Conversation 798-015

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 Do not cite this transcript as authoritative.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 think that's right.

Yeah, it always is.

I bet.

And then the next day, .

I was going to say first on the speeches that are coming to the bottom, foreign policy should be put in the bank, frankly.

But you've just got to leave a hole in Vietnam

It's not that we expect anything.

We may know, or that we don't expect anything either way.

But the point is, don't write the Vietnam section at all, but the other section, Rickards, may as well.

The board policy is the only one.

I'd actually constantly, we would like constantly to do that.

Constantly.

Everybody, constantly, constantly.

Right.

So in that way, I would get that.

I think there might be a little more analysis to be used on the other aspects, you know.

I mean, the great, basically looking to the future more, that we have, that we've been, you remember that you started out the article in the Foreign Affair.

You probably go into this one yourself, or do a lot of editing.

Would we, we have allowed Vietnam to obscure our mission.

You would find it out in 67, I believe.

We have made these agreements, but they're only beginning, you know, I've made that speech over and over again.

But then, so we're doing with China, the Middle East, in relation to Europe.

Between now and the time that will be delivered, the European Security Conference is going to be announced.

The SALT II will have been announced.

The trade agreement will be announced.

So there's going to be a great, I mean, a great deal of movement.

Vietnam, just forget it.

Don't even try to think of anything.

Why couldn't you give a foreign policy radio speech before Vietnam that purposely omits Vietnam and says exactly, leaves on that basis?

You know, I wrote some years ago.

Let's talk about the rest of foreign policy.

Everybody talks only about Vietnam, except when we go to Beijing and Moscow, they're not interested in anything.

And what is far more, the bigger game, Vietnam will pass.

It's a horrible thing.

All wars are.

But it passes.

What really matters is how the big game is being played.

The big game is being played extremely well.

Why can't you frankly say, I'm not going to discuss Vietnam, which has overridden everything else?

That's a pretty good idea that I would like to talk about.

I think you have to.

I don't want to make that speech.

You've got to watch the timing.

Well, actually, it should be made.

It should not be made at a time when Henry's traveling abroad, for example.

It might be an interesting time.

I don't want to make that kind of speech right now.

Could you make the point that Vietnam fits into a much broader picture?

Except, John, the problem is that developments could occur in Vietnam.

Well, I don't think we've seen that.

But it seems to me that the main thrust that comes out of this is that by his preoccupation

government demonstrates his incapability to cope with foreign affairs.

And somehow or another, you draw the comparison by putting it in its place as one facet, or as a symptom of a larger condition, or, you know, how we do it.

Although, let me say this, no plans for next week.

I just, there's no reason.

I mean, to be immediately out there before Paul's speech next week, at a time when Henry made the law, you don't know, you don't know either.

You know, it's, it is the case.

But, but that is, that's not to be a dead loser.

Don't you agree?

And while he's traveling.

Yeah, I think so, because the focus then has to be on what's happening.

They're going to say, why the hell am I not talking about it?

What are you even talking about?

So you've got to figure this out.

It's taking a journey of your own timing.

This is something I don't think it will be.

It cannot be done.

We'll answer your Sunday.

Or this kind of speech.

I would say the following Sunday.

29th.

That would be the 29th.

Yeah.

Now let's come to the others.

Here we go.

We have more or less pretty much approved the journalism business, you know, for taking a joy in that land.

Or next Sunday, or when, or not.

Well, it's... Well, that's what we're talking about.

Excuse me.

I think it has a good tone to it now.

You have to tell me about the tone that I have, too, which we haven't, frankly, got quite into this.

Well, it's gotten into it a little by the beginning, but I want the tone to be more, as much as possible, like the first one you spent me singing.

And not quite as much like this one in the chronic, which is rather, you know, shall we say, hard.

and so on.

First of all, that kind of thing is not needed on radio.

I mean, it's a radio you can talk on in a, you know, it doesn't have to be the, you know, you've got to have, you've got to have three or four bullet lines, and that's about all.

But the rest of the time, you can sort of, you know, philosophize together.

And I want the tone, in general,

But as much as possible, I want the subjects to be uplifting.

In fact, the line I was developing in Atlanta at this time, that we should be, that we should direct attention to and be guided by the folks

and united us rather than divided by the fears and hatreds that divide us, rather than by fears and hatreds that divide us, in other words, something like that.

And that has got to come at some point, you know, the whole goal, that means something all-national.

They basically just take the next four years' business and use them as fundraising tokens, including that into a talk about summarizing all that on,

All this jazz about the fact that we, that what we're planning in the next four years, the press is only interested in the programs.

We can't give them much programs.

One thing that you've got to understand is that I don't want the country misled.

I think you've never got a comment on the rash of old and expanding programs.

It's going to be the other way around.

Not that we aren't going to do some positive things, but they do not involve either new or expanding programs.

They will involve, frankly, flushes.

that we don't get the impression that now we're, this next story you're going to expect from that issue of programming, because it's not going to be that way.

It really isn't going to be that way.

And I'd like to take this on for a day or two.

Now, let's come to the point, the immediate thing.

The paternalism speech for the new American majority

I think it should be made on Sunday.

I don't care.

I mean, it's Saturday.

Saturday for Sunday paper.

Saturday for Sunday paper is what I had in mind.

It's not even to be newsworthy, but it's to read very well.

And it could be done Wednesday.

The point is, what do we do Wednesday?

The way it looks, we've got, frankly, you have...

Only six time slots left.

We've got three weeks.

You can do one in the middle of the week and one in the end.

So you've got that many times left.

You may have only five, because we may be too busy in one of these weeks to do that.

You see, Patty?

You've got a Wednesday slot this coming week.

We ought to do something on it.

We haven't got any ready at the moment, so we better start talking about it.

Then maybe you ought to do the paternalism.

We've got to, I don't know why we talk about one's better weekend speech or a weekday speech.

I don't really know what the difference is.

We're never really, you know, in the middle of the campaign, it doesn't make a difference.

Yeah, neither.

Right, right.

Anything, okay.

That's who the term is in speech right now.

It should come, we've had two hard news ones.

That's, yeah, basically.

Now we'll get one with soft news.

Sort of, what's the manner, do you think?

What's he like?

And so, you notice that that's about the only significant change I've made in that since the start of the campaign.

So the idea that you know more about a person not by his programs, what does he believe?

Because then you can anticipate how he will react to things that you mention on the public scene today, which I think is very important.

Now, we're talking about doing a veteran speech on Sunday.

Now, the veteran speech basically can be done.

Though it should not be done as one of these series

That's why the farm speeches, there should be a farm speech, right?

