Conversation 878-019

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 Do not cite this transcript as authoritative.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.

Well, how are you?

I'm glad to see you.

Did you have anything to do with it?

No, not at all.

Sir, here.

Thank you, sir.

I don't know much about this, well, federalist business.

Well, let me tell you, the, uh, the, uh, the, what I wanted to chat with you about, I'm going to put it on the back.

And it's just a good thing in a way that I think we should be generous on this regard.

We have tea, coffee, iced tea, Coca-Cola, a bunch of cola, et cetera.

We didn't have tea.

We didn't want to have tea.

We won't have anything.

No customers.

Anyway.

Before we get into the federalist thing, I want to say something to you on something else that is extremely important in terms of the whole national event, which I know in this case is not necessary to say to you.

But, Brian, I hope that our southern boys will stand firm on the efforts

and they'll be from some Republicans as well as some Democrats, and actually not by all of our attacks.

His efforts to slash the hell out of the defense budget, he cannot do it.

That defense budget is as low as it can be.

If we cut it, then lower.

Our efforts, for example, to get a solid agreement with the Russians, our efforts to get the neutral balance force reductions,

be down to two, because you know the whole success of our policies, I'm sure you know, has been that last year we were able to go into negotiations with the Russians on the basis that we were doing something that they wanted us to stop, to lift the APM.

They were doing something we wanted to stop, and that was their SS9s.

This year, if you ever send us into negotiations where we, unilaterally, have said, all right, to show our good faith-wise, we're coming back.

I think I'm going to start with that.

You were always, you and I always saw a light.

Well, I used to follow Mr. Rivers on Latin.

Mr. Rivers, of course.

And we would talk about it.

Mr. Rivers, you're absolutely right about that.

And it's a boy that I can give you a moment beyond ordinary.

I'll do it for color.

I firmly believe that I told the boys after that boy came in, I think he was right about the voluntary part of it, you know, 20 years ago.

I'll take that if you come before the Senate committee.

Testify.

Do it again.

And I think when a testifier will guess the impossibility of building a free land, because you said this does not match your potential enemies in the world with nothing about that.

It means under the sea power, land power.

So how do we do this?

a million percent about that.

And I realized that after all this is over, there's always a tendency to let it out.

And it costs you particularly back here.

People say, well, you see, the thing is, right today, as I was sitting down, trying to apply for this kind of little legislature, I told him, Coy, which was here before you, was the advisory committee.

I said, look, you go back and tell your PR friends all those pieces up there.

You tell them that after each war, it was a tendency for the United States to do the wrong things.

They thank God peace is here, and so that that's what we can all decide.

I said, second, it'll be even more so this year.

And it will be more so because they say, well, since we've gone to Peking, we've gone to Moscow.

Why now?

They've got to realize that the reason Peking would see us was that we were strong and respectful.

The reason Moscow would feel was that we were strong and respectful.

And we must not.

We must not send the president, any president, me or the next guy, to deal with these bastards if they are that way.

Unless that we've got strength.

And then we can do the deal.

So you can have a speech piece on that.

We are for peace.

I'm for peace.

You're for peace.

I'm for disarmament and so forth.

But I don't want to disarm that.

The other guy may not.

Mr. Franklin, I remember when I was a senior in high school,

Principal, and this is a fact, turned out in high school to let us see the U.S. cavalry troop mine.

This was in 1933 when Hitler was building the Panzer Division in the Stuttgart.

And we had a horse caravan and one of ten men in West Point, ten men.

And my brother was saying, 33 years.

So I did do all that.

You know, the tribe general, General Benjamin Mitchell, I keep his picture in the office as a reminder.

You know who loves Billy Mitchell?

John Brackett.

Oh, yeah.

I was on the 100th.

And he used to bring up, he'd make a speech.

He was the best one-minute speaker at the housework, so he

He always ended it with a good part of life.

He used to come on and make a speech about presidential politics.

He probably was.

And Mr. Reagan, Mr. President, I remember that when George Patton, I wasn't in for him, he said that was the end before we came in here.

George O'Bannon looked up John Rankin.

You've never met him, have you?

No, sir.

I was a secretary of government in the... Did you?

In the... You were a lawyer?

Yes, sir.

But George O'Bannon looked up John Rankin.

That was the number one man in Washington he wanted to see.

Thank him for standing by him on the pole about that incident and the system.

Well, listen, I rely on that.

I'll tell you that truth.

