in Canada, or some guy who died out there, and then you just say, it's all done, and then you go, hell no, there's not going to be any funds.

Right?

We haven't heard the last of Bush's funds, but that'll be one of the fights in the Democratic fund.

Now, would you do one thing, and we're going to put you on this topic, because some of you just come up.

Hasn't the service as a policy, and I wrote that in a news summary recently, do we have any policy that we have to adopt, or that we should adopt, for handling a case where somebody does come and say, look, I did do this, and then have them serve in the armed services, you see my point, or would we want those batteries in the armed services?

That's the problem.

Well, if that comes back, there's no case.

I know, I know, I know.

What could you do?

Go to jail?

They go to jail, and when they go to jail, they're very temperate about it.

You know, I'll ask them to sell me, you know, and this or that.

I don't judge them.

I judge them as you sell them.

I put them on probation or something.

You're right.

The guy who comes back after the war, he comes back in no danger.

Nevertheless, that's much better than giving him clemency.

Well, it also is the discipline of the individual.

He's a politician.

Well, then we got to Japan, and you've never heard of Japan?

No, I've never heard of Japan.

With Sato, he didn't seem too concerned about our economic policies.

I had the impression for most of them there that maybe they were getting away with something, and they were willing to

sit down, and they weren't worried about taking this to become something very interesting.

They found it needed to be, of course, they were generally crushing the bitch.

And they got guys like this governor of Tokyo, who was a communist.

He was one of the first visitors to those things.

But the difference is with Red China, as he pointed out, Red China once they got you there, they play games.

And so any of the Japanese who now want to visit the game,

are ordered by the King that they must first visit North Korea.

And they have to stay in North Korea.

In other words, to give prestige.

And they go to North Korea, and then they go to the King, but they made that the price of admission for any of the

Both the foreign minister, Fukuda and Sato, they were very interested in Korea and its relationship with China.

And they kind of said the same thing I mentioned.

But Sato was very interested in finding out.

He wanted to know that I think Taiwan would walk out of the United Nations if the Albanian resolution won.

And he was also interested in whether South Korea had expressed interest in the future of Taiwan.

Both had, or were looking at it as a spot Amazon.

both expressed a belief or a desire that there would continue to be American armed forces in South Korea.

They seemed to think that this was very symbolic if we pulled out of there entirely.

And I said that I have a full doctrine here that we were reassessing the number.

And I said in places like NATO, we know that they haven't picked up the total share of their burden.

and that they should pick up more of the burden.

I said, there might be some reduction, but I didn't believe that in any way abandoning any of our alliances or anything with any of these other people.

And I said, we have to recognize that certainly Korea had carried its share of its own defense load and had not just left to the United States.

Fukuda made a great stress on our mutual interests, and what he got around to was that the area of international monetary policy, as he put it, long-lateral negotiations are fine, but the only way to really solve the problem is for Japan or the United States to sit down privately and work out mutually advantageous solutions.

And he related a talk that he had with Prime Minister Yi, in which they had a bet.

Prime Minister bet Fukuda that the United States and Japan would never reach a textile agreement.

And that day, the agreement had been signed.

And so Fukuda was quite joyful about the fact that he was going to win that debt.

And he was using the story, I think, to point out his desire that we can and should work out our deals privately and cooperatively.

And again, then he expressed

I think about if we should withdraw military support from South Korea, and he seemed to be saying that if this should happen, the communists would probably take over Japan because of its constitution.

They were telling us that they were having their own, you know, they had to rise while we were there.

So the algorithm was great.

I mean, I must say, I can't remember.

Yes.

But the...

The Okinawa thing, on a still-maintaining basis, of course, was a big political issue.

And Fukuda was pointing out that they were asking for a guarantee in writing from Sato that we would not leave and the opposition would not have any nuclear weapons.

And I don't know whether to do it or not, I said to Fukuda, I said, well, look,

Why don't you, this could boomerang on them, I said, why don't you turn it around?

I said, since the United States has a policy of never saying whether there are or are not nuclear weapons anyplace in the world, why don't you tell the opposition that it's kind of up to them to prove that there are nuclear weapons in Okinawa?

And if they can't prove that, then what the hell is the issue?

They were quite...

They keep that around.

