FOR

RELEASE

ON DELIVERY
AUGUST 10, 1964, 11:00 A.M.

REMARKS BY SENATOR BARRY GOLDWATER,
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF COUNTIES,
WASHINGTON, D. C. , August 10, 1964

I've just had the very great pleasure of reading the basic governmental philosophy plank of your American County Platform.
"Leave to private initiative all the functions that citizens can
perform privately; use the level of government closest to the community for
all public functions it can handle; utilize cooperative inter-governmental
agreements

where appropriate to attain economical performance and popular

approval; reserve national action for residual participation where state and
local governments are not fully adequate, and for the continuing responsibilities that only the national government can undertake."
I know that not all of us here agree on partisan matters or affiliation .

But, if you subscribe to that platform, I can tell you very flatly that

we agree absolutely in our philosophy of government.
And, as I have been saying for some time now, it is to give
America a chance truly to choose that
philosophy of government that I am seeking the Presidency of the United States.

All of you can see this choice from a true vantage point--the
county government.

You have first-hand experience of a growing tendency to

by-pass various levels of local and area government and to hand problems directly over to the Federal government.
You have confident reason to know that this is nQ.i necessary; that
local governments,governments close to the people,

can

bear the primary

governmental responsibility for meeting our nation's major domestic needs.
You may judge, also, who in public life just talk about the prerogatives of local government and who in public life actually match deeds to
their words.

(mere)

-2-

I submit to you that at the very heart of the domestic difference
between the two great American parties is their performance in regard to
local governments.

And I urge that, because of your particular position in

the structure of our government you judge the parties most carefully on
this basis.
Nowhere is the dynamic conservatism of the Party I am proud to
represent more clearly evident than in this concept of government.

I say

conservative because we believe in building upon the best of the past.

I

say dynamic because we believe that tomorrow belongs to those who will work
to build it and not just to those who talk about it.
County governments have the opportunity to be keystone contributors in the re-building of a balanced governmental structure in this
country--a structure that can•serve people best by serving the people it
knows best, in the localities

it knows best.

Not only are county governments

area-wide in scope, and yet

very local in nature, but two-thirds of our total population increase in
the past decade has occurred in suburban areas which, in many instances, do
not lie within the jurisdiction of any municipality.
Here, dramatically, we can see where a local segment of government can clearly fill a pressing need in our nation.
And I suggest that the public demand for and desire for local
leadership is crystal clear.

The equally clear danger, however, is that

whenever and wherever local governments

fail
to respond, then

Washington's

ever eager fingers of bureaucracy are right there, waiting to grab the
defaulted responsibility.
In stressing the local need and the national danger I do not for
a moment suggest that the Federal government has

!1Q_

role in the problems of

shifting patterns of urban, suburban, and rural population.
The Federal government must have effective powers efficiently
to meet its Constitutional responsibilities in working cooperatively with
state and local governments and, in some instances, to coordinate or provide research data and stimulation for local programs.
Also, it should be a prime role of the executive branch of
government to see to it that local goverrunents have the tools with which
to do their jobs, and thus preclude the need for Federal take-overs.
(more)

-3We have, far too long, seen a Federal establishment obsessed by
the enlargement o f i trole
s and i

personnel.

We can, instead--and I am dedicated to this proposition--have a
Federal establishment just as properly and prudently concerned with turning
power over to the people, rather than taking it away from them.
And I suggest that we'll all be better off, from the village to
the nation, as a result!
This isn't turning back the clock.
sibility going backward?

Is freedom and local respon-

Not at all.

The people who look backward are those

who seek solutions only

by concentrating more and more power in fewer and fewer hands.
That's not a new idea.

That's the oldest, worst idea in govern-

mental history!
The meaning of the American revolution was the rejection of that
idea.

And if we are to keep that revolution alive and ongoing, we must in

cur time also reject absentee government and the c_e ntralization of power.
In practical terms, I suggest that we need such action as:-a critical re-examination of federal, state, and local tax revenues to find

feasible and equitable methods of effectively redistributing them to keep
local monies closer to local projects.
--a critical re-examination also is needed of Federal grant-in-aid
programs, with a view to eliminating these no longer necessary, and channeling the remaining ones through the state.a.
--we would be well served, also, by a hard look at the system
o f f ederal payments to state and local govexnments for Federal lands.

an increased

With

citizen demand for services from the rural governments where

much of this land is located, the exemption of it from local tax rolls can
pose serious financi al hardships.
But now let me ask you the most important question of your
political life.
Of what use would be the solutions to all of those problems, or
any domestic problems, if we cannot solve the crucial problem of peace in

the world itself?
The very existence of a world or a freedom in which to solve
all the other problems is dependent upon the outcome of this crucial issue.
(more)

-4And I submit to you this plain but fateful proposition; this
nation and the entire free world risks war in our time unless free men remain
strong enough to keep the peace!
Many of us have worked so very hard in the past years on behalf
cf the preparedness of this nation that some critics try to make it appear
that we are preoccupied by war, or eager to start one .
There is no greater political lie.
We are preoccupied by peace.
We are fearful that the peace is being permitted to slip away,
as it has three times in the past, by leadership that misjudges our enemies,
mistrusts our own destiny, and misuses or fails to use our great natinnal
power.
This nation has been prosperous under both political Parties.
But this nation has gone to war under only one
Party--and that is nQ.t the
Party I represent.
And today, as it has before three wars in the past, our guard
is dropping in every sense.
We are disarming ourselves and demoralizing our allies.
Despite a ludicrous bookkeeping exercise in which the present
Administration claims to have more than doubled defense research and development, the hard fact is that our R

&

D program has increased by less than 15%

in each of the past three years and by only close to 10% this year.

This is

scarcely enough to keep pace with rising prices, much less with the aweinspiring technology of modern defense.
Even our everall defense budget, as compared
non-defense spending,

with the growth

of

has been declining.

Make no mistake -- I don 1 t

want
defense spending

to go up.

But

I am convinced that Americans are prepared to pay for every dollars' worth
of defense we actually need.
This Administration, which inherited the mightiest arsenal for
the defense of freedom ever created on earth, has so depleted it that we
face the prospect of going into the decade of the 1970's without a single
new manned bomber.
We

face the prospect of going into that decade with a worn and

obso.lete force composed only of those left-over planes still able to fly.
(more)

-5At worst we could .find ourselves in the 1970's without a. single

one of the flexible, manned weapons which give us the vital scale of a controlled, graduated deterrent rather than nnly a capacity for all-out, intercontinental nuclear confrontation.
Let me also warn you against the public relations gimmick of
parading versions of a single reconnaissance aircraft before the public and
representing them as a whole series of new weapon systems!

I am afraid that this device is as pure bunkum as when.we tried
to fool ourselves into believing that our men could train with wooden rifles
and in cardboard tanks, and that this would impress the enemy.
It didn't then and it won't now.
Nor will our enemies in the world be tempted to turn from the
ways of war by such facts as this:

our appropriations for strategic deterrent

forces of all sorts have been declining steadily.

In the current fiscal

year they are hardly half of what they were three fiscal years ago.
And what of this, the most perilous statistic of all?

Under

our present defense leadership, with its utter disregard for new weapons,
our deliverable nuclear capacity may be cut down by 90% in the next decade!
Let me repeat that.

The figure is startling, and yet undeniable.

Sometime in the decade ahead, unless present plans are changed by the demand
of an aroused public, America's deliverable nuclear capability may be cut
by

90%
This will not serve the cause of peace.

This will merely tempt

the forces of aggression--just as weakness has tempted them to war three·
other times in our century.
To insist on strength is not war mongering.

It is peace-

mongering--the only kind that ever has worked in the whole history of the
world!
Winston Churchill once was called an extremist because he spoke
up for Britajn's defenses at a time when appeasement was popular.

Had he,

rather

than those who called him names, been listened to there is every

reason

to

bel1 i

believethat

the second world war could have been prevented.

(more)

-6Only with the strength to keep the peace can we ever hope for
the time in which the ideological obsession of Communism will be abandoned
by the leaders of the nations which today we call Communist.
those who fear that strength may only provoke the enemy.

Yet, there are

Was it strength

that was responsible for the attacks on our destroyers in the Gulf of Tonkin?
Or was it the enemy's doubt of our strength and our will to use it?
I charge that our policies have become so involved, so twisted
with diplomatic red tape that the enemy might well have wondered if we

wculd accept their attacks at sea on the same basis that w e h a v e b e e n
accepting their attacks on land.

I support, as does my Party, the President's firm action in
responsP-.

But I must point cut that it was just that, a response--an incident,

not a program or a new policy; a tactical reaction, not a new winning strategy.
Yes--we support the President in this strong, right action.

No--

we will not let this one action obsure a multitude of other needed actions.
And, n.Q,--we will not let our support today silence our basic
criticism; that the war in Vietnam--and let's call it what it is, a war-that the war in Vietnam is being fought under policies that obscure our
purposes, confuse our allies, particularly the Vietnamese, and encourage
the enemy to prolong the fighting.
We must, instead, prosecute the war in Vietnam with the object
of ending it, along with the threats to the peace that it poses.

