Conversation 869-007

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 Do not cite this transcript as authoritative.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.

I really just want to sit back.

He said.

but is putting them in another place and hanging them in another way that some are actually expanding.

And Jerry and I will make a point how difficult it is for us to have this issue so fairly stated that we can't even pass it on to others.

I was advised to learn from fellow scientists

So that is the first thing we're looking to figure out, how best to sell this.

Because now it's so failing, and with such categorical exactitude, that we take an affection for what they are, frankly, and we're all about people that want that.

I think the thing to do is turn you over to Jerry's stuff and see what we can do there, because you're not meeting with the same individuals in the Senate.

And I think the news, news, public statements are great, but I think it ought to be published.

I guess I never give up hope for it.

But I ask you to watch this.

You're a spokesman.

And I think we go, we try to agree with the votes, and then we should go over it.

But I'm not going to agree with the votes that are here.

And so let's just have some time when I'll see where it's working.

And the votes that are out, it doesn't make any sense to try to convince the Senate to do things that they don't.

I think we have an average of perhaps 33, 35, or 45 senators.

And at this point, the shield is getting nice.

I don't think, I don't see how you're going to change them really.

But we've got to recognize that we're going to get votes on TV, so we're not going to get it in the Senate.

No, I would just have to look at it as actors who just aren't going to stand up.

They just aren't going to do it.

It's not their nature.

Well, obviously, it's true, but as we get into some of these other things, the impression is that.

We have a little different problem in the House.

I think you, after the election, would agree with me that we become a little more conservative

that has been paired with some of the other GCs.

Playing with the Democrats.

That's the right approach.

Not like every one of our districts.

Yeah.

So I think that's the plus.

Of course, one thing about the freshman senators, they should be able to be somewhat more stationary.

Because they're coming up.

That's one thing, right?

I can see where people are coming up.

They're scared to death.

And you've got to watch your nose.

I can't

That you can spend this time together.

Well, it seems to me that if you've got the house, there is a way to take all that.

So I just want to be in the Senate for some positive votes.

But I can't, I don't believe, frankly, we'd get the Senate on the negative votes.

By that I mean...

So did the other issue.

It's a giveaway.

The boys are on our side.

Yeah.

So, but a lot of the things like aid that come to that, or ADM, that's what makes it helpful.

Oh, and we should spend time with senators on that issue.

But don't put the sorry things that we can't with them.

What is the deal with this?

Well, I have on the 14th, I was going to try

No, I don't.

I think what they will do, they'll try in two or three.

I may be wrong.

That is a good thing.

I'd better expose this to the world.

Now, let's see what they're showing you.

I think they've got a name on the issue, so they're working on it more.

That's what I think.

When things like that, trust control, that generation, we have a sustained value.

That's what we're doing.

So then, before we control this.

What about pleasure?

Well, we can sustain sex.

I think we've got a pretty good job.

We've got a pretty good batting average.

The ones we undoubtedly most sustain are rotational rehabilitation and the so-called rural water and sewer bill.

We've got 54 votes thirsty against it.

We might pick up another 30, but we have to pick up 80, and that's a big chunk.

I voted last Thursday on the role of water and sewer.

The Senate hasn't passed that.

No.

The Senate passed that.

I think that would probably be the first one.

Unless we get a role in that.

I'm afraid so.

But I think we ought to make an effort in the House because I do want to have

Now, it might bring a drink which we can sustain, satisfied with an amendment.

I don't know what the Senate version is, but the House Committee version is about a hundred million dollars.

I'm not going to argue that it's an authorization.

And they said, and Emily said that it's not a mandatory amendment.

I don't know what the Senate version is.

I think they ought to fight it, even though...

So we're trying to get that here.

Well, this problem is basically what we need you and the two Republican senators that we got.

We need them to pee off.

You fellas have got to be out there and stuff.

But in the House, we need you for the votes.

So we've been talking about two different things.

Votes are enormously important.

Thank you, sir.

is casting the bolt.

All the other terrorists.

and the other aspect of spending.

Al Queen tells me that he explored this in the middle

But I think this is the one they're going to try.

Now one thing you can do, you know what I mean?

Give me a little bit about why in detail you vetoed it, President vetoed it last fall, and why you think it ought to be vetoed now.

