Remarks at a Fundraising
Brunch for Senatorial Candidate Susan Engeleiter in
Thank you all very much, and thank you, Susan. And before I start, let me say a special thank you to Steve King; Don Stitt; Mike Grebe; a great Governor, Tommy Thompson; and a great United States Senator, Bob Kasten.
here today to ask everyone in
it's true what they say. Susan Engeleiter is a
me pause here and say a word about a lower capital gains tax, an idea that a
certain liberal has been trashing lately. In 1978, against cries like that,
Susan has been a leader in the fight against crime, and in particular against
drugs. She led in reforming welfare, and the Nation has in many ways followed
her. And she's for a strong defense. Meanwhile, both her opponent and the head
of that ticket are tax-and-spend, antidefense
liberals. Now, they'd be the worst thing for
The problem with the other side is not camera angles or lighting. It's not whether their candidates are likable or not. No, it's the very thing that they've spent this campaign trying desperately to hide. When our liberal friends refuse, until the last week of the campaign, even to whisper the ``L'' word and insist that this election is not about ideology, it's about competence, they're just acknowledging that where they want to take America, America doesn't want to go.
But, my friends, we're making some progress. After all of these months and all of this time, George's opponent has finally come out of the closet. He has finally embraced the ``L'' word. He has confirmed that the American people -- or what the American people have known all along: He's liberal, liberal, liberal! And come next week, the American public will say no to the Massachusetts liberal who preaches higher taxes, big spending, and a weak defense.
the American people always have a way of figuring out the facts. It reminds me
of a story -- at my age, everything reminds you of a story. [Laughter] This one
has to do with an agent in one of our central intelligence agencies, or
services. And they called him in and told him that he was to contact another
agent who was in a small town in
Well, you know the facts, and so do the American people. Our liberal friends have spent the last several months trying to dress up their agenda in our clothes -- and now in Harry Truman's clothes or F.D.R.'s clothes -- but somehow nothing fits. [Laughter] When they say ``opportunity,'' they mean subsidies. When they say ``reducing the deficit,'' they mean raising taxes. When they say ``strong defense,'' they mean cut defense spending. No wonder their favorite machine is the snowblower. [Laughter] They talk about it being time for a change. Well, where have they been the last 8 years? We are the change; we began it 8 years ago. And the choice this year is go forward with the change or go back to the stagnant status quo of the past.
we took office,
of what cutting inflation to a third of what it was means to families who are
seeking to protect their life savings. And think of what our tax reduction
program has meant to families, most of whom now pay a top rate of 15 percent.
Yes, what you heard in a recent debate, I've heard echoed in my talks with the
leaders of many nations: Today the
We've come a long way in the last 8 years, but, my friends, everything that we've worked for these last 8 years, everything, could be lost faster than you can say the Pledge of Allegiance. [Laughter] Our opponents say they're in the tradition of F.D.R. and Harry Truman, but from the economy to national defense, they've taken positions that only a McGovern could love. [Laughter] No, they're not Truman, and they're not Franklin Delano Roosevelt.
We've achieved arms agreements with the Soviets and a new warmth in relations, not through weakness but through our policy of peace through strength. You'd think our liberal friends would have learned from that. But not long ago former Defense Secretary James Forrestal -- or Schlesinger, I should say, wrote that their ticket this year seems to be, in Secretary Schlesinger's words, ``viscerally antimilitary.'' They would cut the B - 1 bomber, the MX missile, our strategic defense against ballistic missiles; and two supercarrier battle groups would be eliminated from our Navy. In fact, what they plan for the Navy is so bad that by the time they get through Michael may have to row the boat ashore -- [laughter] -- that is, if Herb [Kohl] doesn't sink it first. [Laughter]
Yes, it's the same Carter-Mondale liberal agenda they're pushing: less defense and more big government. For example, as a part of their so-called profamily agenda, they support Federal child-care assistance. Now, a little while ago, I told an audience that under this proposal, their proposal, if parents want assistance and they also want to leave their child with his or her grandmother the grandmother will have to be licensed by the Federal Government.