Taking

strong action simply to return to the status quo is not worthy of our sacrifices, our ideals, or our vision of a world of peace, freedom, and justice.
This does not mean the use of military power alone.

We have

vast resources of economic, political, and psychological power which have
not even been tapped in our Vietnamese strategy.
These can be the peaceful means of waging war on war itself.

I say let us use them!
As it is, we seem forever to be making crisis decisions in the
middle of the night--crisis decisions for supposedly isolated outbreaks of
fire.

Actually Communism remains a global, not an isolated threat, and we

must face it as such or risk, in some uninformed response to a supposedly
isolated crisis, the misstep that could bring us closer to the nuclear war
we all want to avoid.
(more)

-7Those who remember that the final defeat of free China occurred
while our eyes were riveted on the Berlin blockade, cannot help but realize
that today--while our eyes are fixed on Vietnam--we face another disaster in
the heart of Africa, the Congo.
We need to understand that a devotion to preparedness is a
devotion to peace--and that those who rashly would disarm us unilaterally,
risk tempting our enemies to war, just as they have before every other war
of this century.
In my campaigning across this nation I can hope to sound no more
clear message than that of peace through preparedness.
And you, in turn, regardless of the other interests which may
absorb you, face no greater challenge.
If we cannot remain strong enough and skillful enough to keep
peace in the world, the prosperity of our nation will avail us little at
all.

###

..
FOR RELEASE
.IMMEDIATE RELEASE
AUGUST 12, 1964,
Contacta James L. McKenna
News Editor-RNC

REMARKS BY SENATOR BARRY GOLDWATER,
DELIVERED TO THE REPUBLICAN UNITY CONFERENCE,
HERSHEY, PA.,

For myself, and for Bill Miller, I want to say how delighted we
are that you are here.
I want to thank my old friend, Bill Scranton, for being such a
very gracious host.
And I want to express particularly

the appreciation of every one

of us to General Eisenhower and Diok Nixon, not only for joining us here
today, but also for the very generous and very helpful way in. which they
have helped us get this campaign on the road.

I want to say to each and every one of you -- those of you who are
now Republican Governors, and those who very soon will be Republican Gov·ernors-that I'm honored to be with you.

I'm proud to stand with you, before the

American electorate, as a Republican.
We're going to win in November.
In that effort, we need your help -- and we want to do anything
and everything we can t.o help you.
We have a lot of work to do between now and November 3.

We have

some hurdles to olear, and we have some problems on our hands.
My
those

purpose here today is to talk very frankly with you about

problems,

and to discuss with you how we can best go about solving

them.

WORLD AFFAIRS
If I were asked to name the number one problem ·facing the Republican Party at the nationallevel in this election, I would say it is the
t otally wrong view our op onenta will try to din into' the minds of every
American voter -- namely, that the election of a Republican President in
November will somehow lead to war.
(more)

- 2 -

This is the supreme political lie, and we've got to label it for
what it is.
The Republican Party is, and has proven itself to be, the Party
of Peace.
We don't claim that the Democrats are a war party.

But America

might well question the calibe_r of leadership which has blundered into
three wars in my lifetime, because it didn't understand its responsibilities
for keeping the peace.

That same leadership demonstrates today, in the . ·

wake of Laos, Viet Nam and the Bay of Pigs that it has learned little in
recent times -- and that it understands far too little now about leading
the Free World in the cause of peace.
Let me assure you here and now -- and I have said this is every
corner of the land throughout this campaign, and I will continue to say it
that a

Goldwater-Miller Administration will mean an immediate return to

the proven policy of Peace through Strength which was the hallmark of the
Eisenhower years.
The Eisenhower-Dulles approach to foreign affairs is our approach.
It served well the cause of freedom and avoided war during the last Republican Administration.

It will do so again.

We will hear over and over again until November such words as
"impulsive", "trigger-happy", "imprudent", "hip-shooting" and the like.
Now, I wonder if the really "impulsive" and "imprudent" President
isn't the one who is so indecisive and vasoillating that he has no policy
at all -- with the result that potential aggressors are prompted to move
because they know we have no policy.
Was there anything impulsive or imprudent about Dwight Eisenhower

when he moved with firmness and olear purpose in Lebanon and the Formosa··
.
.
Straights? Compare the Eisenhower-Dulles policies in thos situations with ·
the appalling
-.:; actions of this Administration in such places as Laos and

the

.'

Bay of Pigs.

· I have said, and will continue to say, that a Goldwater-Miller
Administration will mean an immediate return to the proven Eisenhower-Dulles
policy of Peace through Strength.

But let me say something more.
. Every .

President, if he's worth his salt, will pick his own Cabinet.
(more)

Be must pick

- 3 -

,

his own associates

for the top echelons of government.

However, I can

assure you that I would not appoint anyone to the offices of Secretary of
State or Secretary of Defense or other critical National Security posts until

I had first.discussed

my

plans for those appointments with General Eisenhower,

Dick Nixon and other experienced leaders seasoned in world affairs.

If all this amounts to an impulsive and trigger-happy approach to
foreign policy, then I fear the English language has lost its meaning.
AMERICA'S ALLIANCES
Again -- anticipating the Democrats, and to set the record
straight -- I want to say tha.t we must rebuild and revitalize our whole
system of alliances.

We will repair on an urgent priority basis the damage

done by this Administration to the great North Atlantic Treaty Organization,
an organization which is to me the greatest peace-keeping force ever devised.
Our allies will swiftly know that once again America wants to work with
them
in the cause of :freedom and peace.
Let me reiterate here what I have said also in every corner of
the land in this campaign -- that I support unconditionally the purposes
the United Nations was originally intended to serve; that I believe we must
make the fullest possible use of the United Nations and work hard to improve
it; and that while the UN was never designed to be a substitute for a clear
and resolute United States foreign policy, we must take ali reasonable steps
to help the UN become a more effective instrument for peace among nations.

THE DOMESTIC FRONT
In domestic matters, the Republican trademark is faith in the .
individual, faith in competitive enterprise, and faith in limited government • .
We Republicans believe that where there is a legitimate governmental concern,

the government should -- at the appropriate level -- undertake

to help people with those tasks they cannot adequately perform by themselves.
Specifically, a Goldwater-Miller Administration will move to assure
the return of an economic climate in which this marvelous enterprise system
of ours can grow and flourish, and in .which real jobs may be created as a
real answer to poverty and a real key to lasting progress.

(more)

I

- 4 -

Our Administration will bring an immediate end to the budgetary ·
sleight-of-hand by which this Administration has tried to hide its shabby
record of profligate spending.
Our Administration will adhere to the time-honored Republican precept of fiscal responsibility, and we will wage an unabated campaign to curb
inflation.

Let me say at this point, as I have said in just about every

speech I have made in this campaign:

In respect to those who live on fixed

those who are retired, those who depend on pensions and on social

incomes,

security, in fact all wage earners
continu-ing concern with inflation.

all these must be the objects of our
And let me also repeat -- for perhaps

the one millionth time, lest there by any doubt in anyone's mind -- that
I support the Social Security System and I want to see it strengthened.
Under a Goldwater-Miller Administration, every American will be
assured of a compassionate and understanding approach by the Federal Government to the human problems growing out of -- automation, the rising costs
incident to catastrophic illness, unemployment, the costs of education, and
the like.

CIVIL RIGHTS
A Goldwater-Miller Administration pledges, in the literal wording
of the President's Oath of Office -- "faithful execution" of the 1964 Civil
Rights law, and all other civil rights laws.

This solemn pledge for full

implementation is included in our 1964 Platform.
For myself, I reject any suggestion that I would do otherwise
my

individual vote as a Senator when the 1964 Act was approved by

the Senate.

Further, I say to you -- as I have also said in every corner ·

based on

of the land throughout this campaign -- that I will use the great moral
influence of the Presidency to · promote prompt and peaceful observance of
civil rights laws.
tionwould take

It goes without saying that a Goldwater-Miller Administra.within appropriate constitutional limits -- whatever action

is necessary to deal effectively with situations in this area that might
\

develop in disorders, riots, or any other forms of mass lawlessness.

And

let no one mistakenly assume that a Goldwater-Miller Administration would
shirk any Federal responsibility to prevent any .American from suppressing
.,
the rights of any other American.

(more)

- 5 -

THE REPUBLICAN PARTY
The Party of Lincoln is now, at last, a great National Party • . We
seek to read no one out of this Party.

We seek instead to make room for

all, and to assure a climate within the Party in which all of us will feel
comfortable and at home.
In this campaign, we want, and we need, the help of every Republican if we are to win in November.

We who are involved in the national

campaign promise, to the limit of our own endurance, any help we can possibly
give any other Republican.
Now, we have heard much already, and we will hear more before
November, about political extremism and about extremist organizations and
policies.
Let me reiterate what I have said over and over in this campaign:

I seek the support of no extremist -- of the ieft or the right.
far too much faith in the good sense and stability of

my

I have

fellow Republicans

to be impressed by talk of a so-called "extremist take-over" of the Party.
Such a thing cannot happen under Bill Miller and me.

We repud;ate character

assassins, vigilantes, communists, and any group such as the Ku Klux Klan
that seeks to impose its views through terror or threat or violence.
As a Party, we have sincere and lively differences of opinion
within our ranks.