But also, if we could have the record of this administration showing what we recommend and what has been spent on the actual rehabilitation so that we can talk affirmatively about what's been done

I don't know.

to the point that it may not.

Senator, look how many senators are basically what we call the men of law and the men of

And then I can argue how it relates to this proposed bill and how what we've done is better than what this bill has done.

Very close.

and I don't even know what he's saying.

And then we lost them on that.

That includes all the others, too.

They're going to say, well, no, we've lost that.

And then I'm going to ask you to see.

So I'm not sure.

I'm not sure you've got to cast this right.

So wait.

Well, that's the key point.

That's our rear.

The material given us on the VHL, for example, maybe beats up again.

It speaks of the impact of the budget.

I don't know.

I don't know what to say.

I would like...

the same to be carried over here to contrast with how much we're actually doing against what the Democrats are trying to make us do.

If I got in 15 of those, I could read that in 15 minutes.

I don't have that.

That's about to open up the VA hospitals to all collateral dependents of veterans who entered Vietnam or the Civil War.

Now, it wouldn't help you to have them buried at home.

But you can say this, this administration in the last four years just turned the pattern back.

That's what you're using.

That's what I see.

This administration has doubled the amount for health.

It's a whole thing.

It's a hard thing.

It's a terrible thing.

The argument is not to be specific.

The argument is, if it's veterans, we're going to hold on to the veterans, but we're not doing what the team wants.

Yes, sir, to change the public view of what's happening in this meeting.

You say, well, now look what we found in there.

First, overall, we've done what they've offered for what we call domestic spending for the passport.

350% increase in civil rights, et cetera, et cetera.

So when they say, why don't you want to civil rights?

Why don't you want to do the poor voters' civil rights?

What's the matter with this?

It's that kind of thing, too.

And I had a debate with a speaker yesterday on a TV program, and I took a point just as you're making it.

But in order to do that, you've got to talk generally

I think if we lose the vocational rehabilitation, we ought to say that we've lost the war.

We've lost the battle.

But we're very sure that if you don't say it, it's a result of losing it.

It's all that's lost now, right?

On the other hand, if we keep pulling up, say, on one of those apostles, we'd break it back.

Yes, sir.

If we don't vocational rehab, we don't think we can.

We'll know better tomorrow what kind of a vote we get.

it was said

I suppose each individual bill.

I think it would be helpful with the White House press if we could get something from up here that gives us a little indication of support over on the floor.

The danger is that when we get down into individual bills.

advantage in beginning to signal now that these are dangerous spots, rather than waiting until after Congressional action, when it then announced it was going to have a year-and-a-half base.

It looks like recent contrivance really is a weaker position later than it would be now.

I'll bet during the voting on any one of these bills, on their 40

What's going to happen?

Is it going to be vetoed?

If I can say yes, it helps me get both right there, because... Well, Jerry and Hugh should have a list of vetoes.

Oh, they have, yeah, sure.

I mean, I asked a question later, and it was quite exciting, but it would help her hurt.

For us to be saying something out here, out ahead this far, my immediate reaction is yes, John.

It would help her.

I think it's important to have all three of us do it simultaneously, but

You know, there's lots of merit to this.

How do you like it?

I would say just weak sometimes.

Well, now, they're going to see the president today.

They're going to go out tomorrow and say, we're going to find me with the president yesterday.

And we discussed the money and goods.

Right.

And we discussed all the other things we're doing.

Right.

And I'll tell you what your new situation tomorrow is going to be.

No, no, no, no, no.

the Veterans Hospital, National Cemeteries, and Drug Control.

And they will be able to feel ready for action by Wednesday, Thursday, and Sunday, at least.

Absolutely not.

Vietnam veterans are going to be there.

I'm not going to understand that.

Now, these old World War II, those hats they want to have, I mean, their granddaughters, those young babies in the hospitals, they're like, oh, no more.

That's the reason.

You know, the professional veterans, you know, aren't that interested in Vietnam veterans.

They take the Vietnam veterans.

to the others, you know, I mean, the professional veterans, you know, that come to the Legion every Thursday night and get drunk.

That's the way it is.

None of these bills that are involved with veterans do anything adverse as far as Vietnam veterans are concerned.

And there's a lot of things.

Well, there's a lot of things for everybody.

There's a lot of things in demand for the World War II.