I suppose somebody's working on this.

There's got to be a farm speech, and I want to pick some little town like, you know, like Campbell or, you know.

But will we remember?

The fact that you're doing the bedroom speech Sunday, it seems to me, does not preclude doing a radio speech on Saturday.

Right.

And I think you should, because you're not out campaigning.

Yes, we've got one.

I believe that it's not going to go where it's at, but we get ready to shoot it.

No reason to bite into losers.

I mean, as far as education is concerned, hell, it mustn't be covered, and I don't want to get into it anymore.

I mean, I'm tired of saying it.

What was, remember at the meeting, there was a big pitch on education.

I'm sorry to interrupt, but there was a lot to cover.

No, that's good stuff we had, and the chance to get in peripherally, the aid to parochial schools, and the aid to parochial schools.

Right.

Well, I mean, the district, we got a draft,

I'd like to get at that, because we aren't on the right side of the issues.

And I don't want to make a speech totally on it, but it is one that the government has to move on.

We've got to reiterate our own support of it, but in a broader context of education.

But I don't know what you can say on education.

It is going to appear dependent with the education lobby.

And I don't want to mislead the education lobby, because I'm going to kick them in the ass when I get a chance to.

So what do you think about that?

I don't know.

I remember there was a big, well, thrust about great education.

You can talk about education finance, and that is a standard for them to get over into property taxes.

Well, isn't that a separate speech?

No.

My suggestion is that the tax reform thing,

He couched as a separate speech and could go as a Saturday speech.

And in 15 minutes, you could develop the whole subject of the plight of the elderly in this country, the egregious situation with regard to— Now, let's talk about that.

That is really our biggest bullet in terms of our discussion.

Good morning.

I think you wanted around the 15th—or, excuse me, around the 25th.

Well, that's— What is today?

14.

And you don't want it next week?

I'd like it the week after, I think.

Awesome.

The week after is the second week.

And you'd like it, I don't know what day, Thursday or something, but 25th is a Wednesday.

But it may not be.

You've got a problem.

Well, it may or may not.

We don't know about that.

But the point is, why not a little earlier?

How about going, what about the 23rd?

How about going Sunday?

How about a week from today?

That's two weeks before the end of the election.

Is that what you're saying?

No, well, let's see, that's 9-7-16.

That's all right.

Congress is out.

That's all right.

How about shooting for this weekend?

That's right.

I've been waiting for Congress to get out primarily.

Congress will be gone.

Does that give it too long for people to debate?

No, no, I think that's all right.

That's one that would be damn good to do on a Saturday for Sunday papers because it is big news and there's stuff to write about.

Now we are going to start this process of property tax relief by giving property tax relief to the elderly.

It cuts two ways, Ray.

One, property tax relief to the elderly.

Two, a deliberate national policy that the fiscal dividend will no longer be applied to the

automatic expansion of the federal bureaucracy, but will be used to reduce taxes.

It's a no-frequency principle.

It's one that sends time right up the wall.

But on the other hand, it's one Schultz even believes in, so I'm for it.

Anyway, the main thing is, it's a hell of a restraint on government.

To me, it's a hell of a thing on the growth of government by saying, in effect,

we are going to commit, that we are going to use.

Now, that's not even a fiscal dividend.

Let us be clear.

We're only taking the modest part.

That's right.

We're not taking all of it.

Now, we're taking the true growth without the inflation.

The true growth without the inflation.

In other words, we're taking the inflation factor out.

Right.

And applying that.

We're recognizing that that's not real income.

That's not real income.

Yeah, that's right.

Anyway, that's going to be quite a talk.

Well, it's different between Sunday and Wednesday.

We can't do it on Wednesday.

I can't plan it on Wednesday.

All right.

How about the following Sunday?

The following Saturday is Ohio, which is the farm speech.

The farm speech doesn't matter.

The farm speech can be done back to back to something else, too.

The farm speech, nobody gets one damn about it except Bryce Hart.

Well, that's a week later then.

What's the intervening Sunday?

25th.

No, 22nd is the Sunday.

That's the veteran's day.

Oh, I see.

I see it.

Well, how about the Wednesday in between then?

Well, between the 21st and the 28th, I think I'd rather go with the 21st.

I think the 28th, you're subject to the charge that in the last minute, that's what I have.

But I think we've got to make the tax thing, and also we're going to get questions on it.

and be ready to go any time we get a hell of a buildup on this.

I think putting everything else together through this week is a hell of a buildup.

You're going to need it.

Are we talking about a rigid format?

We're talking about a circuit breaker, a rigid format.

Which would allow only the inflationary groups to get by, or only the real groups?

Real groups.

Real growth is applied to a, in effect, a personal subsidy to the elderly against property taxes, whether they are property owners or creditors.

So you allow the individual to go to the federal, which you have to.

Yeah, you have to.

Because inflation is trying to, because the cost of the debt goes up, the social security goes up, the government goes up, the cost of the wages go up, and so on.

I've got a draft coming to you.

Very complicated.

When you see it, you can see it.

That's good.

We do crime tomorrow.

Internalism Wednesday.

Tax reform Saturday.

Veterans is a throwaway on Sunday.

Let me suggest this.

If you get a grade, I mean, get a grade and a copy of that immediately, and I think it's interesting.

Yeah, it won't be late until Monday.

Monday, fine, as soon as you get it.

So far, we've not told anybody, George or Herb or anybody that you've made it to sea.

And so, I don't know, Schultz is forward, right?

Yeah.

It actually sounds a lot bigger than a new train, but it's the only way you're going to get any recent property checks without

without adding additional protection.

You're not going to do that.

You're not going to do protection.

Well, what we're saying is we can confidently say in the speech the ACIR needs more time and that we don't get to the massive questions before the McElroy Commission and the ACIR on the finance of education at this point.

But the research indicates there's no reason to wait to give relief to the other people.

The questions in people's mind, I think, are obviously going to be tough, especially with three and a fourth of what appears to might be on the expenditure.

And it's kind of like, whatever can come along and say, obviously he's going to cut this, he's going to cut that, which would mean something huge.

I have to say that's the way that he might be working it out.

Obviously, he's going to cut this, he's going to cut that, which means something huge.

Well, as I understand it, the way that he finally worked it out, John, I think, nothing really was shrunk.

That's right.

I think the way it was done, the government will continue.

It just means we're not going to add.

That's right.

We're not adding.

Because basically, we leave all the money in.

Matter of fact, you know.

half of its inflation.

That stays in.

So in other words, the goddamn AGW will continue to expand, and the Social Security will expand, and the government payrolls expand.