They eat a lot about that one.

They thought that'd be fun, but they don't know what this is.

I don't know if they've ever done it around this.

But, uh... That was the... You, uh... Now they...

They go off and do this.

Yeah.

Good to see you coming.

Yeah.

Incidentally, in Saigon, at the lunch, I got a Ted Agnew soup that one of you told me about.

Son of a bitch, I saw that little thing on the menu, a lot of stuffed pigeon.

And sure enough, they brought this bowl of soup, and it was very good.

We added the chopsticks and everything.

Boy, I ate everything, couldn't talk in all those countries and did it all.

Until I took the lid off and everything got a damn bird staring at me with a guilty eye.

And I know, I know, maybe if I take a couple of spoonfuls of soup, and the first one I spooned went in, it hit the tea with a click.

And I decided, I made a great pre-cast that I was so full that I...

Because, you know, you need so much in the first few courses.

It comes pretty well down the line.

So I didn't get into that.

But all in all, I think that in those countries there was reassurance.

I think the very fans very hard have accepted me there.

Some of their fears were allayed.

And as I say, I did stress in every one of them.

that we were interested in trade, that we were interested in expanding it on a California standpoint, because we're all very over-the-top.

And that, plus, as I said, I constantly gave the assurance that I had been assured that there was no change in our policy with regard to treating our products.

So, fortunately, it turned out well.

Very good.

It was a rough time.

The funny thing is, most of them were as confident as we were.

That was the least of their worries.

They didn't seem to feel we were going to lose.

And that was truly the chance.

I've been reading on your stickers.

There are people here.

There are people over there.

You know, you've got to remember, 300 million of them are on the mainland of Asia, leaving out India and Pakistan.

If you look at Indonesia, man, that's a hell of a lot of people living under free governments.

Japan is over 100.

Indonesia is about 20, very little.

So you get up to 300 million awfully quick, because Philippines, Thailand, that's where Taiwan, they all live in the Chinese group.

About 300 million.

a lot of people that are understable, but I won't.

Now, I, there's a, this is none of my business, I know, but I have to tell you, there's an ambassador in Singapore, Boris, and I couldn't help but observe the rapport he had with them, and I was greatly impressed by him.

He was good?

Yes.

And I learned that he is being shifted to Saigon, not as an ambassador, but as head of

Some kind of a trade mission, or some kind of... What?

Oh, he's going to drop the paint, or a combo, too.

Is it, uh...

Okay.

Well, he's the ambassador, anyway.

And it seems that he previously has some experience in hitting some trade missions.

there in Vietnam.

And it seemed to me that, gosh, we were shaking a trade that maybe it wasn't that necessary just to put you more in a trade mission thing in Vietnam.

And as I said, I was greatly impressed.

For example, the dinner was certainly not a dinner in which they loaded up with all the visiting Americans or anything.

You met big people.

in the Senate Board.

And he was just a parent, but he was doing a job.

I have another job there, Nick.

Old man, is he?

You gotta say something.

Let me just say, he's a young man.

Older man.

Not a young man, I say.

Probably he's a career dad.

So he's asking me, that's what I'm trying to do.

He came out and said, we'll check into him.

There's a lot of people who need to take jobs, take your partner for the key jobs, but we're going to take the money.

Would you like it?

Yes.

I'll see if they're going to find it out there.

And I mean, you know, you could just, in the end, could you sell him a part of the economy?

You should have met him.

Talk about the economy there.

Oh, yes.

Yes.

He's a pro.

It was beautiful to watch him work.

He really was.

That's fine.

Yes.

Who was in Korea by the time you got there?

Was it Porter, of course, or Vaughn?

Uh, Javi.

Javi was there.

He had just as bad.

That day, the day I met Mark, he had met first to present his credentials.

He was smart and able to follow me.

That's true.

He did a good job.

Yeah.

I got a domestic problem.

You remember Santonetti and our agreement about our experiment, but we're still negotiating.

We still don't have permission from HEDF to do it.

And the whole issue is over the size of the experiment.

I feel like I'm president of this Green Actors Guild again, negotiating the labor contract out.

And they seem to think that we're, what we've done is, you had said you didn't want a token.

You wanted a broad-based leave test or something.