What I handle is anything specifically that helps Vietnam veterans who've got people.

I agree.

Anything against the Vietnam veterans were even identified against the Vietnam veterans.

Does the Vietnam veteran have the same rights and the GI fellow rights as other veterans?

Reemployment education?

Yes.

Oh, sure.

Yes, pretty well.

Basically, they've got an overall approach that we might talk about on veterans' innings and specifics.

Basically, three things.

One, that we've got to emphasize our compassion and concern for the Vietnam Act and focus on the end.

Secondly, talk about our positive record, and we've got a hell of a veterans record all the way across the board, educational loans, medical care and so on.

Third, we're trying to be sure that no veterans don't reach the President's desk that they can't sign.

Now, that's going to be tough because these are going to have

No veterans bill that is related directly to Vietnam.

I think you'll find that they will track PR in such a way that you can see the problem up here.

Now, in point of fact, you take this one about the defendants, the veterans of the past getting free care and being a veteran, but that's a national issue.

that some of those dependents are Vietnam veterans' dependents now.

And so the argument that you're denying the wives and children of Vietnam veterans is a little funny if that goes through.

I don't think the basic veterans' organization or the ordinary veteran is for the dilution of the VA service by including the wives' children in that sentence.

But you can see how they're going to be turned up.

So we've got to be, we've got to be.

We're going to work on this and be very close to the leaders on this because that's one area on veterans.

There's no way.

It's like vocational rehabilitation in the States, right?

If you have to be a veteran.

of information about your concern for the Vietnam veteran, the Republican Party's concern for the Vietnam veteran, your past achievements and accomplishments in that direction, and the legislation that you've done over the last couple of years in a real way.

And I think we can do a lot in that direction.

We've got some ideas that we'll avoid.

Let's get it out of the agenda right away, right?

That's the automatic speech.

As far as the votes are concerned,

So brain and social, which we are doing, they're all, every member of the Senate, including either the unions in the White House or the dinners or the...

But every Senate member and so forth, we're not trying to do anything about it.

I mean, it is a question of having him with us all the time.

But as far as me and Joseph are concerned, we know we're not going to get him.

And I just don't think you should go in and tell these faults.

I mean, guys like Curtis and others who have been good soldiers on many other things, they obviously won't believe us on this sort of thing.

Look.

would the press do a good job tomorrow?

I think they will.

Would it be feasible at all to bring them down and spend 10 or 15 minutes with them?

Well, let me suggest this.

Wouldn't it be better if you get your first vote?

The only problem I have is just bring them to the press.

We've had a reception, and you've got a lot of guys, Jerry, or all the groups, SOS, and all the rest of it.

What the hell

I'm perfectly willing to do it.

I think it would be understood by others.

Here they may have worked a week or ten days on it.

Well, why don't you talk to them?

All right, fine.

Fine.

I get COVID.

Well, no, I'm not going to make you look into that.

If it's something that you're saying, thank you very much.

They'll finish a special order tomorrow.

Forty-seven.

Forty-three of them.

There.

And if they do a good job, which I think they will, I'll say it.

This is one other segment that we can't wait to press now, but we have five or six Republican senators who are presently not going to run for re-election.

Some may hold to that.

Yeah.

Some of the others may need some reaction from you, I would think.

I think a couple just want to be talked back into it.

Like a cooking bellman.

I think they need to be talked back into running.

Sure.

They won't allow the outputting to... Other than, I don't know, there's a... That is probably what we want.

We should let Bennett take and...

I suppose some of them may be...

They don't want to.

Young is going to go.

Young is going to run.

Somebody is trying to beat him out there.

He doesn't have to.

But, you know, you've got to take a hard look at the fact that this is a time that we've got to be very sure that we're not going to have guys that are going to be...

But he's going to decide.

You see, I don't want to call it.

And we'll help.

And if you want to do a bush workout, some sort of field.

Oh, and rock, of course.

You should get on with talking.

We do the bush rock.

What do you all come up with?

I did, effectively, talk about when I come back.

And sure, I'll try to remind you.

The question was, oh, my, I hope that was not a shock.

And that is difficult.

And you don't have to tell me what it is.

You see, we've got a chance to better it.

Our problem, Mr. President, is twofold.

Number one,

We are actively promoting Democrats to switch.

Dan Daniel of Virginia, he has told me that he's going to in January.