We're the better for that, because we are not a confor-

mist organization, and our differences sharpen our awareness of our basic
Part y purposes.

They make us a more vital and energetic instrument for

advancing the public good.
our opponents
at San Francisco

We must not let these differences divide us, as

and those sensation-seekers cited by General Eisenhower
might wish.

Nor should we allow ourselves to become

unduly sensitive to those glib and easy labels coined by the Democrats. ·
Finally, on this matter of extremism, I hope each of you will
read carefully the exchange of letters made public Monday between me and
Dick Nixon regarding the comments about extremism and moderation which I
made in

my

acceptance speech at San Francisco.

I trust these letters will

clear the air so that all of us mB:¥ go forward to meet the real issues which
face America and the Free World.

(more)

-

- 6 -

THE CAMPAIGN ITSELF
As you know, this campaign is being run through the National
Committee.

In fact both Bill and I have moved our campaign offices into

National Committee headquarters.

You will hear more of that in detail .

shortly from the National Chairman.
We are also very fortunate in having Jimmy Doolittle serve as
Chairman of the National Citizens Committee for Goldwater-Miiler , with Mrs.
Clare Booth Luce as co-chairman.

We hope through this committee to coordina.to

the work of the many Democrats and Independents who want to help.
We are setting up a coordinated· scheduling arrangement -- one
which should insure maximum effectiveness, not only from my own and Bill's
efforts, but also from the campaigning of General Eisenhower and Dick Nixon.
In addition, we want to make full and effective use of the great campaigning
talents of the Republican Congressional leaders.

We a.re also soliciting

the active help of every Republican Governor, particularly those who aren't
involved this year in campaigns of their own.
We also

want to coordinate the efforts of the National Committee

with those of the House and Senate campaign committees.

And, as I said

before, we who are involved in the national campaign stand ready to do anything humanly possible to help the campaign of any other Republican.
We are a great Party, and ours is a great cause.

We have a sound

and dynamic Platform which we support a.nd on which to run, and we offer a
positive program for a better America.

We can restore morality, resolution

and high purpose to the highest offices in the land. ·
With hard work and with unity of purpose, we can win in November,
all across this great land.

In doing so, we will restore America's faith in

herself -- and, God willing, advance the cause of freedom with justice
everywhere,

in a world at peace.
I

###

'

,

I

I

I

ii

I
FOR RELEASE

FOR AUTOMATIC RELEASE
AUGUST 19,. 1964
12:25 P.M.- CDS

REMARKS BY SENATOR BARRY GOLDWATER TO THE
ILLINOIS STATE. FAIR, SPRINGFIELD, ILLINOIS,
AUGUST 19 , 1964

Back in 1854, the Illinois State Fair played an ioportant part
in one of the truly great political realignments in our nation's history.
The speaker at the Fair, that year, was an up-and-coming politician named
Abraham Lincoln.

This is where he made his first really -i mportant speech

alone the lines that later brought the Republican Party into being as a
Party of freedqm.
There is just as important and potent a political force growing
in the land today.

And there is no better or more fitting place to talk

about it than at this place and this time.
This growing force doesn't call for a new party.

It calls for

a renewal of faith in and an understanding of those political principles
which gave the Republican Party its birth.
There are members of both parties -- and of no party -- here today.
No one expects all of us to agree.

But consider this:

the Republican Party

today is emerging clearly and unmistakably as the Party of freedom once again.
We are not talking of freedom in any sectional or special sense
now, however.

We are talking about freedom throughout our affairs at home.

We are talking about freedom throughout the troubled world that surrounds
and all too often confounds us today.
Can any thinking person have any real doubts about where the two
parties stand on these issues today?
The entire fabric of the Republican Party platform is woven from
dependence upon the individual , faith in the individual, trust of the
individual.

(more)

-2-

In governmental affairs it is woven from reliance upon government
closest to the people -- so that it can be controlled by the people and
not exercise oppressive and remote control over
the people.
In foreign affairs it is woven from belief that all men and all
nations must be free to chose their own ways of life if there is to be
real and lasting peace in the world.
And in regard to peace itself, the Republican platform and my
personal pledge to you today and every day, is based upon a firm belief that
only a strong America can be a peaceful America; that only a strong America
can prevent war; that only a strong America· can preserve the peace in which·

the false and failing ideology of Communism can be finally and fully rendered
powerless.
Now let me suggest that whether you agree or disagree with

those

positions, you must admit, in all political honesty, that the present
Administration stands for exactly the opposite position in each and every
one of those basic matters.
It does not trust the people.

It feels that the people, like

children, must be told what to do, when to do it, and even how much to
. pay for it.

And let's also be honest about this:

some people prefer it

that way.
But I don't buy for a moment t h a t m
people
o s t want it that way.
And in November you are going to have a chance to prove it!
What of governmental affairs?

The present Administration, as

clearly as it can, says that local government can't
cope with things anymore, that only the Federal level of government in Washington is wise
enough to know what is best for you and your neighbors.
And once again, let's be honest.
who

There are men in local government

are more than ready to turn their responsibilities over to Washington.

I want you to know that I'm proud to share this platform today
with one outstanding American who wants your great state to take a different
path.
Chuck Percy, your next governor, doesn't believe in running to
Washington with every problem in every neighborhood or town in his great
state!
(more)

-3He knows that people can solve their own problems in their own
ways right at home -- and he doesn't just talk about it.

As you know, he puts

his beliefs into action.
Today, Chuck and I join hands across the years with those Republicans
who built our Party.

We join hands with them for the very reason that we

are the freedom Party of today!
When it comes to the overwhelming issue of peace, the differences

are just as dramatic between the two parties.

I want to touch on that in

some detail a bit later.
First, I want to go beyond the specifics and the details of political
debate and mention a mood, a feeling in America today which may be as meaningful in the long run as any other factor of the political decision we must
make this year.
You know and I know that there is something distinctly wrong when
crime rises faster than our population.
You know that there is something distinctly wrong when common
honesty and familiar morality are openly and widely challenged by the doctrine
of the fast buck and the code of the off-color novel.
You know and I know that there is something wrong when the standards of drama and literature seek new depths rather than new heights; when
pornography become a measure of talent.
You know and I know that there is something deeply wrong when
law enforcement agencies are attacked for trying to do their jobs while open
violations of civil order are defended.
I yield to no-one in my championship of every American's right to
speak out, and speak out loudly, in his attempts to redress grievances.

I

yield to no man in my actions to support the redress of the grievances of
those

wh
o have been wronged.
But I cannot as a citizen, I have not as a Senator, and I would

not as President support or incite any American to seek redress to his
gri evances through lawlessness, violence, and hurt to his fellow men, or
damage to his property.
In domestic a ffairs, a Federal Administration has no higher responsibility than to set examples of decent, honest, . and moral conduct.
(more)

Wherever

-4and whenever it puts politics first and principled action second, it sets
the stage for lawlessness.
Telling people again and again that the Federal government will
take care of everything for them, leads to the decline of personal and
individual responsibility which is the base cause of the rise in crime and
disregard for law and order.
Pitting class against class, or race against race, to reap the
votes of one faction or another sets the stage for malice, where only open
hearts, understanding minds, and willing hands ever will be fully effective.
Using positions of public power to feed private greed and gain
sets the stage for lawlessness of other sorts:

for the cynical disregard

of ordinary honesty in our every-day lives, for the petty thefts that
plague our stores and industries, for the hoaxes and swindles that plague our
consumers.
I don't have to quote statistics for you to understnad what I

mean.

You know.

You have to face it every day on the front page of the

back page of your paper.

Every wife and mother -- yes, every woman -- knows

what I mean.
There is a mood of easy morals and uneasy ethics that is an aching
truth in our land.

And no one in a position to set the examples that might

set this right, can avoid responsibilitY. for what is wrong.
Let me put it this way:

there should be no skeletons in the

closets of any part of the Federal structure, and that goes for the smallest
agency right up to the White House itself.
Tragically, we cannot say that this is true today.
that Federal structure.

The names and incidents that some are trying to turn

to nothing but ghostly memories persist in coming to life;
Estes,

Scandal haunts

Billie Sol

by Baker, the six billion dollars for the Texas-built TFX--even

though the services wanted another plane--the suppression or distortion of
news in the name of news management.
No greater domestic issue will be decided in this election, than

the very climate, the very mood of government, the very manners of public
servants and public service.

(more)

-5-

honest.

We offer you

• honest Administration by honest 1en.

We know that

mostwho work in government, at i

We pledge that their general honesty · shall no t

unpunished, or unexposed misbehavior of a

levels, are
be

shadowed by the

a else in government service,

no matter how high or protected his posit
The highest honesty in public ~ service,

the most local and respon-

sible level of government in public administration; the greatest selfreliance in personal development, the most individual responsibility in all
of our lives:

those are the ingredients of Republicanism at home.

But •.• now let me remind you of one shocking fact of our Twentieth
Century life.
Nothing of what I've said will mean a thing in the long run
if we cannot, in our time and by our skill and will as a nation, keep the
peace of the world.
Nothing of what I have said may mean a thing for our children or
our children's children, if we stumble into war the way we have three times
before in this century.
Our political opposition does not want these matters discussed in
this campaign.