I didn't know Drew Pearson then, but I thought of the unconscionable darned report.

pick for pearson almost broke back and also prolonged the war because there's no other general that have ever made that run that pat made with it exactly it was a fine guy you know it was a quarter man or the rest but pat was a great

Army Commander Booth.

He understood Booth.

He was the only one.

We got to say, we got to say, we got to say, we got to say, we got to say, we got to say, we got to say, we got to say, we got to say, we got to say, we got to say,

Is that right?

The word spread that way?

To me, it was love.

It was in that war, Mr. President.

I've always been there.

In September of 1944, I had John Bradley, and I liked him very much.

He was in the gasoline.

He was already through the Zickler line.

And he pulled back the Germans made the line.

Of course, it cost us 50,000 lives in November, and we had it all that winter.

Yeah.

But you're absolutely right.

If the Congress cut that budget in the 20s and 30s down to where we just had nothing, and the horse cavalry trooping around, and if the German had been what Canada is, we wouldn't have lasted as long as France.

I mean, we had nothing.

And then we would have gained some gratitude if we don't keep some steam up.

Everybody who I speak to, I don't want to mention, but I'll wind up on that defense line.

And I think the line is, the way we got where we are today, a relatively more peaceful world, a chance to build peace, working with the Russians and the Chinese, always very nice in their competition, but the only chance to do it is to be in a position of strength.

That's what those people understand.

That's why it's not right.

You well know that we have to bomb those people.

Of course, this work's going to be going on.

That's going to be going on right now.

President Johnson asked us one time right there, and I was tired of fatigue and myself and the rivers, I think, all of us who had been to Vietnam.

All right, and we suggested that they never subsisted because of the bull stuff and how funny it is.

There's a lot of them on there.

You absolutely are.

Johnson had done that in 67.

He would have won.

He would have been elected.

Yes.

He would not have been the McCarthy of it.

That's not happening.

Well, I know you've talked all these things out with our folks, and I know that you're very impressed with what you've done so far.

I mean, I know it might happen.

The problem we've got here, of course, is a money problem.

On the other hand, we want to, in a better sense, give us a little time.

I told them, I said, see what they can to try to

work out something that the committee is supporting.

I don't want, frankly, I just don't want to have the first bill that may come down here that I have to veto.

And then it's not easy to put it to because I don't want to veto any reference bill.

I want to separate, and it's very important to separate the Vietnam reference and the disabled and the others and so forth and so on.

And be sure that we go all out on that deal.

And that's one of the good things about our deal that I was returning.

It's reminded these people, the people again, that they're patriots.

It reminds them that this is a good country.

It reminds them that we've got to stand by our veterans.

And I'm all for it.

We're on the same line, if you understand.

I think we have a problem that some of these bills that are in your committee at the present time, or in Congress, are

beyond what I was able to sign before.

And I would appreciate it if you would consider, I mean, talking to our boys, seeing that we can't cooperate on the thing.

We're in a residence and we end up in a bloody confrontation.

And the pressure's running pretty great.

I think I mean, it's the veterans' organization, some airmen, and so forth.

And I understand, I understand why on the other side, the best way to embarrass the president is to stick some bill down here you can't beat.

And I understand that, too.

But the point is, I am for that.

You don't have any iron bills or, the bills are, I guess, desktop.

But have you got any thoughts that you want to add as to what we can, on these bills that you have?

Yes, sir.

Well, we've got some specific difficulties with .

But we would like to work with the chairman and see if we can't get these bills in a position where they would be easier for you to .

to sign, and we're talking about the expenditure of money here.

It seems to me that we look at some of these bills that basically they don't really get at helping the Vietnam veteran.

And so if you're talking about putting resources against the specific veterans group, maybe we'd be better to see if we can do some things that will help the Vietnam veterans.

And what do you do for Vietnam veterans?

Now, of course, the problem of providing for the dependents of the disabled, that's a real crunch.

Yes, sir.

The whole dependents business is a great one.

Of course, that's in one of those bills that really opens up the veteran's medical system.

And you wonder whether or not, in fact, the veteran doesn't suffer more when you open the system up and the system is just really there to serve the veteran only.

What I would like to see explored is this.

How can we take our available resources and even add to those resources and do more for Vietnam veterans

than we've done.

If you can do that, then it gives us something we can be for.

And I don't know whether you could find something we could do there or not, but that's what I would like to do.

You know, I want to do something for those Vietnam veterans.