Well, he's going to run as a Republican.

Republican this year against the non-nation, I think you'll get Dan Daniels and Dave Satterfield.

And maybe even Tom Downey.

We've got Sonny Montgomery in Mississippi.

We're working on that.

The other thing is Bud Brown is doing an excellent job out in the recruiting field.

And I think that's going

Well, he's got a lot of ability, but he's his own worst enemy.

What is he?

Well, they call him the Tennessee Talking Horse.

Well, that's probably what most of us have said about him.

I thought that was a good thing.

I love you.

Well, he was a good guy.

There's no rock that showed him the primary pole results.

But we've had no problem with Michael.

I couldn't get along with either one.

The White House couldn't get along with either one.

Whatever you want.

You and you have got to determine who you want.

You've already determined Bronco, haven't you?

Oh, yeah.

You worked well then.

Very well.

But you've got to make your choice.

I remember I told you once before the election.

Right.

But they had a contest in the Senate, and Bill only won 16 to 14, and there are no hard feelings.

Bill only had it.

I lost her.

I've talked to both of you before.

So if you and George and Jerry, when you've got something that you want to have this guy, or us, if you think we ought to bring him in, if you think, for example, we ought to have a meeting, all those are going to be candidates which we might want to do a checkpoint.

We bring him in.

In your case, you can't quite do it that way because that's 180.

But you see, we've got this whole drill now.

Let me tell you, and can we keep this in confidence?

and of course we had the economic down there in which case it's right to take.

All right.

1972, some thought it did where we went in, and yet it didn't help anyone at all.

And it certainly didn't do a good job.

It was all down there.

So, although it made a lot of money.

Now, in 1974, we have the interesting situation where the president has no, is not going to run

But I am prepared, after all of you sit down here, I am prepared to take a look at this.

all out on that sort of thing.

No.

But your judgment on that, I'd like for you, Brock, Brown, of course, Wilson, and maybe your wife, Michael, too, if you want to come into it.

You all sit down and discuss it.

And then if you could have a talk in terms of our scheduling.

rather than just doing it in three-week splits before the election.

In these days, it's impossible for you or any president to take off.

Even in 1970, I think in 11 days, I didn't know who he was.

It's impossible.

But starting early in 1964, we can pick these states up all across the country.

It is my plan for four years to put all 50 states in any land like I did in Florida.

What do you feel about this?

Or you go in and you praise that Marlo Cook for being a great fighter in the House of Representatives.

You know what I mean?

But in addition to that, without taking any Democrats on the go, we've got our candidate.

And if you've got a real chance to build one, I have.

Now, understand, we've got the year laid ahead.

You have to know well enough that this will have to be done for 10 months.

And doing it over 10 months, we can cover one hell of a lot of ground.

The question is, how much better can we do?

We're prepared.

I'm being prepared to do it.

Because there's no problem, you see, of, you know, anybody saying, well, we don't want to hear about the next election.

See, it's not going to be my problem.

But we had to want to do it for the best.

We had to want to do it for the best.

All right, well, anyway, just put that in the back of your head.

as to something we can do for all these guys.

And I will, that is important to what we did before.

I'll catch you in a moment and all that nonsense.

If you do it over a longer period of time, it's not as obviously political.

And sometimes that's a lot more effective than actually, if it's only in the last few days, nobody knows what's effective.

You know, Roosevelt tried, it was not effective, but we would not do this on the basis of our courage.

We would do it always on the basis of

Four of the guys we got, or four of the new guys were... Could I bring up one more?

Sure.

We talked at a meeting yesterday about the trade bill, and I guess that's coming up in the next 10 days as I recollect the conversation.

One of the real problems is that we're going to send a... Not that it's coming to be brought up in the House or Senate.

No, Bill is going to have to bring up the latest one.

We've got a problem because of the efforts of our Israeli friends.

We're a Jewish group here.

We're the most favored nation.

And the impact that they want to, I don't know, a Soviet immigration fee.

Well, I talked to Mrs. Meyer on this.

Let's keep this right for a few.

We are candid.

She's against this.

Sorry, because I've got to talk about it, because I know the problem, too.

She realizes, here's what's happening, that we're getting the Jews out of Russia now.

She realizes that the Jewish community in this country hangs anything like that on that and destroys it in that manner.

the president will slam the door down and never get you to be there again.