Foreign policy, they say, should be above argument.

I wish it were!
agree.

I wish we had one on which all Americans could

I wish, above all, that we had a foreign policy that was working to

keep the peace, working to preserve freedom, and working to confound
Communism.
I don't think that you want to put a muzzle on the discussion of
this life or death issue.

I don't think that you want to think only of

problems at home, when the world itself is burning with conflict, torn by
conquest, and balanced always on the brink of the next Communist crisis.
I say that foreign policy is a major issue in this political
\

campaign.

I say it must be discussed.

I only wish it could be debated by

both the candidates for the Presidency.
And I am willing!
But I can understand why this Administration doesn't want to talk
about it and why its leader won't debate it.

The record is clear.

This nation has been prosperous under both parties.
has gone to war under the leaders of only one
party.
(more)

But this nation

-6Only under Administrations such as this one have we become so
weak that aggressors have been tempted to plunge the world into war.
Only under Administrations such as this one have we closed our
eyes to reality and had to open them to the sound of gunfire!
Many of us in the Republican Party have worked so very hard in
the past years on behalf of the prepardness of this nation, that some
critics try to make it appear that we are preoccupied by war, or eager to
start one.
There is no greater political lie.
We understand that every war we ever have had to fight in this
entire troubled century has come on the heels of weakness.

We remember

1918--we remember Pearl Harbor--we remember Korea--we are watching Laos,
and Vietnam, and the Congo--and we are worried.
Whether we like it or not--and I hate the idea as fervently as
you do, believe me--this is the age of nuclear weapons.

We wish it weren't, but wishing won't make it so.

The enemy has

nuclear weapons.
And there is only one dependable way to make sure that they never
use them:

maintain our own nuclear strength and our ability to deliver it

at a level so superior, in quantity and quality, that the enemy can never

risk any conflict that might bring our superweapons into play.
This is detterence.

Had we been strong, when Nazism threatened,

the second world war might have been .averted.

If we remain strong, the third

world war can be averted.
And today -- let no one, particularly our enemies make any mistake
about it -- today we are
strong.

We are secure in the armament of a

strategic arsenal inherited from the Administration of Dwight Eisenhower.
It is tomorrow that worries all Americans.
we are today.

We know
how strong

Republicans built that strength.

We are worried by the undisputed fact that this Administration has
decided to phase out the manned bombers which today account for more than

901fo of our deliverable nuclear capacity -- the capacity that has kept the
peace and can keep the peace.

(more)

-7We are worried by the undisputed fac t t hatu nder this Administration, with its ut t ,

er

•

disregard for strategic aircraft and for new, major

strategic weapons systems, our deliverable nuclear capacity could be cut
down by

90%

in the next decade.

We have heard the Administration's attempts to explain away that
figure.

I've never seen so such statistic juggling in
But the figure and the fact remains.

my

life.

Under this Administration,

we are facing the decade of the 1970 1 s with the very real prospect of a
strategic force capable of carrying only one-tenth of the nuclear capacity
that can be carried today.
Even that one-tenth will be a great power, of course.
our enemy have stood still, as we are standing still?

But will

Will our enemy have

abandoned research into advanced strategic systems, as we have virtually
abandoned it?

Will our enemy have abandoned the search for new defenses

against nuclear attack, as we seem to have abandoned it? Will our enemy
have curtailed the production of nuclear materials, as we have curtailed it?
What would this world be like, if Communism ever pulled even with
or ahead of us in nuclear weapons?
that one.

All Americans should think hard about

Not even one of Defense Secretary McNamara's chalk talks should

stop us from thinking about that.
We have simply got to get this record straight.

The Republican

Party is the Party of peace.
It is the Party dedicated to the preparedness that can keep the
peace.
It is the Party that can keep the peace because it best understands Communism -- which is today's only major threat tothe peace.
I cannot imagine a Republican President, for instance, warning
the Corr..:1 nists in advance of an action such as that recently taken in
response to the attacks on our ships in the Gulf of Tonkin.
I cannot imagine, to go one step farther, a Republican President
who would have let our policies in such an area become so confused that the
enemy would have even risked such an attack in the first place; much less
r epea t it.

(more)

-8-

But what of the matter of warning them, once the decision -- which
I fully supported -- had been made to destroy the shore bases from which
the attacks had been launched?
The President gave the warning by going on national television,
when a maximum audience was still available, but when our naval aircraft
was still on the way to their targets.
The Administration

says that the warning was given deliberately

so that our people would learn of the attack before the enemy announced it
and so that the enemy would not think we had embarked upon a broader action
against them.
Now, in that time -- which amounted to nearly two hours warning
in advance of the arrival of our first planes over their targets -- the
enemy could have had time to prepare their defenses.
Certainly the element of surprise
warning.

was shattered by the advance

Certainly the safety of our airmen was not the primary concern of

such an advance warning.
I wonder, as a matter of fact, if the Joint Chiefs of Staff were
as enthusiastic about the advance warning as they were about the operation
itself.
The fact remains.
American life was lost.
captivity.

We lost two planes in the action.

One good

Another airman was delivered into Communist

The fact remains that we gave the enemy time in which they could

have better prepared the defenses that shot down our planes.
The Administration has shown little skill when negotiating with
the Communists.

Now it appear they have as little skill when fighting

with the Communists.

For make no mistake about it; the Administration and

i ts civilian generals, such as Field Marshal McNamara, take full credit for
this r emarkable strategy of warning our enemy that our planes were on their
way!
America, and the whole free world, needs leadership in this nation
that understands the enemy, understands how to deal with him, and is
pledged to maintaining the strength and forging the determination that will
keep him from risking the peace.
(more)

-9Republicans seek a strong America because we know that only a
strong nation can
keep the peace.
Republicans rejeot the present plans to disarm ourselves unilaterally.

We call that reckless.

We know that it is the sort of recklessness

that has preceded every war of this century.
Peace is for those who are prepared; those who are strong; those
who are dedicated.

This is the America I know and love.

This is the

America , under God, which I am pledged to defend and to serve.
This is the America :
self-reliant in its domestic affairs
fully defended today and tomorrow
re-dedicated in its morality and devotion to Constitutional
order
this is the America which can show the world the way to a
future of freedom , justice , and yes, peace.

###

COM

I

FOR RELEASE

AUTOMATIC RELEASE 11:00 AM
August 25, 1964

SPEECH BY SENATOR BARRY GOLDWATER
VETERANS OF FOREIGN WARS
MUNICIPAL AUDITORIUM
AUGUST 25, 1964, 11:00 AM

You are men who have known war.
demand of peace.
kept by the weak.

You are men who know the principal

You know that peace, in a troubled world, can never be
Peace is the reward of strength.

You know that strength is more than the arms of a nation.
moral fibre of its people.

It is the

It is their prayers, their dreams, their order

of values, and their value of order.
Strength is not merely the mask of war turned toward an enemy.

It is

the face of faith turned toward the future.
Today we must measure our strength by a scale that goes beyond a single
nation.

We must consider the causes that draw nations together -- or split

them asunder.
There are two such causes in the world today; causes that over-arch
the smaller differences between men and between systems; causes that in their
depth of difference have torn the world almost exactly in two.
One is the cause of freedom; the other, the cause of tyranny.
On the one hand is the array of nations and peoples who, though ·d:i.ff ering, insist upon the right to decide those differences in their own ways, in
their own lands, by their own votes, by their own lights, and without impairing the freedom of others.
On the other hand is the bloc of nations whose leaders have come to
power only .through force and agree on these points:
That Communism is the wave of the future.
That Communism must conquer the world.
That Communism cannot be fulfilled until all other forms of society
are destroyed.
This is the world as it exists.

We wish it were not so.

But to close

our eyes to the Communist threat is to imperil our very civilization.
We see its ugly manifestations around the uorld.

-2-

The Congo is not embattled simply because of some purely local problem.
It is bloodied by an assault Communist in origin, support, and purpose.
Cuba is not fomenting violence throughout the Latin Republics because
of just another social doctrine but because of Communist doctrine and Communist zeal.
Vietnam, tortured by many domestic problems, is being slowly murdered
by Communist violence.
Indonesia is a threat to the peace because Communist support makes it
so.

Laos is split by a Communist thrust.
Berlin is cleft by a Communist wall.
Wherever in the world today there is a serious threat to the peace,
it is a Communist threat.
And wherever there is hope for peace, it is the bope of free world
strength to deter Communism; to discourage Communism; to develop all the
pressuresneeded to make Communism collapse by the weight of its own failures
and internal contradictions.
Today, in its arms, this nation has such strength.

Today, in the heart

of its people, it has such strength.
But its leaders lack this strength.

They are misled by strange and

unrealistic notions of appeasement and.disarmament.

Tbeir eyes are turned

away from the real world and are fixed in a hypnotic stare upon a dream world.
Their myopic world view is losing for us the flexible, mixed, tested,
and balanced force inherited from Dwight David Eisenhower.
strategic deterrent.

This was the deterrent fashioned by

This was the true

such

Secretaries

of Defense as Tom Gates, Neil McElroy, and Charles Wilson.
This mighty shield of peace is now being cast aside.