We're in the field, obviously.

We should.

Good God, they're a great man.

And, you know, I think when you think of that, people might talk yesterday.

Roy spent four years, four years in solitary.

Four years, never saw another living soul.

Except the captain.

Four stinking years.

Two meals a day.

No eating.

Nothing.

For four years.

God, they're great men.

But anyway, we all, they'll tell you about it.

The whole nation wants to take care of that.

Well, I think of that poor, that poor guy, those two and a half that went back and got a job for those, and I think of those disabled guys.

Those disabled guys, the Vietnam guys, listen, there isn't anything that we shouldn't do for them.

Anything.

That's what my, my, my philosophy is.

Well, there is, you know, some distinction and concern among you Vietnam veterans that we aren't doing enough for the young.

And I'm glad you buried that report of recommendation on cutting the disabled.

That was probably the first time.

I don't know why I don't like that.

I can't understand that kind of display.

I think he was trying to destroy us.

I heard that there wasn't enough money.

He knew it would be embarrassing to you, and that's why he got out.

He got out, too.

That's right.

You were right about that.

On anything like this, you would do this.

Always go, okay.

I put them on the right hand.

And you go and direct.

He's as close as about 30 seconds from this office.

I told him, remember I remarked on that to him a dozen times, I said, we have got to do the right thing for these veterans.

I said, I understand some of these bills, but I'm not going to be in a position of being against, of not being for veterans, particularly being non-veteran and disabled veterans.

That's my philosophy.

Now, how we deal with it is questionable.

I mean, you've got to address yourself to it.

Who's our Republican?

Harris.

Is it Harris?

Yes, sir.

He's right with me.

He knows the reason.

It was all for it.

But I thought it was important to see you along.

Mr. President, briefly, I can't do this now.

I'll be very frank with you.

And on that bill that passed the Senate, the one the president vetoed on medical grant, they won't pass that.

And I know your objection to that, of course, is that the dependents of totally disabled veterans will get medical care.

But here's that argument.

They say, well, you've got military people, you know, colonels and officers and all that whose wives can go to military hospitals.

And it's kind of a hard argument to answer.

And his defense can't get him to be in custody.

But that's the argument there.

And that's pretty hard to overcome.

I think we'll pass that bill and the one on cemetery.

But I can do this.

I won't get this up there on the other side of the aisle.

I mean, yes.

It's gone around and gotten 100 people that sponsored the bill that would cost $400 million.

That is on the 20% increase in Social Security.

Take care of everybody.

Well, we'll have to have something, maybe a little increase in the allowable income, something like that.

But I just can't go along with something that costs that much money.

Of course, this committee is a nonpartisan committee.

I've never, I've never been able to call a partisan vote.

But this, I can have people on.

And if they start that patient business, this, you know how impossible it is.

We may have to work out something there.

Maybe a little increase in the patient number.

But if you take care of everybody...

who lost cause of the 20% .

What is it on this medical care thing that you're going to pass that in its present form?

We would like to work with the chairman for the administration of .

Of course, we would hope we can.

a chance to work with him.

I'd like to try to get that thing on a basis that we don't have to knock her down.

I think the timing of this is important, too.

I think the way that if we can work with you, if we can get that so that as whatever it may be, as a veterans bill is regarded as that as opposed to something that was sent down here as a part of some effort to bust the budget, I think that will be important, too.

And the veterans bill is considered separate from the other budget bills.

Yes, sir.

I think that helps.

Absolutely.

It helps everyone.

I don't want to be Joe Garrensville with something on a wheel.

I don't know what you mean.

What did you mean by that?

I was not going to be Joe on a wheel.

But I'm sure I can help you on that.

And this is, I mean, we're getting less than 50,000 from all over the country saying, do something.

We lost so many of my patients because of the 20% increase in Social Security.

And there's a tremendous pressure there.

But I think I can work out something with you on that.

And also, you know, that this is part of a real general issue here.

Straight across the board, this would make a difference.

You know, we had one Mr. President that passed the House, and it fits.

You can have people who don't listen.

And you can take those bits, too, as long as you have the courage to do it.

But then you've got people in the Senate that are worse than we are in the House.

They had $45 million on the loop, $5 million relative to that.

I said, you know,

In those days, you know, we in the House, we were the radicals, they thought, and we were to a certain extent.

We'd pass something, and then it would go over to the Senate, and Bob Taft, and Harry Gerber, and Walter George, and those fellows, they'd get it together, and they'd cool it off.