We've picked clusters of counties to give a kind of a great variety of county, a lumber country and seasonal employment and so forth, to the Central Valley, to the industrial areas.

And we've come down from their original size.

We've tried to meet and cooperate.

And the total that we're down to now, not to get into too many details, just roughly, what we want to do is we don't want to divide it in a cluster, because we want those counties to all be in this workforce.

So the better the counties where no one is in it.

They want to put a seating of 30,000 people.

We have a total.

But the counties have chosen about 57,000.

Now we have come down from more than that, from different clusters.

And every time they said, no, we've rearranged and taken different clusters, then we have to add up the number of people involved.

And they're still holding that somehow there's something wrong.

We've asked also for three years since.

They won't give us more than a year because they say it's never been done before.

Of course, I didn't think that that was much of an argument.

It's never been done before.

What the hell?

That's true.

I thought we'd do it.

But anyway, here I think that Kelly would be willing to make a kind of a challenge agreement that we'd reapply each year.

It would happen.

But he's still sticking on that it's got to be within this 30,000 figure.

Well, if we submit to that president,

What we do is we come to a point in which we do have counties in which we had to drop a whole cluster of counties and not have more.

We're divided within the county.

And the only point I want to know is if you're in a position where you

want to back him, we'll have to give in.

If not, we'll keep on fighting, trying again.

But we've been negotiating since June here in all these months.

Now, did he come up with something in the last couple of days?

The last offer was a different situation.

Yeah, I had him here Monday and I talked to him about it and I told him that before you came in I wanted to see what he could do.

If he could make another offer.

I don't know, I don't know.

Well, the offer he made was it's still in the $30,000 but this time he wants to make it that he will

Without saying so publicly, he will agree to the $57,000, except we will agree that we won't face an end effect.

In other words, in a year we'll never get to $57,000, we'll never get to more than $30,000.

Well, we may, it could be that we don't get to $30,000.

I don't know, you know, how fast you start doing it, you're going to be able to put them all in.

I hate my health to be bound by this because what we would like to do is we want to, in those countries, be able to say to all of them, sign up.

You come in and you report for this work, you sign up now.

It may well be that, as we figured, we're going to start, like, with an increment of 10,000 jobs as we can wrap up and put these people to work.

And so now all that it is is a kind of thing which, well, okay, 57,000 is the potential, but we must get to 57,000.

So we spend a whole year and just never be able to go beyond 30,000 in a year.

Well, just let you take the leverage off because you don't have the right to have them come in and sign off.

That's right.

The project doesn't work.

That's right.

We're convinced.

I told him I'd get back.

Fortunately, when he caught me with this line, I was at the airport yesterday in San Francisco.

So I had no chance to talk to our people.

And I said to talk to him and Jim Hall, who's in charge of this whole thing.

He was very much getting on these movies.

Oh, no, he is here.

I called him on the phone.

He told him what the latest offer was.

I said, Jim, what does it do?

Harley.

And he said, well, it does keep us from being able to say to the people in those counties, sign up.

See, we're convinced that just like picking up the checks in New York, where they didn't pick them up, we're convinced that one of the things we're going to learn in this experiment is that when you say to them, sign up for work, there's going to be a hell of a lot of them who are disappearing out there because they're homies.

And if we can't order them to sign up, we're outheaded.

You know, we have 16% of the people in the country have welfare in California.

Now we're only 10% of the population.

And I seem to think they keep throwing New York at us.

Well, New York settled for 25% of the eligible caseload would be there.

I said, well, number one, we've got a higher percentage of unemployed than New York has, or of the welfare people.

And I pointed out to them, number two, New York fell for this pressure that they have to pay extra money.

New York, they don't just work for their welfare grant.

they are now going to get extra inducement.

Our test, as we explained in San Clemente, was that usually you want to see work for the other.

And the difference is also that because they got extra money for the other, they can work full time.

We're not.

We're not going to have slave labor.

We're going to work them half-time.

So I said, I'm 57,000.

Reading only comes down to less than 30,000 jobs, because it's going to take two people to fill the job, because we're only going to work them half-time.

And none of these seemed to come over very well.

I'm going to tell the president about the number of people that have gone off the rolls up there.

Well, you know, we started this thing in March.