We are asked,

instead, to rely almost exclusively on a fragment of that shield -- on
retaliatory missiles whose dependability is yet to be proved, yet to be
fully tested.
This failure -- to keep our defense high, flexible, and mixed -- this
failure is matched by another.

And it is to this other failure, a pro-

foundly disturbing one, that I want chiefly to address my remarks this
morning.

-3-

This Administration, by its lapse in leadership, has neglecte d the
magnificent NATO Alliance, and allowed it to drift into a state of dangerous
disarray.
NATO has been and must be the shield of freedom.

As itdeclines, so

declines the strength of free men to deter war, so rises the incitement to
aggression by Communism, so declines the chance for peace.
This Administration must answer not just to the voters of this nation
but to history for its abject failures in foreign policy.

And of those

failures, none is more tragic than the lack of support for NATO.
NATO should be a partnership of sovereign nations which, by sharing
a

common heritage and culture, can share in trust a common responsibility

for the defense one of another, all of one.
Has this Administration been a good partner, or even a working partner?
It has not!
This Administration has humiliated the Netherlands by supporting the
demands of an Asian tyrant, in deciding the fate of Dutch New Guinea.
This Administration dealt a blow to Great Britain and undermined its
basic defense plans, by unilaterally

withdrawing

the Skybolt missile.

This Administration refused to heed French alarms regarding the limited
nuclear test ban -- refuses still to lend a sympathetic ear to French aspirations for a secure European nuclear deterrent.
The President himself has offered gratuitous hints that Germans must learn
to live with the Soviet garrison that bestrides their land.
In all too many matters this Administration has bypassed our NATO
partners to deal directly and unilaterally with the Soviet Union.
Who, our NATO partners might well ask, does this Administration trust
more:
01·

the leaders of the free world, the leaders of the Atlantic community

the leaders of Communist despotism?
Our hot line to Moscow is an unfortunate symbol of this, regardless of

its intended purposes.

It suggests secret conversations, deals, unilateral

negotiations in matters that concern and should involve all our partners in
freedom.
I pledge that, as President, our NATO allies will be given the opportunity to hook into our hot line, either directly or by diplomatic process.
Only in this way will the Corr.munist leaders know they are hearing, over that
line, not the single voice of a single leader, but the concerted voice of
freedom 's great Atlantic partnership.

-4-

Further, prior to any negotiations with the Soviet Union, particularly
those at the so-called summit, I will propose that there always be a meeting
at freedom's summit first.
I feel, further., that NATO's tremendous potential for applying peaceful
economic and political pressures against Communism bas been ignored by this
Administration.

It is true, of course, that there is much work ahead just to

restore confidence in NATO and improve its consultative and control machinery
at the political level.

Beyond that, the economic power of this Alliance

strikes me as vastly promising.
Had NATO been what it ought to be, the recent fiasco of wheat deals
would never have taken place.
The question of consultation and control within NATO is, of course,
directly related to that most sensitive problem of all -- the control of
the weapons needed for NATO's and Europe's defense.
I have suggested, along with many responsible leaders who have considered
the problem, that a way must be developed to provide NATO with its own stock
of small., tactical, nuclear battlefield weapons -- what may truly be called
conventional nuclear weapons.
I am convinced, for instance., that the majority of the great Americans
who have commanded NATO would agree that NATO's effectiveness would be enhanced if a political solution for the control of these small conventional
nuclear weapons could be worked out in NATO itself.
And let me stress that these small conventional nuclear weapons are no
more powerful than the fire-pover you have faced on the battlefield.

They

simply come in a smaller package.
The present Administration's attempt to make this question of control
a partisan political issue, its attempt, for political advantage, to close
the door tiahtly and arbitrarily on this pressing problem, is just one more
striking reason why NATO may be doomed to decline unless there is a change in
American leadership.
This Administration has attempted to scare not only our

own

citizens but

those of Europe too, with preposterous alarms regarding these vitally needed
NATO defense weapons.
But I refer again to the accumulated wisdom of men who have long worked
with and in NATO.

I cite the conclusion of· a Congressional taskforce that

-5-

these "smaller tactical nuclear weapons have a strategic val.ue of:\ magnitude
which would indicate that they should be thought of in terms of con .ventional
1:reaponry and not as weapons of retaliation for massive nuclear attack."
Let me repeat that vitally important key phrase -- "they should
be
thought
of in terms of conventional weaponry."
Rather than grasp this good common sense of modern technology, however,
the present Administration deliberately and cynically has made it appear that
all suggestions to bolster NATO with these weapons are rash suggestions,
reckless suggestions, and irresponsible suggestions.
No.

It is quite the other way!

It is reckless to expose Europe to Communist forces equipped with these
weapons and deny Europe an ample and immediately available force-in-kind.
It is rash to face Communism's legions in Europe with anything less than
a fully credible deterrent at this practical tactical level.
It is irresponsible to gamble the strength of the world's finest hope
for peace in order to score a domestic political point.
How would you feel if your sons had to stand face-to-face with a nucleararmed Soviet horde and had no equivalent and modern weapons with which to
defend themselves?
I have, because I have joined many NATO leaders in describing these
weapons as conventional, suggested that greater control over them be vested
in the NATO Supreme Commander himself.
Other suggestions have been made.

My mind is not closed to any of them --

so long as the ob.iective is kept clearly in mind:

to provide our partners in

Europe with modern weapons most appropriate to their defense needs.
An American President, rather than slamming the door on the legitimate

concerns of our European partners, should be opening new doors of consultation, new doors of exploration, new doors of cooperation and, above all, new
doors of participation .
Just as many responsible leaders have suggested some course along the
lines I have just mentioned, none
-- including myself -- have suggested that
the control o f olarge
u r retaliatory weapons be turned over
anyone
to else.
These

are the truly massive weapons which concern all mankind, and right-

fully concern every American.

l

These
weapons,
reaffirm,

should remain in America's arsenal, under

American control as established by the Congress.

-6-

Our European partners already share a good deal of proper consultative
responsibility in regard to tb.e targeting and missions of tb.ese weapons.
I would hope to see this participation and consultation grow, rather
than diminish .
Even in this area, however, a foolish and dangerous move by this
Administration has introduced new doubts and opened the way for new NATO
weakness rather than strength.
It has now become apparent that this Administration has abandoned
efforts to develop a mobile mid-range ballistic missile.
News of this latest set-back to American strength has been accorded
only relatively minor attention in our press.
For many who are deeply concerned over the fate of Europe, this is news
of the most grave and depressing significance.
Both General Norstad, as far back as 1959, and General Lemnitzer, now
commanding

NATO, have stated that there is a genuine need in NATO for such a

medium range missile.
The reason is apparent.

There are more than 700 Soviet medium range

missiles deployed against Europe.
These Soviet missiles have not only been ignored by this Administration
when publicly assessing the strategic strength of the Soviet Union, but now
they apparently have been ignored in planning weapons for the defense of
Europe .
Rather than provide the weapons which NATO needs, this Admini stration
has offered a plan for missile-armed ships, crui sing
Europe and manned

by

sai

l ors

of

many

nationalities.

off

the shores

of

-7-

The Administration feels that this would solve the matter of controlling

the missiles.

Instead, of course, it would just introduce what some sensible

commentators have called the threat of control by mutiny.
Instead of adding new security to a European deterrent force, it would
create a string of sitting-duck targets.
As General Norstad has said, the difference in vulnerability between a
le.nd-based rr.obile missle, hidden or on the go, and a ship plodding along on
the water's flat surface is simply the difference between locating a needle
in a haystack and a needle on a billiard table.
Yet, this move has been taken by this Administration in calculated
disregard of the needs of NATO and the valiant millions

who are our partners

in it.
The day is dark for NATO.

The future need not be.

All the hope, all

the gloried promise of this foremost of the free world's alliances still can
be revived, still can be realized.
But America

must lead in the

rev i val

and join wholeheartedly in the

realization.
America must not isolate itself from Europe, America must not build the
walls of an illusory Fortress .America.

We must not shut ourselves off from

the Atlantic civilization of which we are a part.
American leadership must dare to look forward to the flowering of this
civilization 1 and not turn its dreams inward.
Above all, American leadership must open
its eyes
--To see the reality of existing threats to the peace.
--To see the reality of our need for NATO and NATO's need for us.
--To see the long road that

we

must take to a whole world, not just half

a world, of peace and freedom and justice.
--To see that America 's greatest days lie not behind us but ahead of
us, in the buildi ng of the great ci vilizaticn for which our common
cultures

have equipped us and our partners abroad.

l'his is the vision in which we can join.

1

give

you

my pl edge

and

ask

This is the vision in which I

your help and Cod I s blessing.

FROM:

REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE

1625 Eye Street, N.W.
Washington, D.c . 20006

Phone: (202)

NA

8-6800
FOR AUTOMATIC RELEASE
AT NOON, EDT, THURSDAY
September 3, 1964

OPENING CAMPAIGN SPEECH AT PRESCOTT, ARIZ., BY SENATOR BARRY GOLDWATER .

REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE FOR PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES

We stand together in this historic square today, as we have
stood twice before, to launch a campaign in a good and noble cause.
Twice before we have won that campaign.