It's a sinister hidden growth.

The taxpayer never votes on whether the federal government will expand or whether more money should be appropriated.

These fellow Wilbur Mills knows damn well that he doesn't have to raise rates to raise more money.

But I think what we're getting at is very apparently worth nothing.

I mean, I think your objection to Smith, you raised it when we talked to Schultz.

do expand government, if government moves into an area that presently is not occupied, then you've got to find a way to cut it in some other way.

Because it allows for the growth of government, the extent of it.

It's a secret resource that has permitted sub-rows of growth of government without anybody knowing it.

Well, and another thing you have to have in mind is why do you have, they studied this,

Every tax reduction that we've had really is taking this, ours, for example, in 69, giving it back.

So we're saying, in fact, we're going to determine now what it's going to be rather than believe it to be the wins of a Congress.

Anyway, you'll look at it.

But look at it with that in mind, because there's no reason to invite it to this campaign at this point.

A lot of on that.

And they've made some questions that are going to be raised.

See what I mean?

Sure.

It's a mighty mile at this point.

It's simple.

Simple, but I mean so that we do not run any problem with the strategy government.

It's going to be strong in some areas, but it will grow in others.

The point that I make is don't.

Don't.

You do not have to go too far in terms of the tax credit for the elderly and instead of the goals.

how the fiscal dividend works very well, and they know how it's been used.

And they know approximately what the annual dollar amount of it is.

So when you said you and John went to do it, and you have a chance, who are the people who know the most about it?

If you could show us.

Lou Engman, here in the White House, knows most about it.

Why don't you let Randy lie second?

And do you want to write this in your song?

Oh, well, they don't like it.

But I mean, if you're going to edit it, or you're going to have somebody

Well, I'd rather have you do the foreign policy.

I'd rather have you, well, the board, I want you to, there are two that I want you to do.

I want you to do the foreign policy and the motion of the future.

In other words, the hopeful stuff.

And I'd rather have you do Spain in the final.

This is basically, I think you're right, that's how I do it.

he makes about the Syracuse government, because he has made this point.

I think we have no use to raise an issue that we're going to, that we don't have.

We'll raise an issue when we do it, but we don't want to be raising it before we can, right?

I can interrupt.

Sam, I will be good on this.

He gets along with those economic things pretty well.

And you concentrate on two.

As a president, if I can suggest it, I think I would rather I could start

We have a draft on urban affairs.

I do that in LA Saturday or Sunday.

Saturday or Sunday papers.

I think we ought to think of that on Saturday or Sunday.

You have to do the farm speech when you're in a lot.

I don't really care.

Foreign policy speech is really a Sunday paper type speech, so it ought to be on a Saturday.

Well, let me say it.

For my reason, I have a paper, too.

It's a wide open paper.

Maybe that's better.

I think Sunday is not as good as Sunday.

Sunday is a wide one.

Especially if it's on Sunday news or somebody has to go to the radio.

That's right.

Isn't that a lot on this speech room tomorrow?

That's what it is.

Did we decide to do that or not?

Not about now.

Why didn't we do it?

Because football games are being compressed or what?

Or church.

That's right.

Not the church.

That's why we did it on the church.

World Series is on at 1 o'clock.

That has to be a lucky break.

It's the best one.

We checked with them on the rating thing on Sunday.

Five to six is the top.

But anyway, coming to that.

Now, and that's how we throw the fire thing in and that.

Crank it right down, everything you want.

Better in speech.

What we're going to do, that's going to be next Sunday.

The purpose of that will only be to make the Monday morning veterans day a page or so.

That's really all you're planning for there.

Now, that was Dave .

I don't want anybody .

the usual, basically, region.

You gotta have Vietnam veterans.

That's the only, that's the one that kind of gets overlooked.

Right.

And one of those is about the strong Americans.

Oh, absolutely, the strong Americans, the veterans of the strong Americans, you could put it there, take it down here.

The amnesty thing has to be in that question.

That, the strong American.

But as we have a volunteer force about everything else,

I pay them the same, but we must give them the respect they deserve.

It's respect, respect, respect.

I'm just saying it's true.

It's not in the law enforcement people.

That was a very good thing to add in a crime speech to a kid that got killed.

I'm just thinking so.

Yeah, and the stakes are so high.

Yeah.

No, not among the pushers.

They're simply business.

They know business.

Well, no, it's a... Yeah.

Yeah.

Rather than .

Yeah.

Mafia has not been much in this.

They decided to get out.

I was going to ask you.

Well, let me make a suggestion.

Highlight the Italian aspect, the narcotics aspect.

Suppose you were to give this guy the Medal of Freedom, possibly.

Can't do it.

Can't do it?

There are too many.

Give him that Presidential Medal.

Here, in very real sense, it is freedom.

You know, we have that freedom line in the Laredo Street.

Sure, sure.

But it's symbolic.

The young guy, he's tied to the White House because he's here.

He met him.

But unless what he did was so far above my whole interest, how was it?

How was it?

That's what Ray's saying.

Unless it was.

Well, except that he's symbolic.

And by honoring him, we honor all of us fine young men that have worked for freedom.

Well, listen, what is the presidential name?

Is there any other thing you gave other than freedom?

Yeah, we have the new presidential citizens.

We haven't given to anybody.

You can give the first one to this guy.

He fits that category.

And those are going to be eased together.

Citizens, I don't have enough around to give him.

but we haven't really.

We've got to get something, though.

Hoover gets awards.

I remember the Treasurer gives awards.

We've got to have something for a law enforcement official, like an FBI agent with a job, and his wife might get something.

These are brave guys.

I don't want to give these, you understand, to local people, but I think there they should just get the U.S.

just like the guy you fight in Vietnam.

That's what I feel about it.

Can't we think about it?

Well, we can't just do it now.

I'd like to get his parents down.

Why not give him the first citizen's medal?

Have we got some of them?

Yeah.

First citizen's medal.

Well, do you think about it, please?

Sure.

I'll get his parents a little bit of help.

It's quite a bloody thing.

The trouble is, what do you then do about the guy that's paralyzed from the waist down?

Well, we'll work out something.

There may be something.

I'll check.

I think this guy is awfully good.

Symbolizing the narcotics thing.

Symbolizing that thing.

I talked to him a little bit about what he's been doing and how he got into this work.

He's just a great guy.

The kind of guy that

But anyway, we can think of something.

At least we can do something.

All right.

We'll do it.

New York, I believe.

We should go to Philadelphia.

Sorry about that.

There must be some other reason for that.

Even I can present it.

I can present it if there is a metal penetration.

I can present that metal.

See?