We had started our administrative changes in the military while we were all those months.

But just the spotlight alone that we were doing this.

And then my speaking publicly and then the newsreapers began sending reporters out to get on welfare and came back and passed a series of arguments and arguments.

Well, the result was that we started now, remember for five years, the welfare rolls in California have been going up 50,000 a month.

That's been our rate of increase.

And starting in March, they started going down 20,000.

By the end of September, 119,000 fewer people were on welfare than were on welfare in March.

Now, I haven't the exact figures yet, but we'll be publishing them pretty soon, by the end of this month.

But we know that it's continuing.

That welfare, through October and November, is continuing.

We're on a steady decline in the number of people on welfare.

So we know that the damn thing is working.

And we think the key to it, and I think it's for us, is going to be this work thing.

I mean, John, he suggested after we finish, you have a talk with the group.

He was, he'd love to talk to us.

Well, have you got this thing and see if they can't figure something out?

I mean, I don't know what to, I don't know all the details of the legal side of it or what we can do.

But if you talk to John, talk to John Rooker, let's see if we can do that.

Because I, I think that this proposition, basically, I'm not,

I'm hard on this welfare thing and I just want to see what the problem is.

Richardson has been very good at meeting his people and ATW has been making a deal with New York against all of this.

And Richardson's rolled up because the other guy told him he had to do it.

It's the reason that he will try to put you, you know, I mean, just to help you.

I don't bother to drop it.

You get, you know, the time, how much you're not concerned about it.

It's just a number.

Well, you have insurance on three years from me.

Forget the three years.

You can forget that.

But you see, after all, and that's good.

And if we are here, that would spread the word.

But I'll give you a personal insurance on three years.

Forget mine.

And it's done.

And I can't do that.

This is an experiment.

We think it's going to work.

The other thing is the $30,000 thing, which seems to me should be negotiable.

Don't you think so?

Yes, but it seems to me another relevant thing is the fact that California has a higher number of people involved.

the basis for the work.

The fact that people work on that, on that, those are the elements that I think, those are the elements that distinguish.

So if I, I don't know, I don't know what you said, just on the other side.

And you see, this is the last offer.

I mean, this is a final offer.

This is what we started out with.

We have come way down.

I told you that.

I've heard all this.

Is there any objection or just a disagreement about the clustering of the areas?

Other than the number?

Well, we put out, you know, one by one, different plans of when we could get this, when we could change it to this.

For example, in Los Angeles, we had Los Angeles, Los Angeles County, and San Bernardino and Riverside Counties because they were in orange.

Well, all of a sudden, the first thing that happened was this new public employees act.

Oh, yeah.

They had paid for public employees to come in.

That's not a department of labor, but it's in cooperation with AGW.

So they came in and their flat declaration there was, we will not come into a county where you're doing this other thing.

And I said, Elliot, I don't know where the hell there's any problem with that.

I said, where do you think we would pick the people that would go into those public service slots except for these people that we're having to work

It would literally be a recruiting area for this.

But this was the first pressure.

So we said, okay, we'll drop Los Angeles, San Bernardino, and Riverside counties.

We'll drop them.

We'll switch to another cluster of counties.

We'll give us something, the same test, an urban area.

But you see, they put the pressure on the counties.

County supervisors were calling us.

We want that money.

Don't do anything to keep us from getting that money.

So we said, okay, we'll get out of there and we'll get out of those counties.

So then we rearranged another group of counties.

And it was less.

Finally it's down to this one that has a total of 57,000 people, which is all that would be able-bodied, eligible to take these assignments.

At halftime.

The ATW had no criticism.

It was supported with arrogance.

It was just the numbers.

Just the numbers.

Now, the question is $57,000.

And I just, okay, you should give it a seat.

This is a negotiable matter.

This is the fifth of our plans.

Yeah.

I actually, it's a week.

Right.

I thought we got the standing out of the way, but it's five.

So, I'm going to try to figure out where my silence are and see if we can't work something out.

Mr. President, I'm going to be a tell-tale and tell you this goddamn bureaucracy.

You remember you said, let's do it in Illinois, New York, and California, all true?

Does that mean Ogilvy's turned it down for some reason?

Well, I'll tell you one of the reasons.