She knows that.

She knows that what we need is to make the noise here and so forth and so on.

But don't go so far as to make the whole economic policy, shall we say, cooperation between the U.S. and the Soviet Union will rise or fall on the basis of what the Soviet Union does with regard to its problem toward the Jewish minority.

How do you handle it?

It's a scary thing, the idea of that.

Well, good.

But what she was, what we were saying was that we've got to find a way to get that, to get that so that we don't put it just, look, as I told her, I said, as far as the members of the House of Senators are concerned, you've got to overcome it, don't you?

I said, there are no Russians in here, no Congressmen.

I mean, they're all going to vote for the future.

But I said, she realized that she knew this was going to hurt, which was lovely.

I said, yeah, I thought you were actually talking about it.

There will be never another Jew who bleeds Russian.

They're speaking in May, and this morning's paper says they're down to 10%.

Only 10%.

Good.

I just thought, I don't know.

In case you're trying to put this campaign up for the State Department.

We've done it so they can save face.

We've never let them save face.

But now, if you can't miss things, forget it.

My thought is, if we could get in the Committee on Ways and Means a provision that follows the format of the so-called manual amendment with the traditional escape laws,

That if you decide as president, if it's in the national interest, that there be no removal of the most faithful nation clause.

And this is the kind of escape clause that's given to presidents for the last 20 years and a good many other cases.

And then I'll talk about it again.

Too much talk.

the NFN thing, that it should be left to the presidential discretion.

So you can bargain with him, and he's absolutely right.

But then, look at how he wants the power.

But what we want to do is get the job done.

And I've got to do it.

I don't want to have somebody put a tie on it.

You can't do it.

Well, if we could work with Wilbur to get one of these escape clause provisions, you still...

I have the affirmative thing that some of these people want, but then the next provider gives to the president this authority.

Well, I think we ought to work with Dr. Wilker down in Arkansas last week.

I think it's a chance, Mr. President, as you say.

Well, we'll try.

That doesn't accomplish anything.

We've got an unequal sponsor.

Any sponsor to that?

I know that.

There are probably 340 of them.

How many will try it?

None of them have any goddamn sense of responsibility.

Try that.

None.

But if you don't get it, then they're acting like crazy about it.

And I'm guilty of that, too.

And I know what Andrew Harrison thinks of me.

But if we can give it to them in the big time and take it away from them in the small time, that's what I want.

Well, I understand why people don't take Jackson.

Jackson, like you, is two of the best directors in the Senate supporting the foreign policy.

But Jackson, frankly, he's in the pocket.

He's in the lobby of this country.

He'd be the first to admit it.

Then he's going to ask his candidates, what the hell did you think Jackson did?

We're working with the Jewish people.

And let me say this, he'll work with you on that.

And incidentally, Henry said he'd talk to Javis.

So if you would follow up with him, you remind him that he needs to talk to Javis.

Because Javis is a leader here, and Javis has got to see.

He is really concerned about those 10%.

And of course he is.

Why are Jewish Bibles just terribly concerned?

Mrs. Meyer told me how they had these, the way they treat them, the vicious bastards.

They take a sane Jew, and they put him in a nut house with ten insane people, and they leave him there for a year.

By that time, he's nuts.

in that position.

I don't know.

We want to offer it.

But the way it came out is give the Russians a chance to do it gracefully.

They want to offer it.

are working on this all the time, but they say, please don't slam the door open.

Now, that's the way to talk.

I think Devin's going to understand this.

He'd like to get off that.

Oh, I know he would.

Well, let's let him.

You just got the point.

If you could put the small front and the big front.

But we've got to get it in the House bill first, and then you've got the format to support it in the Senate.

We have a better chance of holding it.

Thank you, Larry.

I want to thank you and Jerry a couple of things about leadership.

I think that we ought to take one thing on a certain extent and let you and Jerry give an answer.

You know, we've had this wildfire business on here, which hasn't been very good.

Now, here's a chance for you to take that word out a little bit, of course.

Your office is over here.

Why don't we extend that?

We wouldn't have them sit at the table.

We'd have them sit around so that you've got to say, so that you've got to say, as many as six to eight.

Just sit around on the outside and listen at each of the leaders' meetings.

Is that volume exciting?

like, for example, in trade.