Let's leave the chair with that.

All right.

Would you rather not consider the Citizen's Medal?

No.

No, I think it's all right.

OK.

I think it's all right.

As long as we haven't given any away.

That's just by presidential victims.

Yep.

It's primarily for people out.

I think the Citizen Medal is fine with me.

It's never been given so it can be redefined any way you want.

who serves this old man, and beyond the call of duty, makes a sacrifice beyond the call of duty.

You see what I mean?

You could say, here's this kid, a guy gets shot, and that's a pretty damn good sacrifice.

Now, with the, regardless of anything else,

We've got your speech.

The speech you're going to do on the American dream, basically.

I think it should be for Sunday.

That should be done.

I'd like to do it in California when we arrive.

What's the date of that?

The Sunday before.

I'll do it on Saturday.

Do it Saturday in California for Sunday papers across the country.

We'll release it early, you see.

That one should be all.

That's the one I want you to concentrate on.

The Sunday before that, potentially, I'd like to have the four of us.

I would like for you to work on that one, too.

Do you use anybody you like around who you think could be help?

You got anybody in your shop that's a good authority policy man?

Not really.

Well, I've got a draft on that, either .

From Kister's office.

Well, I've got a draft .

Well, that's either .

All right.

Good.

Okay.

There's that.

That one, incidentally, doesn't concern me so much in terms of style.

I mean, it could be sort of a substitute, because I talk so much about it anyway.

Now, the farm and the bedroom, I don't consider to be significant.

They just have to be made.

Now, what about the wenches?

We have this wench we built with one paternal.

And we're going to make the tax beach next Saturday.

All right.

Saturday.

Next Saturday.

All right.

We filled all the Saturdays with major speeches.

We have a Wednesday slot open.

The Wednesday before election.

The first.

All right.

We should definitely have a speech for that now.

What have you got to suggest for that?

Education, maybe?

Possibly.

There's not one in the works.

I don't want that.

I covered that in the acceptance speech.

I've laid it out.

That's as controversial as I want to be.

I don't want to get in now, because that will be inevitably interpreted as a reaction to McGovern and the company that set it up.

That other set up the issues.

Connolly's doing that very well.

Connolly, you'll get it.

You see, Ray, I want all of these speeches written in such a way that I'm able to inevitably say the wrong thing and the reaction to the other side.

Rightly, in a way, that we should act in line with being president and not the message.

never referring to the other side, never saying those things.

We've done that.

See, that's all been done now.

And I'm not going to take them on.

Do you agree?

I don't think it's needed either.

I not only don't think it's needed, but I think it could be very counterproductive at this point.

Say, here are the great issues of this campaign.

I said that.

It's going to do it in space and forever, I think.

What else do you think, John?

I don't know about the opportunity.

We've got materials for that.

I don't know whether that's sales to me at the moment.

I don't know that I can say without sounding, frankly, so damn soft.

I mean, when I don't mean soft, I don't mind that.

Except that in terms of being kind of, but being flabby without really saying anything, you know.

I think that we...

I say it all.

Well, that's, yeah, that's right.

And along that line, you put together a pretty good speech on urban affairs.

That is responsiveness of government, local government, revenue sharing as a philosophy.

That whole thing, the bankruptcy and the Great Society approaches urban affairs, could we call it something?

Sure, sure.

We've just been using that term as a city.

Yeah, but it's sort of a good opportunity in there.

Federalism kind of approach, I don't know what you call it as a subject matter, but

And there's a lot that you talk about in there.

That sounds pretty good to me.

Also, we would be addressing that subject and that constituency.

We won't make any votes.

We should address it so that it appears that we're not.

There's a lot to talk about in terms of our experience in D.C. and the fact that it can be done.

Sure you have.

But there's two or three lines in there.

It doesn't hurt.

Why in the hell would they arrest those people?

Because they wouldn't get out.

We didn't want them.

We should have had them there.

I heard about it.

You've got that draft, right?

We sent it over to you.

All right.

What else?

Education.

The opportunity I would prefer to have worked into that.

Let me think.

Maybe the way there is to, I mean, sort of take them on the high ground.

The kind of a country we want this to be.

The kind of a country we want it to be.

I never liked urban affairs because most people hate the cities, who don't live in the cities.

And those that live in the cities hate them more.

So my point is, and the urban

people that sit around at Harvard and other places and worry about the terrible problems in cities.

But I think what we need here is to, rather than in terms of appealing to people, but we're doing enough of that with Reckonshire, the Lindsay's, and the Russell's in this room, is to say that we're talking about, you know, building a, it's basically the quality of life, the kind of country we want this to be.

We want, we want to renew our cities.

We want to run a neighborhood in rural America.

Call it basically

What I hear you talking about is it's reform, renewal, and restoration.

It's the 1970s state of the union without as much on the environment.

In fact, you ought to pay your own service to the environment in that speech, too, because we're going to have to be doing water building.

I would say, if I got a word for it, I'd report it.

Take the 1970 thing, and you've got some good lines.

It's a good approach.

quality of life, the cities.

I kind of like that.

In other words, a positive look forward.

It would be great if the press were all involved in this.

Well, my governor got out a really pathetic staff paper on urban problems.

And he was a cop-out.

He appointed a lot of committees and didn't come up with any solutions.

He didn't have any feel for his philosophy.

And I suppose if it went on that, it might have had to be better on that.

But basically, in terms of the average person, just make one .

You get into that closing week, and it wouldn't be bad at all to be on every day with one.

Speech in the first part of the week.

Before you interrupt.

In the first part of the week, I pressed the plan, right?

Saturdays, and the grades were counted, and we were trying to keep it all closely held.

And then we got signed within a week.

But Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday.

Maybe go radio, radio, radio.

So maybe if you're out campaigning the way you're supposed to be, you can't be making three speeches every day.

Why don't you make one a day?

So if you want to, you can do it.

I have room for any speeches that you can get that you can grab.

So put your best people to work getting together, and I'll read them.

Well, that's off the coast of the line.

That opening and closing works awfully well on that speech.

This is something that I was taking to the president's office in Camp David.

The president was dreading to speak from his office in Camp David.

And then he said, the president had just spoken about his office in Camp David.

And why is it up there, Dale, over and over?

Nobody, it tells, we've never said there was, there never was an opposite campaign in reality.

No, there really is.

What kind of a line do you want us to carry on this subject of campaigning?

And we've been saying up to now, of course, that we had the Congress in, so I'm assuming the Congress was out today.

I'm sure to get hit tomorrow with this question.

Oh, I think you should say it.

Well, we, well, first, the President has all the bills the Congress has passed.