Ogilvy came to me about a week later at that nurse conference.

And he said, geez, if you could run, I don't think this thing is going to work.

He said, ATW's already been out of the scene.

And they used the very word that you used at San Clemente and said you didn't want tokenism.

He said, ATW's told me that this thing's only going to be a token.

He said, we've got to have more help than that.

Now, you know this.

You want to, yeah.

We're out of the police, but there are other things.

That bureaucracy is a damn hard one to handle.

You know, they're not any of us.

They're all part of the system, too.

We have very few.

We just have a few sitting on top of hundreds of thousands over there.

But we understand this.

I understand this.

It's not going to be done in seven weeks.

The Rockefeller is trying.

You're trying.

We're trying.

Oh, we are trying, don't we?

I don't know if you think that's the case.

You are on the court.

I think he's making a mistake there, Ron, if you're talking to him.

And I expect you, this is a very sensitive area.

Don't mention that John and I raised, John and I talked about it yesterday.

He's in deep trouble in Illinois.

And it's not probably his fault.

I mean, he had to have been interested in tax problems and a lot of other things and so forth.

But for whatever it's worth,

It's the evaluation of many of his friends in Illinois that he may be trying to appeal to a constituency that he can never win.

In other words, he doesn't want to be as tough as you have been, Horace.

As a matter of fact, Rockwell has been a tough welder.

Is that a fair statement?

That's a fair statement.

That's good.

Percy's killing for him back here.

Yeah.

And Percy, of course, is taking that same line now.

Hopefully, we'll never get Percy's constituency.

He's got to get his own.

My own view is that, oh, but he's got to be his own man.

I don't think, totally, we can ever sell ourselves to the world.

Right, John?

What he's trying to do now is to turn to that side, whereas I don't think he should be here.

He's got to stand up on some of these things and try to take the issue out.

He does in May.

I don't know.

He's a pro.

He's been around a long time.

I guess he determined this course.

If the subject comes up with, you know, maybe a conservative leading in that direction, we want to win.

Yeah, or he got a tough campaigner.

It's all Simon against him, apparently.

He's another kind of guy.

We've taken on Percy, I say, already.

This is the amendment of his on the hold harmless of 125%.

the present state cost of welfare.

And the president, our feeling is that all the things you're going to do about this, if you suddenly put a ceiling and say to the local and the state government, beyond this level, whatever welfare cost, you'll never have to pay the federal government who will pick up the tab for it.

There's never going to be any reform of welfare.

Hell no.

Just send them.

Absolutely.

I've already got a wire from Sargent.

Oh yes, he's sure that I will join in supporting him.

Hell, we've already sent a wire, but he thought it would be kind of cute to send a wire to Tony and Grant to urge him to vote against it.

Wish I'd better go do it than make the wire public.

Uh, Mister, what was wrong with it and why are we opposed to it?

There's one other person here, of course, and that is not a registration position.

I know.

As a matter of fact, can I tell you what I said about Percy at the dinner the other night?

He was sitting at the next table back to back with me, and I said, this is the dinner.

And Percy got on with it.

overtime thing to his.

And I was counting how much per minute it was costing when he got to your legislative program and how innovative and so forth it was.

And he opened his mouth and I said, well, let's go ahead with the son of a bitch.

And I heard that speech and I couldn't, I couldn't believe it.

I said, who the hell's talking?

Yeah, who is talking?

Foreign policies, of course, will be done in the war.

Right?

He voted for George.

He voted for Manny Field.

He voted for every goddamn event.

You know, it's unbelievable.

But he knew this was our audience.

That's right.

That was our audience.

He knew that these guys were basically the decent business people of Illinois.

And it was close.

And he was a clever follower.

He hasn't opened a television.

He mattered.

That's right.

Well, I must say, your remarks out there were great.

Not only one, it's

earlier, in the early morning session, which we're on most of the time, which you're seeing in our halls, you see, and also in Mark's afterwards.

But they, uh, this dentist, Percy, is a... Could you believe it, John?

No.

He said there's a...

He caught that in your eye, you know, because he did out-speaking it.

We helped everybody out, and Percy is all about receiving it.

I just have to believe that I have the gall to get up and say that.