Today, you pass something in the House, they send it to the Senate, nobody catches it, and it goes back.

Well, it's impossible.

And then the house has to take the heat, and the house comes up every two years.

Why?

It didn't matter at the United States Senate, you know.

What's not?

I don't know.

It's just not like it used to be.

You know McKinnon, where he was?

Oh, yeah.

He worked with Stronghead.

Stronghead.

So they request we get that meeting with those fellows.

They just go off and own the budget and don't hold down expenses.

But, man, it's just the other way around.

They like it.

Oh, Mr. President, I can't help you on that fishing business.

I know, you know, Ty T has done a good job over here.

Yes, I have.

He was tough.

You know, they called T and myself all kinds of names because we'd go, I mean, people all over this country said, well, where's Bruce on all these?

Well, I said, uh, but that is the back of the country.

I can help you on that, and I can help you on this other thing, too.

It's just tremendous.

Well, we've got to do something, but what we do is...

It's mostly important because I think the social security costs, the cost of that could be astronomical.

And over that, I do want to talk with you about it.

If we can go through that with some of the experts as well, maybe there's something we can do that's worth taking a crack at.

What about the drug deal?

Well, you know, I didn't ask why it's the attempt to get down here, but the Senate had $45 million.

And I'm a drug trigger with just $5 million in connection with your president being the hospital system that's planning to take care of these fellows.

And ultimately, we asked, and I don't know, Mr. President, but we felt that a fellow that people who are dishonorable discharge in Vietnam, if for no other reason other than drug addiction, he should be treated.

If your service is otherwise honorable.

Now, of course, some of those people can only get out and commit other crimes, and it's almost impossible.

But those, we, that doesn't fail.

And this is another one, I believe, that, you know, we can talk to each other.

And, um... You can clean up the center version somewhat.

I hope so.

Well, you know, they had all kinds of stuff.

They had some kind of a mom, some, well, my sister got some pension business on a bill last year with the cops.

You did.

Well, it's good to see you.

It's good to see you.

I appreciate it.

Well, I'm going to help you on some other legs, too.

We know, we know, we know.

We'll send you down a picture if you'd like to have a picture.

So I'm glad to have all that to take with you now.

Can I send you a little invitation?

If you can permit it due to qualify the reception in the caucus room, you'll get it.

I realize we came to the caucus together.

We had a great time.

And President Johnson also had a great time.

Well, sir, John, the county was with us.

John's been there a few years, and then he went to the 748.

Mr. Brennan, what was that?

I thought it was some businessman.

I wanted to meet you.

I wanted to meet Ken and say, you know, one of those fellas may be friendly.

We won't offer you that.

I said, you've got to pay a lot of money for that kind of effect.

And you said, why didn't you?

I said, that's it.

Four years.

Four years in solitary.

Four years never saw another living soul.

Except the captain.

Four stinking years.

Two meals a day.

No eating.

Nothing.

for four years.

God, they're great men.

But anyway, we all didn't care.

The whole nation wants to take care of them.

But I think of that poor guy, those two and a half that went back and got a job for those, and I think of those disabled guys.

Those disabled guys, the Vietnam guys, listen, there isn't anything that we shouldn't do for them.

Anything.

That's what my philosophy is.

There is, you know, some distinction and concern among you businessmen that we aren't doing enough for the young.

And I'm glad you buried that report of recommendation on cutting the disabled.

That was probably in the first place.

I'm glad you buried that.

Well, that got out with

I don't know why I don't like that.

I can't understand that kind of disloyalty in the church.

I think he was trying to screw us.

I heard that there wasn't enough money.

He knew it would be embarrassing to you, and that's why I got out.

He got out, too.

You were right about that.

You could have quit at the start of that thing.

It was just people calling me all over the corner.

On anything like this, you would do this.

Always call Ken on the veterans.

I'd put them all right at Ken.

And you'd call him and direct.

He's as close as about 30 seconds from this office.

But I told him, remember I remarked on that a dozen times, I said, we have got to do the right thing for these veterans.

I said, I have a stance on these bills, but I'm not going to be in a position of being against, of not being for veterans, particularly being on veterans and disabled veterans.

That's my philosophy.

Now, how we do it is a question.

You've got to address yourself, too.

Who's our public attorney?

Yes, sir.

He's right with me.

He knows the reason.

It was all for him.

But I felt the same way.