You've got to get the bigger ones, and he may end up losing it.

It's going to be one hell of a lot of turns.

He has, you could say, maybe he's got 30 or 40 bills that he has to consider.

That's going to take the first part of the week.

Nevertheless, he is going to make them.

He's going to make them.

And then I think you could say tomorrow, he's going to make two radio addresses.

He's preparing those.

During this period of time, he's going to have to stay here.

He's going to prepare for what's going to be.

I don't need to say.

Oh, you should.

They might as well.

Yeah.

He's going to make a great day.

He's going to make a great address.

Now, when is the announcement?

We don't know we're going to do anything yet.

When will they announce PR, for example?

On Monday.

It'll be announced Monday.

Well, you say that then is scheduled for the last... We hope to be able to do some campaigning the following week.

Yeah.

The campaigning will begin.

How intense will it be?

Well, I think the schedule will speak for itself.

I think you might say this, that he obviously cannot get to all the states.

Well, more than that, Congress has only left you 18 days or 15 days or whatever it is.

Yeah, well, that's the point.

And that's just the evidence.

You can also say that the president has already, if you can't say it today, he's not going to make the speech tonight, but he has been very lucky to deliver Winston.

What is the subject I haven't got yet?

He announced at the time.

And then I think he would say...

I wouldn't announce it Sunday, no.

I think I'd just say Wednesday, Sunday, Thursday.

And then you would say that tomorrow, I understand, an announcement would be made with regard to what you'd be doing next.

That gives you guidance?

Fine.

But I think I would be, I'd say it's very responsibility to the president.

And you would say, well, another president said, well, it is true, not true.

and also their intervention .

Now, I don't think that .

You could just say that Congress, just like all these bills, they're very important bills.

They involve huge expenditures of money.

The decisions the president makes on this bill, these bills, will determine whether or not we're going to have a tax increase.

And so the president feels it's his responsibility to say, let's do the job, do everything that he can,

to veto any tax increases.

And nobody, of course, doesn't want to veto bills that have that, that are subject to any of the purposes of the Supreme Court.

And to even avoid it.

And this requires a lot of tough calls.

It's a tough call.

There are some very tough calls.

You can say as a leader, you can say as a matter of fact, gentlemen, the President's got most of the day's salary, except for his father-in-law, who's just talking to the members of the domestic council, Mr. Timmons, and the leaders of the Hill.

Most of these, it's taken this Congress two years to work them out.

And the president now has 10 days to decide whether to sign them or not.

That's another good point.

When are you going to get rid of them?

No, Friday.

Friday?

Yeah.

We couldn't get the wires out in time, actually, for too long.

We've got a time problem.

We have to try to balance it most of the stuff in the week.

So it actually works pretty well to do it Friday evening.

You still think you have to ignore anybody?

No.

You still think you can still lose that vote?

You know what I mean?

Since we know, or is that what you do?

You have to set up a lightning round for all the jackasses from the version to come over and make it unblessed.

That's not a bad idea.

You're going to have all those Democrats there.

If you're going to have unblessedness, go without you.

Let them get it.

That's all, of course.

That's what I had thought, but I don't know whether they would allow it.

What in the hell's up with this?

This isn't presidential.

You run Independence Hall.

That's a national park.

Is it big enough?

Sure.

You bet.

That's the Independence Hall big enough to have 400 people.

Oh, sir.

You bet.

There are two rooms in Independence Hall.

One would be big enough.

The other would not.

But I think the House Representative's Chamber is where you have to have it, because of the historical set-up in Independence Hall, which I cannot state.

The point is, I had this idea, and I discussed it with John the next morning.

I thought it was a great idea, and now I need to re-publish it.

Yeah, but now you've decided you've got to get into Philadelphia, and it's a hell of a way to do it.

The other thing to do is go to the Philadelphia City Hall, which has to be the funniest-looking building in the United States.

Yes, I'll meet you.

This is Mayor Rizzo.

Yeah, that's right.

He calls it home.

We have an independent hall.

That's where the first Rizzo would bring that place to the cops.

He'd keep the cops on.

Well, we had jurisdiction there.

We put federal cops all over as far as that.

Now, hold on.

The other question that I raised, though, is that's how we get shafted.

Yeah, well, he's invited anyway.

He's invited anyway.

We're invited in all 50.

But we would have to run it.

Well, see, on federal ground, that's no problem.

In other words, I have to run the show and run it the way we have.

But let Mayor Rizzo be in the airport.

Oh, yes.

And we've got to run it.

Why don't we try it there?

And we're having two marriage lines.

Gribbs made it right.

You've got to invite myself.

Every time I see him there, I invite myself.

Yeah, I know.

We know this.

We sort of follow you around.

We know these mayors.

We've got a lot.

Tampa?

I've got a little question.

Oh, yeah.

Well, you've got one from Tampa, too.

He's picked up down there.

He said he had one hell of a, he had three mayors in Monterey, California, that Democratic mayors, three new ones that he launched in Monterey.

He said it was just one hell of

Let's do it in Independence Hall.

I frankly think that, let's face it, sure you've got a chat, and sure you're going to have headquarters.

And it's not, don't try, motorcade over.

No, no motorcade.

Because that looks like it's then, that you're trying to make a campaign, and it'll be there for it.

It'll just be, on the other hand, bothering.

a motorcade, no medicine signs.

You could admit to the Carpenters' Hall and Independence Hall areas by ticket.

Yeah.

It's controllable.

Sure.

Well, you have to, because you're inviting the governors of all the states and all the mayors and the dignitaries of all over the country.

It's not a public.

This is a campaign event.

So you're not inviting all of them.

Oh, no.

No, indeed.

Good job.

No, indeed.

Now we're inviting the co-sponsors of the legislation.

And does the Wilbur Mills use long types?

Russell.

Russell, please.

I'd like to think of it.

Why don't we then do it on Saturday?

No, I'm trying to find it.

Saturday isn't that long?

No.

Yeah, I do that all right.

This is the television show, right?

Right.

We'll build the crowd down there.

I mean, that's sensational.

It fits.

Yeah, he's got enough of a rhythm.

He's got kind of an organization that he can do the crowd.

Well, we'll do it, too.

We'll do it, too.

You'll do it.

And you'll have a police there to kill everybody that shows bad signs.

Well, that's just so I don't shoot them.

and execute them at sunset.

No, no, just the colors.

Those guys, after Wolfsburg, the company that people really wrecked so they had Shepard as your drill sergeant.

Yeah, terrible.

He was a terrible bastard.

He took it in a snoot.

Every editorial, the editorials were supporting him.