You can get up and say, honestly, if you make a short speech, which you're supposed to read, you're 15, so I have to take 15 at the end.

But nevertheless, the overtime, but nevertheless, that's all right.

But if you take this time, I'm going to just say, well, we

the usual, you know, white voice kind of thing.

Well, we support the president, the re-election, all that jazz, if that's what everyone's saying.

If you go into something and you tell that audience that he had been a supporter all the time, you know, a lot of them probably didn't know any different.

But the angry person, that's the traffic business contributor, just followed the votes up close and believed in the video, and he did that.

It's a bill that reaches your desk.

You'll be getting a letter from me.

It's a liner.

Please give a call for a veto.

That is this Mondale bill about the child care centers.

Now, we started off again with the idea of child care stacks so we could put them out at work.

But this thing, the paper drive column, you know, this is what they, oh yeah, this guy was starting to open that up.

This isn't confined to welfare or anything else, and this now has gone beyond.

This is my God.

God, this is the state taking over the rearing of the child.

Be sure you are learning.

There's lots of the types of packages.

I'll tell you what it said.

It said the types of packages.

Oil.

It said that the oil for rearing.

Well, I don't think it's a tax package, too.

Well, whether they got it or not, that takes a

to his credit on this case, we'll broker it out on that.

But it's in the O.P.O.

Appropriation, Authorization, and Authorization, the whole job here, Senator.

Be sure that you send a wire to me.

I have an idea.

I don't know how I'd feel about it, but I'd like to get a wire.

Senator, the crime scene is going into it.

Yes, our senators.

Now, just the last point, I'm very aware of the bill.

The real problem is, basically, that concerns me about the program.

For example, I understand the child care center in the bill, which has for its purpose child care so that a mother can get the hell out of work so they can grow up and stuff.

When it goes beyond that, then you are going on the dangerous proposition, I think it's a dangerous proposition, that the state...

takes the voice of the man to raise the kids.

Boy, you crossed that line.

You are very close to that.

That's what I was looking at.

Just send me the wire.

All right.

Mrs.

Rush.

Yeah, that's right.

Because this is how we range.

Now they can have all these social workers, psychiatrists, this whole thing, you know, to these children.

And you know, it's a strange, we forget that in World War II,

In order to get Rosie the Riveter, when we were so short of manpower, we had child care centers all over America, in churches, in schoolrooms, manned by volunteer mothers.

Volunteers came in and took care of these kids, and I don't think they destroyed them, killing and doing this.

And no one sat out while they had them there to correct all their social ____ or their psychological ____ adjustments or anything in these kids.

But this bill has got to, oh, I can see all of those pros in that whole social reform field going right into these centers and having those ____ there.

That's what the old Catholic church said.

I just really wanted to say we have the days are restless.

I have letters on my desk, and one, a horrible letter, and the, I'm talking about, I want so much from it.

It's like, Walter Knott and Blanche Seaver refuse to support the dinner because of the dissatisfaction.

You know, Pat Broglie, yes, Pat can blow it on coal, on anything, but Walter Knott and Blanche Seaver do not deserve the Republican cause, likely.

I never have known them to deserve it ever before, or anything.

And I get these letters from men around the country who've been great in fundraising and prom and so forth.

And I just feel that before they get crystallized too much in this position, something can be done to give them a briefing regularly.

to let them get it off their chest, to put it into their belly.

But this one letter has been presented to me as one that they are going to send as a mailer to leading Republicans by the thousands, tens of thousands, who I think that's a very big figure, 20,000.

Very destructive.

And this is my sales letter.

Yeah.

I don't deserve to know.

But there are others, and...

Men in California like Jack Hume, Holmes Tomlin, they said, we can't win if they are not enthusiastically engaged on our side.

We know that about the Republican Party.

And in the case of, well, they don't have any place else to go,

Yes, there's a third position.

You just sit there and ask.

That's right.

All right.

You're the expert on that.

Yeah, they can do it.

62, they can do it.

They can do it.

Well, I think your suggestion of getting some group up, and maybe rather than getting them here, like up in California, you've got to do it state by state basis.

That's not hard to get the names from a distance because they're all talking to each other, basically.

But I think, Ron, that you don't want to get all the hard notes in one group.