We shall win it again.

What could be more fitting than to stand here to send forth
our message--a message for all who would be free and unafraid, a
message for ali who would face

the future with hope and faith.

This is truly the home of the free and of the brave.

Our fore-

fathers came here seeking a new life; a life that they could lead
for themselves, with honor, with faith, and with a friendliness that
need never be forced.
They hewed and fashioned that new life through hard work and
sacrifice and they passed on to us our most cherished heritage--a
free and orderly community of men.
Today that free and orderly community faces the grave danger
of becoming merely another possession of the White House, and we
who live here face the grave danger of becoming the servants of
some Big Brother who lives there.
We all sense
but
land.

this danger, not only those of us gathered in this

.s11. of us across this land. Thereis a stir in the

There is a mood of uneasiness.

and stormy sea.

We feel adrift in an uncharted

We feel that we have lost our way.

We must and we can find our way to the greatness and a purpose
worthy of this nation and its people.
Today, with your help and with God's blessing, we go forward
to greatness in this nation.
Greatness of purpose--to keep the peace and extend freedom.

of purpose

-- to keep the peace and extend

freedom.

Greatness of action -- to speak clearly and to be heard respect-

fully once again in the councils of the world.
Greatness of heart and self-restraint at home -- to restore law
and order, to make our streets safe, without losing liberty.
Greatness of vision-- to see beyond the comforts and pleasures
of the day toward the towering goals of tomorrow.
Greatness of soul-- to restore inner meaning to every man's
life in a time too often rushed, too often obsessed by petty needs
and material greeds, and too often controlled by the pressure of
groups rather than the conscience of the individual.
The individual, the private man, the whole man -- you! -- today
stands in danger of becoming the forgotten man of our collectivized,
complex times .
The private man, the whole man -- you! -- must and can be restored
as a sovereign citizen, as the center of the family, the state, and
as the prime mover and moulder of the future.
Today, therefore, and again with your help, we also begin a
great campaign to return the government of this nation to the people
of this nation.
Today we take a first step toward ending in our time the erosion
of individual worth by a growing Federal bureaucracy.
This time, in this election, w e h a
a choice.It
ve
is between far
more than politcal personalities, far more than political promises,
far more than political programs.
people we want to be.

It is a choice of what sort of

It is the choice of what sort of world we want

to live in and ' want to pass on to our children.
Choose the way of this present Administration and you will
have chosen the way of the regimented society, with a number for
every man, woman, and child; a pigeonhole for every problem, and a
bureaucrat for every decision.
Choose the way of this present Administration and you have
way of mobs in the street, restrained only by the plea that
after election time to ignite violence once again.

the way of uni1ateral.:

disarmament and appeasement .. i.n. foreign af-

f airs.

Choose the way of this present Administration and you make real
the prospect of an America unarmed and aimless in the face -of militant Communism around the world.

Instead, I ask that you join with me in proving ·that every
American can stand on his own, make up his own mind, chart his own

future, keep and control his own family, asking .for help and getting
help only when truly overwhelming problems., beyond his control,
set him.

(I

Let mein
usf.finding
find
diTwentieth

as k you t o Join with

be-

h century answers

for Twentieth Century problems rather than relying on the old, dis-

proved doctrine of turning our problems, our lives,

and our liber-

ties over to a supposed elite in an all-powerful central government.

My

The campaign we launch today) isdedicated

to that.

My
The campaign (we
l aunch today) is dedicated to peace, to

progress,

and to purpose.

You have heard· those words and phrases time after

know how empty they have become.

time.

You

Our task is to look beyond the

words, to understand -what the politicians really mean when they

say them, to what they

do

with them when ·they get in office.

When we speak of these · things we mean something far
from the opposition party.

different

We
mean:

Peace through preparedness

Progress through freedom
Purpose through Constitutional order
These are the themes that we shall make resound across this
of ours, and across · an anxious,

The questions of peace,

for

troubled, · and. listening

instance,. is basic to the differ-

ences between the two -major parties today.
The present Administration

does not understand the

the threats . to the peace . ..the .nature of

nature of

the enemy who threatens the

peace,

or the nature of the conflict

which, whether we like

i t or

not, has been imposed upon the entire world.

What more flat evidence of this could there be than the fact
that, in his acceptance speech, the leader of the present Administration did not even mention Communism.
The fact is that Communism is the only great threat to the
peace!

The fact is that Communism is a threat to every fre.e man!

It can't be ignored!
Republicans have proved that they understand these things.
Republican platform this year shows this understanding.

The

Republi-

can performances in the White House and in the Congress have demonstrated this understanding.
A major concern of ours has been the military security of this
nation.

Some distort this proper concern to make it appear that we

are preoccupied with war.
There is no greater political lie.
We are preoccupied with peace!
And we are fearful that this Administration is letting the
peace slip away, as it has slipped three times since 1914, by pretending that there are no threats to it.
I am trying to carry to the American people this plain message:
entire nation and the entire world risks war in our time unless
men remain strong enough to keep the peace.
This Administration, which inherited the mightiest arsenal for
· the defense of freedom ever created on earth, is so dismantling it
that we face the prospect of going into the decade of the 1970's
with only a fraction of the flexible, balanced weapon systems which
give us the vital options of controlled,graduated deterrence--ra-

ther than only a capacity for all-out nuclear confrontation.
Administration uses the outmoded and unfair military draft
system for social schemes as well as military objectives.
Republicans will end the draft altogether, and as soon as
possible!

That I promise you!

Republicans

understand that the military

forces need trained

voiunteers who make the military service a career.

Republicans un-

derstand that the purpose of the military forces is not social,

or

political, it is to help keep the peace of the world.
To use military services for political and social schemes--as
this Administration does--is to drift closer to war on an ebbing
tide of military strength.
we have simply got to put this record straight, and all of us
must understand it.
The Republican Party is the peace Party.
we are the peace party because we understand the enemy.
understand his aims.

We

We understand that he always has and always

will take risks and seek advantages when tempted by weakness.
We seek a strong America because only a strong nation £fill keep
the peace.
I do not intend to be a wartime President.
I have been to war.
them in a war.

I have two fine sons and I do not want

I have two fine daughters.

I have grandchildren.

I want none of them touched by war.
We seek peace for everyone in this land and in this world.
And I do not intend to see peace and freedom torn away from
this nation because we lack will, weapons, or leadership.
I promise an Administration that will keep the peace--and keep
faith with freedom at the same time.
The Republican Party, this Party of peace through strength, has
no clearer message.

Peace has no greater hope.

We cannot support this cause, however, on a base of sand at
home.

our economy must underpin the strength with which peace can

be kept as well as fill our needs at home.

And the key to progress

there, as it is to eventual peace in the world, is purely and simplyfreedom.
This country has grown great and strong and prosperous by placing major reliance on a free economy.

What we have we owe to the

ceaseless strivings of tens of millions of free men to better their

own condition and to provide better future for their children and
their children's children.

Private property,
our greatest tools.

free competition, hard work--these have been
Let us not discard them now!

This system has preserved and protected our freedom, our right
to disagree, our diversity, our independence from arbitrary interference in our affairs.
This system is the mighty engine of progress which enabled this
country to develop from a small but independent citizenry to become
a multitude spanning the Continent and living on a level that is the
envy of the world.
Government-to-government aid from other' countries did not do
it for us.

Hard work and freedom did it!

Progress through freedom

has been our heritage and must continue to be our goal.
Increasingly, however, government has been absorbing or controlling more and more of our resources, our energy, and our ambition.
Today you work from January through April just to provide
government with the money it spends.
Until early February you are working to pay the expenses of
local and state government.

For twice as long thereafter you are

working to pay the expenses of the Federal Government.

Only then

do you work for money that you yourself can use for what you yourself choose.
This cancerous growth of the Federal Government must and shall
be stopped.

A Republican Administration will let you use more of

your money for yourself.
Of course, the mistakes of the past cannot be corrected overnight.
policy.

Our economy needs stability and continuity in government
We must proceed with care in our task of cutting the gov-

ernment down to size.
Honesty requires that we honor the commitments government has
made to all areas of the economy, whether explicit or implicit.

-7-

Good faith requires that we not disappoint reasonable expectations based on those commitments.
We, in a Republican Administration, shall never abandon the
needy and the aged--we shall never forsake the helpless.

We under-

stand their problems in our hearts.
But we know that a true and lasting solution of those problems
cannot be found in degrading, capricious. and politically motivated
handouts from the White House.

It must ultimately be found in a

thriving and compassionate economy and in programs principally
handled by the levels of government closest to the people.
Prudence requires that we proceed slowly and steadily in withdrawing the central government from its many unwarranted interventions in our private economic lives.

Only so can the private economy

adjust smoothly to its properly broadened tasks, without the extra
burden of sharp and erratic shifts in policy.
Much as we may wish it were otherwise, we shall only gradually
be able to alter many policies of the central government.

We shall

be able to do so as we develop solutions permitting a smooth transition to new and better arrangements.
But there are some things we can do at once.

We can start at

once to slow down the expansion in federal spending.