All of the state.

Terrible.

Ray, didn't the Independence Hall sound good to you?

I

John, I've heard it discussed.

I'm just wondering.

At least it is.

Let's do it.

There's an indoor and an outdoor possibility there.

It's got a beautiful program.

Beautiful program.

Wow.

You've got a reception outdoors.

The difficulty with outdoors is that you do have a problem with the showers.

Well, no.

No, because it's on the back of the building.

There's no way for the public to get out.

All right, let's do this one.

Let's sign it inside.

But the advantage here is that Liberty Bell

is right there.

You could have a receiving line right smack in front of the Liberty Dome.

Right.

And let them come by.

And it is out there unless it rains.

Unless it rains.

And then have a receiving line there.

But let's have it down inside.

Okay.

And if it rains, just do the receiving line in the hall where you have it signed.

Just stand there and receive it.

Yeah.

But otherwise, this is such a significant change and new development in the American system.

And also, frankly, a return to those basic parts of the back, to the parts that were announced.

The Constitution was signed there, too.

The Constitution was signed, yes.

The Constitution of the United States and the Declaration of Independence.

It was the principles of our founding law.

The reason why we believe in locals and local government, state government.

Mayor Rizzo made an appeal to the president that this historic signing should be done in this historic place.

You called on him to come and do it.

He uses very good words.

I am now thoroughly familiar with his entire vocabulary.

What did he say to you, Bob?

Uh-huh.

Oh, he said, Bob Trapper?

Oh, yeah.

He said, you know, Trapper's got a girl.

We had this girl on Channel 3 Westinghouse here who quit to go to work for the Trapper campaign.

She's doing something.

He said, he says, I think he's banging her.

He said, but that looks to me like a faggot, so I just don't know.

Ha, ha, ha.

You know, he talks to Ken Cole every day.

And one day he says, Ken, I like you.

He says, I need a housing commissioner.

How'd you like to live in Philadelphia?

Oh, yeah.

Rizzo suggested the president to come over here.

Because it looks a little yucky of him to decide to go over there.

But if Rizzo says, geez, I've heard him.

If you were calling today and said, we've been talking a little bit here, what would you think of our signing an independent song?

That's great.

All right.

We wanted it yesterday.

Why don't you make an announcement?

Then we say we'll make a joint announcement that he's issued the invitation that we're going to deliver an independent song.

Let's see what I mean.

Let us advance it first before you make an announcement.

We're going to have to quietly with him and let a guy check it out.

There's no way to work out anything quietly.

He'll be out.

Every time he talks to us here, he tells the press he's talking to the White House.

I don't think there's a lot of problem there.

I'll just call him and say it.

All right, here's what I'll do.

I'll call him and say that you would like to have an invitation from him to do this, and for him to phone me.

Yeah.

And that way, it'll keep him tentative until he does talk to you, and then you can lay out the terms and conditions.

I just wonder if he should.

We don't know.

Well, that's the way he plays.

All right.

It's strange and wonderful.

Okay.

Let's go on that.

I'll talk you out of the way.

We'll see what happens.

I won't commit to him.

I'll say that looks like a possibility.

Let me send a guy over and check it out.

Yeah.

And when you're on tomorrow, you can say that I have the President, of course, now has not been able to make any commitments.

We're going to be working on the schedule tomorrow.

I know that he's going to do a tolerance speech this week.

He certainly is going to have a schedule over the course of the last two weeks, whether we can get in something else this week.

It depends on how fast this legislation can be moved off his desk.

Certainly, I know the gentleman is not going to go anyplace for the first until it is done.

There's going to be some campaign travel this week.

This is not campaign travel.

Do you say there will be no campaign travel?

I think we're beginning to take our lumps a little bit on the work ethic.

I think it's pretty well established in the work and look of the of the candidate where we are.

Well, there's one of my thoughts is that I think we might have some possibilities to be, again, to be sort of reflective on some of the, on the, uh, EBOC might be done as a TV thing where they overlap with some kind of, before the election, uh, kind of reflecting on the presidency, on the many folks called, the presidents called on to make, uh, for doing some of the decisions in the coming few years.

I think it's a good idea.

It could have been a fun time, but I think that's so obvious for the self-serving and basically a vote on the government and so forth.

I just don't want to cut it.

If you talk about TV, I think you really hit it on doing a political campaign.

From the old law.

As a matter of fact, that's one of the reasons Billingsman can't take it.

It's two years.

That's your home instead of your office.

That one I don't like very much.

Presence is a very important position.

It's terribly close to all and requires great experience.

It's a good idea, but I'm not so struck by it.

It might be one of the rules of the American spirit, which

provide some of the quality in the last few years and some of the... Well, I just, you don't necessarily, you don't see that as your last one.

I thought we were going to the last one.

We're going to the last one.

Do you think it's a separate dispute?

I like John's idea of the one on urban.

Urban bears and so forth.

Since we're doing the farm, we might as well do one.

Do one on the farm and you can balance that on urban, basically.

Have you seen Murray Reithoff's speech the other day?

when he talked about how the President literally has brought us together, how we don't love each other, but we've learned to live with each other in the last four years, and we're not tearing up our homes and our workplaces.

Well, Wittenbaum, yeah, it's an extraordinary speech.

He gave it down in St. Louis the other day, and it's very, very good.

really sort of a capstone, where you said four years ago, the President said he's going to bring it together.

Remember how it was four years ago?

Well, let me say this.

The greatest significance is the beauty of this.

It's the world.

This is the thing.

Actually, everybody thinks of the day of Vietnam War.

But I noted a variation thing, where somebody was in the office here, not a particularly literate, kind of a follower of the day.

And he said with some degree of wonder, he said, you know, Will, did you notice what the Japan is not getting together with China?

He's just thinking that that's because you went to China.

Well, it does have a relationship with North Korea, South Korea, that's related to China, and Soviet Union.

And certainly the fact that the Romanians coming in here, and the Poles coming in, and where he had started, where he was sending a group over to Czechoslovakia,

always going to have people that's always going to have nuclear war hangers and as long as the Indians take the Pax and the Jews take the Paris there's a potential war there and as long as it's communism the world's a possibility of aggression but the point that we have to have in mind is that in terms of people in the world being basically in communication or even friends

competitors at best and opponents at worst.

This is something that we have made enormous progress on.

It's what we have learned and worked with in this very potentially dangerous world.

We cannot afford explosions.

We cannot afford not only an immediate confrontation of the Russians or 120 years from now with the Chinese or even between the Russians and the Chinese.

We have developed a safer world in terms of, as we said,

No more Vietnams, no more Koreans.