The president said it's better to do it on a heuristic, mystic basis and bring in some of the tattic thomases that haven't left the fold and go along with it and harden them to be on service yet.

Well, you could bring in the Calvary.

The Calvary group should be done separately because that's us.

And it could be done nicely.

So that they get the attention.

If the group is too large, it isn't good.

Lee Kice is going.

Lee Kice says he's going.

Well, Lee's a little volatile at times.

He's been corresponding with Larry, myself, and a few of the others, and I think Lee is not being unredacted.

But I had lunch with Jim Huckle here this week.

Jim's helping in this area.

And he has, of course, been talking to a lot of them.

And he feels that what you really need is someone

a good signal in some direction that they can rally around and our friends can use to put a burden or make a burden.

See, I think this shares some things.

It's like talking to Henry in there.

See, the human thing, in their minds, that's you and Henry.

That's not the State Department.

So then they're disappointed there.

I think there are

a number of things that they understand.

For example, they're told, as you told me, that, hell, we're not going to give away Taiwan.

We're not going to dump them going to Peking.

So I'm looking at more important, well, than just as important, the field of defense.

They really don't want to discourage me.

We have fought a lonely battle here, I guess, without any help from them.

Not any of them ever raised their questions for me, saying, hey, I had to get one letter from these people when I had to go through with their treatment.

You know, I checked that.

Not one of these people said, please go ahead with it.

We never hear from them, you see, when we need them.

I never hear them attack liberals.

You see, that's the fun thing.

All these things we've been throwing out, that the Senate are beating, of course, fighting them off day after day on the Cambodian laws.

at the unilateral withdrawal from Asia.

These are things which we have fought, but it may be that they are not aware.

This is it.

I was just being a governor, and I'm sure it's true in spades here, that these men, activities actually told to them.

and to think that a president can say a thing and get it done.

For example, just as you said earlier, they didn't understand something.

They don't understand this.

To them now, this great concern about us being in second place militarily, that now has, you know, it's been three years, so therefore that's this administration.

And I know that I have been able, in some instances individually, to say, wait a minute, from a five to one superiority when Kennedy could make noises about the missile crisis.

We started in 69 in second place.

In those eight years at Missouri, I can talk about 16.

The first new weapon, the first new weapon system that has been conceived and put in place is the ice carriers.

And they don't think, you see, when I say to them, look, if the President suddenly went to Congress and said, I want an appropriation for three nuclear carriers,

They get his head kicked off from hell.

But they don't see this.

What they need to hear, and hear from you, like in a room, as I say, not more than 1,000 or 1,500 guys, and they need to hear you say as you can, look, this is the reality with Congress, and they've got the edge of rules.

And then point to an ADM and show how skinny was the hoop by which we managed to get it.

And then if you want to say to them, where the hell were you when the fight was on?

And it is true that conservatives, when they elect a man, they feel as if they have a tendency to say, okay, we're there now.

And then realize that the other side is pushing and they've got to make noise too.

They ought to attack the liberals.

They ought to look at me.

They ought to take care of me.

Keep their brains up for opposing all these things.

That would help.

I understand.

They've got to determine what we can do.

I think it has to be done on a highly selective basis, just the leaders.

Because they are not going to be impressed with a big meeting.

They will be impressed with a small meeting.

We should send out the Disappearance and Armistice Effective Dissection

He's going to Cincinnati tonight, today or something.

All right.

I pulled off a publisher the other day, and I just told him my home state had called me just two days ago.

And I know there's no good argument on the phone or anything, but I pulled him off on the basis that I said, well, look, why don't you just don't convince yourself and stay loose, and let me keep in touch with you.

And I...

I said to him, I said, stay loose because, I said, look, the things that some of you were talking about can only, like one of those other men, this country cannot survive four years, under any one of those other men that they're talking about.

And I, and he told me what I had, and he said, well, I had just sent down that jury pretty stiff, and he said, I'll call him back.

He was told, all he does is hold him off for a while.

I will say this in audiences to Republicans.

The pitch that I've been making about what would it be like if, yes, a Republican was going to be king, or a delegate was going to be king instead of a Republican, and then saying in the end, saying now,

or to Russia, said, you're going to talk, said, you're not going to be serving the old friends.