Now, here's a place where you can pick up some of your liberals' issues, because they're for trade.

And Barry was already on board.

They did not have people that we already had.

And we've gone down a certain way, and we've always seen the same ones.

And I don't mean by that that, like, one exception would be Barry.

Barry, though, on occasion, you know, you've got to have him because he was a candidate for president.

But, gee whiz, there are other members of that Senate

You ought to take a list.

We have never been to a meeting.

There are some members of the House here, I think, rather than taking the absolutely new list.

But we do another one, right?

There are members of CNN that have never been to a meeting.

I'll never forget the guy, for example, a social racist who came down here.

He was a congressman from Mississippi who retired.

Phil Collins.

No, no, no, the other one, Tom Andrews.

Tom, I would add to you, we haven't had him, the last, go to the White House yet.

I mean, we just were able to work it in because of, you know, the usual thing we let down to listen to the Democrats.

It was a dinner for a nothing guy, I don't know, some actor or something.

Anyway, this person is dead.

He's almost in tears.

His wife wasn't.

She's sitting there 25 years in the house.

It's the first time she's ever been invited to the White House.

She's a Democrat.

Now, we're doing a lot of this.

That's why these meetings are going to be as general.

We're going to have to have the White House tell us that some of the Democratic Congressmen are not.

Now, we're going to cover all of our Republicans, all the Democrats, except the Democratic study group and government.

So first of all, I'm a loudmouth, and I don't think there's no problem at all.

That's a problem right away.

We'd love to have worries, but he's not going to tell us.

Thank you for something, though, something that he's interested in.

But let's get to it.

Now the other thing is, let me get the panic to work out a few thoughts.

What we want to do, Hugh, is this.

It seems to me that every other week, every other week, we ought to have a meeting of you and Jerry.

But I would suggest that probably you'd want to also include your website.

and I think you should tell them that may we tell them that may we take a little credit and say that we joined in the suggestion that you discussed I think that's right now in other words next you would have your regular leadership meeting you'd come the following week with an area with your other now don't think that the regular leadership meeting would follow the next week because

And the bipartisan, however, will be all of our leadership at the top level, plus the Democratic leader, plus some wild cards.

You're going to have a bipartisan on entity.

And I need a bipartisan on trade.

And I need a bipartisan on aid.

So those three are going to have to come in the next three months.

But you see, this way, you'll turn the crank about every three weeks.

But I do think that it's very valuable to have the small group of

Every other time.

But with the bipartisan, so what would probably happen?

Republican leaders, that's next week, I think, isn't it, Bill?

Yes, the Republican leaders are next week.

The following week is likely to be bipartisan.

The following week, that would be smaller.

And the next week, we'd come back to the Republicans.

Fair enough.

And that sounds like a good scheme for you, so that every week you'd be down.

What I mean is every week you can carry this.

And our others, sometimes on a bike road, sometimes just by yourself, and sometimes on the revolving zone.

And then do I understand that next week we would have our first wild card go around?

Yes.

And it's valid.

What I want to do, I want to do, I'd like to have as many as eight.

If you can get it.

But if you can't because the seating is six, I do not put them at the table.

But I think what you could do, if I could suggest so, I could put them in seating.

This is very important, too.

directly behind the directly behind on either side of the vice president on the one side and the other side so you see one would be behind you one would be behind Jerry you see the two great guys so that they don't feel that they're sort of sort of obvious helpful to us and then we'll have in that instance all they get is a picture we'll have all they get not a press picture there's kind of that stuff

All I need is a picture.

We'll get a picture back to them later on.

Now, don't be mean.

You're not going to get too many on this, but you'll have wild cards also for the lifeguards.

That'll be $104.

But you see, there's $8 before you get about $12.

You can get some very important people.

Now, on occasion, I want to suggest this.

If we've got one hell of a problem on a veto coming up,

I'd like for you to give Jerry and the couple, the bachelors, can you keep communication if we've got a vote that we need in the Senate?

Maybe we've got six senators and two congressmen.

So this won't get too rich on us.

I have to protect the House in this, Mr. President.

We have aid on a regular basis.

Should we get six in the Senate, too?

I mean, after all, we've got a hell of a lot of...

We want to work with you, sir.

We're going to try to get rid of that control.

We will try to find ways to talk about it.