We can start

at once to foster an economy that will provide jobs for our growing
population.

we can, and will, see to it that the job-making sector

of the economy--the private sector--flourishes and absorbs the unemployed, particularly among our youth.
We will need millions of new jobs-not millions
over the next few years.

new

words--

Republicans understand how an economy of

freedom can build those jobs.

we will have those jobs!

of

And with a Republican Administration

-awe shall attack this problem at its roots.

That way;. I pledge

to you, we can succeed where the present Administration has so miserably failed.
Only now, in this election year, has the present Administration
bestirred itself to the problems of the unemployed.

It has pulled

out all stops in this election year to create an artificial prosperity
a prosperity resting on shaky, artificial props that spell serious
trouble in the future of our economy.

The state of our economy and

the future of -our jobs have been made a political football--with votes
in the present traded for jobs and income lost in the future.
Of course, the wind cannot always blow fair.
rough weather cannot be avoided.

It can only be moderated.

ment has the responsibility to do just that.
base for private decisions.

Occasionally,
Govern-

It must provide a stable

It must ease the distress from loss of

jobs and income that these occasional rough spells may bring.
I pledge to you that a Republican Administration will use all
powers and instruments at its command to fulfill these responsibilities.
Perhaps even closer to our hearts, is the matter of purpose

and

order in our lives and our society.
Most of us have conceived of the purpose of our national government as being service to the people, bringing them fair laws and fair
administration, and doing those absolutely needed things

which

•individuals, communities, or states cannot do by themselves.
But leaders of the present Administration conceive of government
as master, not servant.
Responsibility has shifted from the family to the . .bureaucrat,
from the neighborhood to the arbitrary and distant agency.

Goals

are set, roles are assigned, promises are made--all by the remote
control of central government.

The leadership of this present Administration, which seeks this

concentration of power as an announced article of its political

faith, becomes the natural ally of all in our society who would
monopolize power, centralize power, manipulate power, and grow rich
from power.
This applies across the board, from the advocates of big government, to the bosses of big labor, to the bosses of big city politics,
as well as to those who would abuse great economic power in business.
Facing the power seekers is the lone man, the citizen, the forgotten man whose rights our government was designed to make secure.
What have we been given by the politicians who want to tell you
how to behave, how to think, how to live, what to study, and even
where or if to pray?
What examples have been set, what lessons learned from this sort
of leadership?
The shadow of scandal falls, unlighted yet by full answers,
across the White House itself.
Public service, once selfless, has become for too many at its
highest levels, selfish in motive and manner.

Men who preach publicly

of sacrifice, practice private indulgence.
The example this sets can be traced, tragically, through the
easy morals and uneasy ethics which in private life disturb so many
parents and lure so many young people.
If the tone of America is not set by men in public service it
will be set, as unfortunately it is being set too often today, by
the standards of the sick joke, the slick slogan. the off-color
drama, and the ' pornographic book.
It is on our streets that we see the final, terrible proof of
a sickness which not all the social theories of a thousand social
experiments has even begun to touch.

Crime grows faster than population, while those who break the

law are accorded more consideration than those who try to enforce

the law.

Law enforcement agencies--the police, the sheriffs, the

FBI--are attacked for doing their jobs.

Law breakers are defended.

Our wives, all women, feel unsafe on our streets.
And in encouragement of even more abuse of the law, we have
\

the appalling spectacle of this country's Ambassador to the United
Nations actually telling an audience--this year, at Colby College-that "in the great struggle to advance civil and human rights, even
a jail sentence is no longer a dishonor but a proud achievement.
Perhaps we are destined to see in this law-loving land people running
for office not on their stainless records but on their prison rec-

There are peaceful means of expressing a dissatisfaction.
are lawful ways.

There

But no one can in deep conscience advocate lawless-

ness in seeking redress of a grievance!
When men will seek political advantage by turning their eyes
away from riots and violence, we can well understand why lawlessness
grows even while we pass more laws

PERMISSIVENESS
• •
)

And when men use political advantage

for personal

gain we can

understand the decline of moral strength generally.
It is a responsibility of the national leadership, regardless
of political gain, political faction, or political popularity to
encourage every community in this nation to enforce the law, not let
it be abused and ignored.
It is not the

responsibility nor is it the proper function of

the national leadership to enforce local laws.

But it is a respon-

sibility of the national leadership to make sure that it, and its
spokesmen and its supporters, do not discourage the enforcement or
incite the breaching of these laws.

And it is their responsibility

to keep standards of common honesty high, turning on lights of integrity, not turning them off.

-11-

The leadership of this nation has a clear and immediate chal-

go to work effectively and go to work immediately to restore
proper respect for law and order in this land--and not just prior
to election day either!
This is not a challenge just for a few days or weeks, a problem
to be put off until the votes are in.
This is a challenge to the overwhelming majority of Americans
share these basic beliefs with us:
---that each man is responsible for his own actions.
---that each man is the best judge of his own well-being.
---that each man has an individual conscience to serve and a
moral code to uphold.
---that each man is a brother to every other man.
America's greatness is the greatness of her people.
generation, then,

make a new mark for that greatness.

Let this

Let this

generation light a lamp of liberty that will illuminate the world.
Let this generation of Americans set a standard of responsibility
that will inspire the world.
we can do it!

And God willing, together, w e w
doi lit.
l

J

FROM:

REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE
1625 Eye Street, N. W.

Washington, D.

c.

20006 ·
AUTOMATIC RELEASE

9:30 p.m. EDT
September 8, 1964
James L. McKenna

CONTACT:

News Edi tor--RNC
(202) NA 8-7810
CAMPAIGN SPEECH AT GOP RALLY, CHAVEZ
CALIF.,

SEPT.

8,

1964,

RAVINE

LOS ANGELES,

BY SENATOR BARRY. GO LDWA .. TER..

REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE FOR ..PRESIDENT
OF
-·•· ..... .
.... ...THE
·--·

U. S.
-----

Our crusade to restore America's government to America's
people went over the top right here in California,

primary election.

I want to thank you for that.

during

your

I want to

thank you,. in advance, for the part you' ll play in putting

us

over the top in November, too.
Are we going to carry California?
Are

we going to carry this

nation?

And I'll let you in on a political

You bet we are!!
You know we are!
secret that not all the

Lyndon Baines Johnson seems

polls and pundits can hide.

be getting the same message.

Never in my memory have we seen an administration running
in so many ways at once.
to worry about.

Yet they say they don't have anything

The polls say

they don't have anything to

worry about.
But it' s what the people have to say that counts!

from what
\

1.:..9.

they
say -say

LBJ and his friend

And

from the ADA

are running scared!
Just look at how many ways they're running.

The leader of the Administration tries to talk like a
conservative.

Then he picks the most extreme liberal in the

senate as his running mate.

nomic policy, and then proceeds to out -spend

(more)

every other

Administration
•
.

•

o:-i in

leader,

. •
history.

of the Administration

The leader
world

2 -

deftly
-

h

andlingth

trios to appear

challenge

then he fails to even mention Communism

and

as a

of

Commun·i sm,

in

his acceptance

spe ech.
This is more than politics as usual. This is an entire
new circus of politics, with the Administration's ring-master

.

.

trying to come up with an act to please everyone in the audience every other minute.
Our party, the Republican Party, has sounded its clear
and single-meaning pledge to all Americans:
Peace throuqh preparedness

Progress through freedom
Purpose through Constitutional order.
We ve spelled out what we mean.

on the line throughout this campaign.

We re going
I

to lay it

We want people to know

where we stand.
We are proud of our position.

reali ties and challenges.
you to forget them.

We

We think

We are aware of the world's

don' t want
the

to dodge them or ask

issues should be debated.

But not our opposition;
Their leader won't debate anything--candidate

date,

to candi-

man to man.
Their leader wants to forget foreign policy.
Their leader wan ts to: forget Communism.

Their leader wants to forget how badly our alliances

'

been strained.

Their leader wants· to forget

how many friends we've lost

wh ile we have tried to cultivate our enemies.
Their leader wants

to forget

even his £lliD. old friends!

..

Old friends

such

as Bobby Baker,

Billie Sol Estes, Matt

Mccloskey.
(more)
-

--

-

-

Maybe he will forget it.

of the papers will

Maybe many

Surely a lot of the columnists will forget it.

forget it.
it.

But the Arnerican people will not forget i t ..

people will not forgive it, either.

The American

You know that something is wrong.

You knew that it's

going to take a good house-cleaning to set it right.

And you know where to begin!

I
I

The White House, which should be a shining example is
under a dark cloud.
p...it that

I

All of the unanswered questions that have

cloud there must be answered.

We can't forget that at a time when morals in general
have been slipping,

causing all of us concern, there has been

no light in the White House!
We czin' t forget that while the

President

of the United

States speaks of the Great Society, our cities and suburbs
are turning
We

can

trying to

into the lawless society.
'

t forget that ·while brave and honest men were

enforce the law, a major spokesman for this Admin-

istration was exhorting college students

to consider breaking

the law.
That's right.
Adlai Stevenson,

year.

Break the law.

11

honor but

to advance civil and human

he said, "even a jail sentence
a proud

the advice of

speaking to a Colby College audience this

"In the s-reat struggle

rights,

That was

achievement.

is no longer a dis-

.