And I said, now, unless and until he shows that he has somehow undergone a massive change in philosophy.

And I think you've got to go with our good wishes.

And this usually is well-received.

They can be talked to.

But I think that there's a...

they're going to get crystallized and into a position and already now my own effectiveness with them that's right

Be careful to, you know, keep his credibility.

He's done a great job in New York on this.

Yes, he has, and I think he's done it in other parts of the county.

Cassius, you know, the first name's the credibility, but his name's Barclay.

Yeah, because his brother's private.

His brother's going down the other street, or at least the middle of the road.

Jim's over here, and again, confused everyone.

So, you know, he's got the philosophy.

Great guy.

Exactly the same.

Well, I guess I've been, uh, Tommy, uh, uh, oh, you're there, uh, uh, they haven't heard much.

Well, I have to say that I appreciate your, uh, what you've done out there, uh, I know that, uh, it's, there are, uh, kind of some pressures at this time, but at the end of the day, we can, they can be very sure about national security if they're going to talk to a guy in his office.

Every day, we're, I mean, it's just the bureaucracy that's making the difference.

I mean, we have a very serious situation that we will change the House and Senate.

We've got to get our vote in the country.

We may be faced with a situation where the United States will resign itself to being the second-strongest country in the world, and we must not do that.

That's the major issue.

That's what ADM is all about.

You see, a lot of people, I mean, even they have services that are screwed to an extent because

And they said, we don't have our carriers.

The point was, we had to have the Indian Reservations Government and also working for other purposes to protect them in that field.

But if this country ever resigns itself to being the second strongest country in the world, then all these foreign policy initiatives are dead.

Dead.

I know.

I mean, we can't.

We are friends.

You think the Japanese and the rest are, right now, handouts.

Just think of the doubts they would have, anti-Germans would have, if they thought the Soviet Union was stronger than the United States.

Now, at the present time, it's people, roughly.

They're ahead in the fuel missiles, we're ahead in airplanes, we're still ahead in submarines, but they're going to catch up, they don't realize it.

On an anti-murderer, that's one place we are, go ahead.

But they'll catch us there eventually, that's just technology.

But when we come down to it,

We have the support for maintaining an adequate national defense.

And on the Soviet, they are meeting there, which is, of course, that will involve negotiation among the Chinese.

It's more just a discussion.

With the Soviet, if you come down to the matter of offensive and defensive weapons, we either have to have an agreement, or the United States may have to go on a major building program

Well, I'm going to say I have a base for it.

You see, at the present time, when I say at the present time, no, these votes in the Senate are just unbelievable.

You mean that we didn't win any of our one-vote actives.

One bad vote, and we won that.

And last year, it was three votes.

This year, it's four.

But it's countable.

I suspect that the National Defense and National Security will pick up on the issue this year.

I don't see how you can avoid it.

And I vow to help with some of our...

But I have to say, the issue, though, will be very clear-cut.

Because they will be for cutting.

That's right.

And we will be for holding it.

There's no question about it.

The only one of their candidates, the only one, is Jackson, who has supported us in all these things.

They had a bell CIO, he's not going to be nominated for president, you know that now.

But for Christ sakes, Humphrey has voted against ADM, Muskie voted against ADM, Teddy had to go against ADM, all of them voted for cuts in the armed services.

And that's what we're going to be up against.

We can't allow that to happen to this country.

They'll say, oh, we've got to put more into the environment, more into the gas rooms, and more into the cattle care centers.

All three of those countries are the cow care centers.

And so Scoot, Scoot, you know, domestically is liberal.

I know.

Liberal or domestically, it's only a national offense.

It is.

So that's sort of a deal.

But on this issue of national offense, you can really say with very strong conviction,

Nobody that knows that in terms, at a period when you're starting to negotiate, that's the time to be strong.

We will not be weak when we negotiate.

We can't do it.

If I ever had this defense, I think we'd reap that budget as much as we can, or as much as we can in California, too.

Don't tell anybody that.

We can appreciate it.

Yes.

No, I heard there's a line there, and I think we can do a little more.

Well, is there a story I would like to use to answer it?

Uh, no, I think Alex had a lot.

Okay.

Ron is out here.

He's always the first one on the view.