I know you're concerned about talking about it.

Let's have someone specific talk to you about it.

If you've got a specific thing that you want to talk to a group of senators and congressmen about, all right, we'll bring it in.

Well, if you're going to talk about a specific thing, it's better to bring in just a group of cars from a group of centers.

If you're going to talk about a problem, it's one that's evidently urgent at the time in that house.

I think it's better to...

I think, frankly, from my point of view, it's a problem that house members like to be taught to be alone.

They look at things quite differently.

I think so.

I have one last thing.

The other thing I was going to say is that on your meeting with the candidates, let me say, let's not have that until you have had your meeting with Brock, with George Bush, and the rest of them are also gone.

But my view is, if they're going to be in, let them know that we're back.

Whack!

That'll be something they can all go back and say, well, we're happy.

Because hell, that's...

The Saski, whether it's one that you jump to, but that's got to be running through the Ohio crop, because I don't want to have Saski in, and then say, all right, we're all, you go to that plants you're running against, or somebody like that.

Because you know how this actually is.

He's mercurial.

He's actually a very evil man.

I like that.

But the difficulty is that he decides to run in a march like he said to run.

You agree?

I said, well, I've had other little cookies like that.

Oh, I know.

Comes around trying to get me to talk him out of this decision not to run.

That's the way he operates.

You see, if I get the man, if I get the individual guy to get around, that's an awful tough thing.

Well, you could have cooked it.

I could have cooked it.

You could have cooked it.

Or don't.

It's easy.

Because they ought to run it.

But Saxby, I can't do it until we know that the Ohio establishment believes Saxby ought to run it.

They believe so.

They're not concerned.

They're not.

We'll be guided by that.

And I'd like to ask just one of my material suggestions, that is, that some Cincinnati police will now...

uh

And the freshman went around and got 20 of those sentences on his damn petition before John Taylor and I.

Well, they had a meeting.

The petitioner wanted to have a meeting with you, you know, and be talking about these disputations.

But he took some doing, and Bill knows all about it.

He took some really honest decisions.

That's why we get a few questions.

Well, let me say, I was hoping to get a guideline.

You work this out with Bill and Carl and Chris.

Okay.

I want to ask a question, sir.

We are, I don't care who they are, we're there now.

And this is a question of, do you prefer to have people who deserve it, or do you need somebody who's both going to come up here and get it?

I think the main thing is, believe it or not, it's no good.

We'll get to that later.

Very well.

But we hope to have a lot of public relations done first.

And I would also hope that we get a real tally going with what other countries are doing so that we can sort of shame some of these people.

It's only a matter of fair play for the United States to dare explore a realization of a radical nation.

You can't do it now.

We've got the PR on the way.

We've got to wait for your prisoners to come in.

Oh, Tom, that's short of range.

You couldn't do it in the next 50 days.

Otto Pastin spoke to me yesterday, and he's all with us on this.

He said we spent $30 billion a year for three or four years to fight a war, and now why shouldn't we spend a billion dollars?

Oh, it's going to be about two seconds.

So the other countries are Japan, Germany.

I've got messages from at least a dozen of them.

And thirdly, there are Denmark's.

Now, one thing you should probably say, and this is whether it should race or not, the Russians and the Chinese would help you relocate South Vietnam.

We don't want them.

My God, if you get the Russians and the Chinese and South Vietnam, that's really, you know, the...

What I mean is that we do not want them to go.

We want them to go north.

And they will.

That's their condition.

But we have got to help the South.

And others will.

The Japanese are helping the South.

I started to think of help.

Let us find out.

The devastation of the South is

Our mind was so precise that the story that only a thousand people know is probably true.

We didn't get much.

You know, those POWs, it wasn't interesting, or something, said that on the 18th, they heard a month, and they all cheered, galloped like hell, and they said that their jailer ran to the box office.

The Roman club told us at that reception after the signing that in order to keep the peace, the nations must have the willingness to...

I was very much impressed.

It was a great time.

Bill did a great job.

He should.

I know.

And we appreciate it.

I'm going to go to the state park now.

Those poor guys got killed.

Go ahead.

Knock on wood, people.

We don't know who he wants to kill.

Thank you, sir.

We'll see you next Tuesday.

Thank you very much.

All right.

Good luck.

We'll see you next Tuesday.