Who knows?

Maybe we'll have them, but at least the chances are.

Here at home, you have the same thing.

Hell, the young don't like the old.

They never have.

And the women don't like the men, generally.

And the men don't like the women.

They live together because of reasons that have nothing to do with love, usually.

But nevertheless, whatever the case may be, the fight is that younger and old, black and white, and so forth and so on, the idea that everybody's the same is a bunch of crap.

Not true.

These Chinese doctors in here are very different from us and from Walter DeKosch.

They're very different.

They're getting along.

They're working together.

Zhou Enlai and Nixon are very different people.

Brezhnev and I are totally different kind of people.

We're not the same.

We're not going to be the same.

It'd be a hell of a dull world and a hell of a dull country if we were.

There are differences.

The whole secret, the whole philosophy we've had goes back to the 67th Board of Arizona

Basically, we say we live in a world which is potentially explosive and dangerous, and which inevitably there are going to be differences.

You see, it's a total, it's a total different approach from the government approach, where he says, in effect, I don't need to worry about the Russians because they will not be jeopardized.

It's my friendship for them.

There's nothing to do with friendship.

It has to do with interests.

It has to do with, and that's true.

because they found they weren't getting an education, they weren't getting jobs.

Probably more than anything else, what has had an effect, including the campuses, is the fact that these little jackasses couldn't get out and get a job.

And I think it meant a lot to them.

Now, we've helped a bit by saying, well, let's have more civility and support and so on.

But the college professors

The point that I make is that first, when you proceed on this muddle-headed, soft-headed philosophy that if only people know each other and can sit down and converse their problems and evaporate, they're all going to love each other.

It's a dead loser.

That was the great problem of the great society.

Black and white are different.

Young and old are different.

People are dead.

That's what it is.

Why do we have to proceed on this?

People are different.

In this great diverse country, the great secret of the American experiment, except for the horror of the Civil War, was that people were different.

Regions were different.

So we finally learned that, as I said, the things of the United were perhaps more important than those of the United States.

But you could get along with somebody without loving them.

If you can't tell the white Southerner to love the black, oh, it's not that he has much more to say.

The white Southerner is definitely a white Southerner.

But the white Southerner sometimes loves him.

Just like you love a dog.

The white Southerner hates him.

For other reasons.

The Southerner has a commonality of interest with him, which the Northerner doesn't have, too.

Pure economics.

Nothing else.

I've only read about that.

That's what I've heard.

They deny it, but it's true.

The Southern doesn't care how close, like, as long as you get to the bottom of it.

to bring them in close and use them as long as they don't get up.

Another commonality of interest is very .

I suppose one of the reasons why I .

One of the reasons that I really have a deep feeling for the South, and frankly, is the accident that happened at the school.

And as you go to school, you meet bright and stubborn

I was reading last night a biography of Sheridan, Sheridan Chan, and the utter horror of the march to Atlanta, of course, you saw it gone in the wind.

And the devastation that must have been, the hatred that was there.

And then what happened after that?

I should say, by Stanton and all those assholes as being too soft after he marched through Jordan because he didn't want to enslave them all.

But nevertheless, the point is that when you think of that Southern background, and then when you think of the proud Southerner, always being put down by the Northerner.

Here's the Northerner, particularly the Northerner in Liverpool, who does not go to school.

It's an old era feud.

Then Holton, who's not a Northerner, but he does, for example,

Yeah, well, he doesn't for very long.

Not yet.

He doesn't for very long.

When they get older, they'll be more considerable friends.

They'll be damn a little better.

But anyway, the point that I make, and as I said to all friends, has a very good number of blacks, which they always have, but they're highly selected.

They're the brains.

But my point that I make is, when you're going to have the quota, huh?

They've got their quota.

They're damn right they've got their quota.

No, the quota is not because I hear, no.

The quota for blacks and civil friends is supposed to be

Anybody that had the intelligence and the marks got in.

And that's the way it ought to be.

It's not the way it is here.

They don't have to have the intelligence to get in.

They don't have to have anyone here.

Sid Wells is the marks that they once did.

Apart from that, the point is that you've got to understand the South.

You've got to understand that above everything else, the Southerners are sensitive, terribly sensitive.

These enormous pride is a feeling that

And that is why I'm talking to them.

I think it's a great mistake to go in and talk about the Southerner as being a region apart.

The Southerner wants to be told that he is part of the country.

I mean, after I spoke to him there, these big, burly Southerners came through.

And one girl, I think, put it very well.

She says, I want to thank you for making the South part of America again.

And I said, hell, that's important.

strategy.

People say, well, he'll fight the southern judges, and he's playing off on busing, and he's setting up hatreds and the rest.

But isn't it about time after 100 years that, for example, a southerner who would really qualify like Russell to be president could be president?

Hell, most of the bright politicians in this country come from the southern states.

They still do.

but anyway that's been a good thing for the country the south people start

They'll get together.

But you know, the most important thing that has happened in this election is that, if you really look at it, with Wallace out, that was the most important move was made when Conley got Wallace out of that race.

With Wallace out, and finally the South, it's frankly teaching the Democratic Party a lesson.

And they're not teaching it on the basis because they think Nixon is a racist.

They know damn well he isn't.

on the basis that they're proud of the Americans.

They want strong national defense.

And they don't like the people around the government.

It has to do with lifestyle.

It has to do with morality.

It has to do with matters of that sort.

Far more.

I think it is far more than it has to do with race.

That's the reason.

Did you agree, John?

Yes, sir.

You know, race, as I said, is a hell of a lot bigger issue.

I don't satisfy them on race.

They don't like them.

You know, they don't like what we do.

You've given them a couple of bitter pills on race in this administration.

Look what we've done with the schools.

I mean, these things are a success.

Those tax things we did with those private schools down there?

Well, we're very tough to them to take.

The senator basically has the same characteristic as the American union leader in a very interesting way.

He abides by the law, and he respects the president.

George Shulgin tells a fascinating story.

He remarked, when he was over talking to the secretary, I don't know, the greatest secretary of the United States of America in 1970, he had done something that was quite incredible.

And he said, why did you do it, Mr. Secretary of the United States of America?

I had given the impression in my career.

And the greatest secretary of the United States of America,

And you've got to say that to me.

I mean, he is a mean bastard.

And he's a hell of a rough guy in fighting.

But if he walks in this office, he usually won't give us work.

But if he ever gives it, he keeps it.

And that's something that we have in our system today that the British, unfortunately, don't have.

And that's why the British, we just hope they make it.

But they make it on the two because of that inability

for them to command the, even if they pass the law, according to the .