I spoke, a reporter called one of the congressional staffers behind that bill
and asked if it was true -- that grandmothers would have to get Federal
licenses to take care of their own grandchildren. And the reply came, yes, of
course, it's true. After all -- and here's the quote -- ``How else can you
design a program that receives Federal funds?'' Licensing grandmothers -- can
you believe it? [Laughter] But doesn't that tell all the difference between our
philosophies? When they say ``family,'' they mean Big Brother in
look at crime. The top of their ticket and their candidate for
By the way, you've heard that George's opponent says he's on your side. But you know better. In the Governor's 1989 budget, State debt is projected at some $10 billion, nearly double the debt when the Governor took office. And what did this debt buy? Well, here are the words of a leader of his own party in the State legislature: ``Not only has this been the worst spending spree in Massachusetts history, we have almost nothing to show for it in better services, just a bigger payroll and a huge pension liability . . . .'' Yes, George Bush is the one, and the only one, who's on your side. And that's not negative campaigning: That's the truth.
Now, our liberal friends have promised that come January the Reagan era is over and their era will be just beginning. And, yes, that's the choice. From top to bottom, the election this year is a referendum on liberalism. Yes, the choice is just as clear as the choice in 1980 and 1984: It's between, on one hand, liberal policies of tax and spend; economic stagnation; international weakness; and always, always blame America first; and on the other hand, what we believe -- limited government, a strong defense, firmness with the Soviets, and always, always ``I Pledge Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America.''
You may have guessed, I feel strongly about giving George Bush a Congress where he has more friends than he had on that Pacific island where he was shot down during World War II. Ours is a system of three equal branches of government. Two branches, Congress and the President, are chosen by election, and the third branch, the court, is chosen by the other two. When you vote for a candidate for the Senate or the House, you're voting for the direction of the country and the world as much as when you vote for President. Yes, we've accomplished much these last 8 years, but we could have accomplished even more, including, I believe, balancing the budget, if both Houses of Congress had been friendly. So, shouldn't we ask: If we must ride two horses, Congress and the President, across every stream, doesn't it make sense to have them going the same way?
Engeleiter and George Bush are going the same way.
And come to think of it, that's my way, too. All three of us are for a balanced
budget amendment to the Constitution and a line-item veto for the President.
And all three of us are for holding down spending and for telling the liberals,
read our lips: No new taxes! And when it comes to the people of
George Bush and Susan Engeleiter
in closing, I'd just ask you to take history in your hands. As Yogi Berra once said: ``It ain't over
till it's over.'' If I lived in
let me pause here and say something that -- because of some of the campaign
rhetoric that's been going on about the Federal deficit and who's to blame.
I've heard myself identified -- with it being mine. Well, I think you all
should know the President of the
And as a matter of fact, the law is such that the President can't even save money. If some of our Agencies and Departments, in carrying out the programs passed by Congress, should come to the end of the year with a surplus, they have to go out and find a way to spend it. We can't have some economies and then have a savings there to apply to the deficit.
what I really want to tell you is -- and point out -- in the 50 years up and
through 1980 the Congress of the
So, whose deficit is it? Because then, beginning in 1965 when President Johnson's War on Poverty began -- which poverty won -- [laughter] -- in the 15 years from there to 1980, the budgets of the United States increased to five times what they had been; and the deficit increased to 52 times what it had been in that first 50 years. So, a great important thing is we've had gerrymandering every 10 years because they've been in the saddle. And the time has come for us to get back on the track and continue in the way we've been going. And I just have to tell you that I think you have a very great addition -- in a small package -- but a great addition to the United States Senate in this young lady who is your candidate.
And I trust that you're going to -- well, let me put it to you this way: I just ask you as our other Senator responded, or said a moment ago, on this. Let me just put it this way: On election day, yes, go out there and win one for the Gipper!
Thank you and God bless you.
[At this point, Susan Engeleiter gave the President a shamrock.]
Could I just say something here about this? I'm half Irish, too. [Laughter] The other part is English and Scotch. But I just can't help but telling you -- and you can take this with you, for I'm going to take this with me.
Note: The President
spoke at in the Regency Ballroom
at the Hyatt Regency Hotel. He was introduced by Susan Engeleiter.
In his opening remarks, the President referred to Steven King, former chairman
of the State Republican Party; Donald Stitt, current
chairman of the State Republican Party; and Michael Grebe, national Republican
committeeman. Following his remarks, the President traveled to