The government, or what has to go, is afraid to pass the law on ways of pressure.

So the fear, they then would be, because they would labor them in breaking the law.

That's the difference between our two systems.

Our developmental system.

We have that same fear, or that's a consideration.

Well, he told us .

He said, you passed your law, now you enforce it.

But he did obey.

Now, what we have there, though, we develop public opinion behind it.

That's our public opinion.

Let me tell you, labor union leaders, they're damn sensitive to public opinion.

I think one of the reasons is getting the hell out of McGovern.

He thinks McGovern's not .

One of the reasons he'd be rather nice to us.

I mean, part of it's, most of it's .

Most of it's .

But it helps the fact that we have the

that I like to develop for you is that when they talk about hardline, they talk about stop, but they talk about ethics, not a new American majority.

I developed this theme in Atlanta when it could be refined.

They make a great mistake in developing that in terms of antagonistic groups.

The Roosevelt Coalition was basically just that.

It was a coalition of groups that had nothing in common except the desire to get in.

The southerners hated the northerners.

The big city bosses and the intellectuals didn't like each other.

The later people fought Roosevelt's regime.

But nevertheless, here's that.

Now, our new American majority appeals across the board.

It appeals to Italians and Poles and southerners and Midwesterners like my mother and father and far westerners and upper New Yorkers, et cetera, for the same reason.

They all get down to basic American values of whatever you want.

It has to do with a strong United States.

It has to do with patriotism, not bug out.

It has to do with the moral and spiritual values.

They may vary about what they think they ought to be, but they still think they ought to have some.

And a violent reaction, permissiveness, and so forth.

And it has to do with mission.

With certain and different work entities,

They're turned off on welfare, not because they don't want to be challenged.

I think most people are challenged.

But mainly because they just don't think the country can be built that way.

And also, they're turned off on welfare for another reason.

They consider that there are idiots in this country that want to take their money and take care of a lot of lazy bastards that won't work.

And so there are selfish motives, too.

They're not just ethnic beliefs.

And they're not just Midwestern or Western.

But they are basically, they're American to the core.

And when I listed those issues, you know, for the southern nation, we got that.

They're the same issues you have with the southern nation.

The little ones are a little more like on 8 November 30, Ambo 8 May 8.

Our support in the south is always higher.

in other parts of the country because they are not poised as much by bad universities or bad media.

But it's bad enough, not as bad.

On the other hand, our support of the South was no higher significantly enough when we took on the great Vietnam issues, on the national defense issues, on the national security issues, than it was in Polish America, in Italian America, in mountain America, in farm America.

Those issues, they are all strong.

Where we were weak and soft was in the educated America.

The suburbia around, I don't mean all of educated America, but the suburbia around Los Angeles and so forth, around San Francisco, in the Chicago area and so forth.

It is here that you're softness, that is, where you didn't have it, have it originally.

When we talk about, I mean, the march of the hard hats in the West,

The press said, oh, this is just a minority.

We have to support the top presidential acts, including the first support for me before everybody realized that it was the right thing to do.

Where the hell did you come from?

Did you see any businessmen coming up in here and saying, congratulations, Mr. President?

No, those parts were sitting out, waiting.

The stock market went down 20 times, and all the rest.

Did you see any educators?

Not one.

Not one college president.

They're sitting it out because they have no guts and no character.

Did you see any of the media?

Maybe one or two, but generally speaking, except for a few reporters and the rest.

To a man, the establishment said, no, no horrors.

We're a war.

Everything's going down.

Where did this term come from?

It came from those areas of the elitists.

You don't need to use this term, but I do.

But the elitists looked down their nose at it.

These sons that they despise, these bandits, the Dees and Does guys, the Laker guys, those farmers, those cattlemen, those people down around San Diego and Orange County.

Thank God for them.

If they weren't around, we would be here.

And America's foreign policy would be down, too.

I don't mean by that to condemn all college presidents.

suburbs and the rest, because there's a hell of a lot of damn good people there that stood up by me.

And I'm speaking about the new majority.

Where's it coming from?

It is not coming from the area that Teeter and the rest urged us to appeal to.

They said, and they said, you've got to go out and look for your strength.

Is it your strength?

Is it, you know, it's in Evanston, and it's in Pasadena, it's in San Marino, it's in Arcadia and the rest.

The hell it is.

We've got to do as well as we can there.

We're doing no better this year there than we ever did before.

Where we have turned around is in areas that are very different.

That's the thing of this election.

Nobody has understood it.

Nobody's written it.

They've understood it.

Well, they see it in terms of, well, the Catholic vote is shitting because they're against abortion.

Hell, a lot of Catholics are for it in France.

And they say that the South is shitting because they're racist.

They say, but they're missing the point.

And they say, well, they missed this point.

And the reason they missed the point is that they cannot bear the thought that the movement has had it.

The movement has had it.

The permissiveness has had it.

All this whole pissing on this country, not wanting to stand up to what is around its head, and frankly, swear to their grave, this country.

It's coming back.

Fortunately, it's coming back.

It doesn't mean that everybody doesn't want kids to cut their hair and rest.

We've got to be mindless.

The point that I make is that if people interpret this election in terms of, well, we just got together a bunch of haters, they're wrong.

It's not true.

What we had here

Basically, you know what the real issue of the election is?

Morality.

Religion.

Material issues are very low.

Oh, sure, if you poll, they'll say it's taxes or it's prices.

But if it were taxes and prices, prices would be covered.

Why?

Because generally, on the economic issues, the Democratic

always promised for now it's true it's thousand dollars you can scare the hell out of them on welfare they're probably confident a little bit on that on the other hand we've done a lot of things

We'll know in 15 or 20 minutes, because that conference has been going on 25 minutes on that scene.

As soon as that clears out, we'll get a much better feel about how the motion is running.

I'd say by 2 o'clock, we are being shaken, so that you can take off.

There's no reason to be the same here as I'm the same.

There really isn't any reason either way.

No.

No, that's what I'm saying.

By 2 o'clock.

But I think it's a good idea for the president to be here during this conference.

Yeah.

Oh, sure.

And that should be cleaned up by 2 o'clock, I would think.

Well, I have other plans to go through.

Well, I'd just stick to those and go.

We'll keep you informed.

I don't need to go.

Actually, I should stick around.

I ain't a loser.

No, I don't see any negative.

Tim and Steve, you can go.

You can take your phone calls.

I don't know if they decide to adjourn.

If they don't, why?

There's no purpose in being here.

That's right.

Well, no.

Actually, it can come around at any time if they keep going.

It depends.

That's what I'm saying.

It depends on how the conference