"

We can't forget that this Administration,which is
under

beds to

extremism--just

find extremists

looking

to condemn, hasn't condemned

as it hasn't t condemned

the

that

extremism of the

socialist platform of the Americans for Democratic Action,
one of whose officic:-1s is now running
right alongside Lyndon Baines Johnson.
(mol:" e)

for the Vice Presidency

-

searching

for meaning,

4,

-

direction, purpose and individual

iden-

ity in their lives -- this Administration has moved to turn

individual into a number

every

every ambition into a new tax

category, every personal goal into a new bureaucratic pigeonhole.
while our enemies press ahead with

We can't forget that

mili tary research, advanced weapons,

and the production of nu-

clear materials, this Administration stalls vital
weapons

abandons others, has virtually

programs,

advanced
given

up the

search for adequate missile defenses,. and unilaterally has
cut dcwn our nuclear supplies .

We can't forget that at a time when Communism is killing
men or freedom or both in the Congo, · along the Berlin wall,
Cuba

Malaysia,in . Vietnam-- that

in

a time,

at

suchth

in

is
aAd-

ministration has simply decided to drop the subject, unless
more disaster or our insistence can keep the subject alive .
this means more
than keeping the subject alive

In fact

for political debate .

itself alive .

Without Republican voices today who would be

speaking for freedom?

of

·.

.

The indictment
far

It means keeping the hope for freedom

longer than our time can accomodate-the

.

of 'this A dministration

of course, is

or the patience

....

American people stand.

We won

forget!

't

we will have a change!

we will find

our way again.
That way will be along a path that is not right simply
•

I

because it is worn and old.

...

and

newly

-

ernment,
loud

needed.

needed to restore balance

so that the votes of our citizens
and clear

represent s
the

It is

It is right becauseit is proven

proposals

us .

in a Congress that truly

to our gov-

will be counted

and courageously

A Congress that does not merely rubber stamp
of the presidency.
(more)

••

I

/

I

-

It

liances
•
some

is

and

needed

It

so that

to restore

-

t strengthen
the

pur poses abroad.

day become

5

· ·
vision
to our al-

so that a wozld torn . apart

a world healed

is needed to restore

-- but healed

by

freedom!

energy to our productive

real jobs paying real wages,

may

may be created

system
in

the

only truly productive area of our economy -- the area of
private enterprise.
I
I

It is needed to prevent the spread of the Federal bureaucracy to a point where it. cannibalizes us all.
And right here,

and right now, I want to put

particular proposition right on the line.

'

that

Let there

be

no

mistake about the ability of reasonable and responsible men
to curb the growth of the central government wi thout
properly s h o uld perform.

any of the functions which it

Common sense and sound management
Only

crippling

points the way clearly.

an Administration more concerned by enlarging its own

powers, rather than enlarging the freedom and well being of
al l our ci tizens,

would fail to see the way and take the way.

As our economy grows -- and we all know that i t has bsen
growing under both parites -- the amount of taxes collected
by the Federal government has grown evan faster.

We can see the .result.

The added money hasn't been used

to pay ofi our Federal debts.

Not at all.

It has been used

to s t a r t nFederal
ew
programs which have ended up i ncre asing

The increased tax revenues haven't. been collected solely
to

.

Not at all

finance legitimate functions

New
schemes

•

have been dreamed up to spend t.he increase.
Just. as Parkinson's famous

"law" predicted,

risen to meet income -- rather
increased

to meet needed spending.
(more)

than income having

been

-

Each year, while

6

-

the Administration works

to

overtime

dream up new spending schemes to spend and even overspend

all the new tax money -- Congress is pressured to raise

the

ceiling on the national debt limit.
This merry-go-round of fiscal

irresponsibility has got

to stop!
We have got to stop inventing ways to spend money and

start thinking of ways to save some!
In particular, we have got to find ways to keep more
I

money in your pockets.

If you work harder, or more skill- /.
/

fully, and earn more money, you should keep more of
not have to turn it ever to a growing bureaucracy.
Our growing revenue potential must be used to reduce
taxes, eliminate perpetual deficits and repay debt,
to finance wasteful governmental
ministration in power

spending

even more
power for

or

not

give the Ad-

political manipu-

lation.
Fundamentally we must have a complete reform and reconstruction of our Federal tax structure.

Under a Repub-

lican Administration we will have that reform!
But wa need not wait for that total overhaul before we
begin stopping the abuses.

I will

1

as one of my first

actions in the White House,

ask the Congress to enact a regular and considered program
of tax reduction.

I will also ask that Congress stop the

wild spending spree begun by this Administration.
This reduction would represent

part of the increase

in

..

revenues that our growing economy is producing.
of

The balance

that increase would be used to eliminate our present

deficit,to cut nuisance taxes imposed on so many of the
things

I

I

you buy, and to reduce the debt.
{more)

-

And

let me emphasize
-

check -- and, believe
hold

i t in

check

7

-

that - point.

me, a

R

epu blican

-- we can cut taxes

revenue against spending.
d ebt from rising

spending

If

is held in

·
A d ministration

and still

·

will

balance

We can not·only keep the national

we can even reduce it.

And Republicans

will reduce it!

The legislation for which I will

ask would provide an

across-the-board reduction of 5% per year in all income

taxes -- both individual and corporate.

The initial request

would provide for such regular, prudent reductions in taxes

in each of the next five years.
At the end of the first year you would calculate the
I

tax

you owed under the present law.

by 5%.

At

Then you would reduce

the end of the second year you would reduce the

payment by 10%.
Each year you would take

off the 5% so that by the fifth

y ear t he ·total reduction would be 25%.

All along, of course, the amount of money that the government
would

takes from you every payday, in withholding taxes,
be reduced at the same rate -- 5% the first year,

10% the next and so on until the 25% mark.
We hope, of course, and confidently expect, that the

overall tax reform could be accomplished as early as possible
in this period.

When it is, properly adjusted tax reductions

would be built into the new tax system.
This -1.s · a safe and sane way to keep

our people

,
our government .and

solvent •

•

It is not the impulsive, massive, politically motivated
tax cut gimmickry that we have seen employed by the present
Administration

under

I

opposed

that tax. cut and would · do so again

t h e same circumstances.

That

reckless cut was not

intended as a return · to responsible fiscal policy, designed
(more)

..-

t

••

•

-

..

8

-

to put a brake on endless growth of spending by the centralized bureaucracy.
Quite the contrary.

It

was designed to create deficit

spe nd ing when the economy was already in the midst of good
times .

It was designed to drug the economy into an

artificial

boom that would carry at least past election day.
Never mind the hangover of lost jobs and income whP-n
the bill has to b e paid! Anything goes if it will get the

votes now!

That is the scheme of the present Administration.

Well, Bill Miller and I will have no part of such
cynical schemes -- that I promise you.

And the American

voter won't either, as he will show the world on November
third.
Our proposal means instead a return to sound Republican ·
principles of fiscal responsibility.

In fact, it reinforces

It will not, as this Administration's -

those principles.

reckless slashing surely does, lead to credit-card spending
in good times at the risk of bad times in the future.

It

will not create false prosperities that breed inflation.
It will, instead, c·r eate the base for a stable, flourishing,

an economy in which you, the in-

and expanding economy

dividual citizen, can decide how to use the money you earn,
and not some distant bureacrat.
A safe, sane, and regular program of tax reductions

combined with restrained spending will, I repeat, take only
part of the additional revenue that a strong and growing
. . economy

makes available.

It will do more than any sudden,

capricious, and Undependable program
.

• '

;·
....-

and growth.

•

,

•

• •

'to promote . that strength
•

•

,

,

.

It will give a clear demonstration of our deter-

mi nation to keep government in its proper functions and to
reduce its raids on your pocketbooks • . This will help at
h ome

d
and

a ro und

the world.

(more)

,..:

.

-

9 -

a clearchoice when you go to

This proposal offers you
the polls this year.

This proposal offors you a way to

control government's spending.

This proposal offers you a

way to keep control of your own purse strings.

This is no scheme to buy votes with a sudden handout.
This is an honest, long-term recognition of present abuses
against your earnings.

This is a common-sense recognition

that it is in the very nature of arbitrary and distant
bureacracy to spend every cent it can get its hands on
and even more when it can get hold of a credit card.

What

we want is an open and aboveboard way to keep its hands where
they belong.
And we say that government's hands d o nbelong
ot
deep
vour pockets!

in

And they do not belong deep in the pockets ··

of your children and children's children, either!
What will our choice be?
Less power for your

More power for Washington?

home state and your town?

for wasteful government?

More money

Less money for productive,

vidual uses?
No • . our choice is progress through freedom!

is

to build jobs -- not build bureaucracy!

turn

on

Our choice

Our choice is to

the free enterprise system that has made this

nation -- and every citizen

in it -- the envy of · the world •

\

\

we are builders in this nation, not spoilers. · We ex-

·..
I

pect to earn the rich promise of tomorrow.
,I

we will never forsake those in need, but neither will we
penalize those whose inventiveness,

skills, hard labor; and

investments, forge the future.
above all parties
and

women

and abovo ali else, free men

and what we are demanding in this election is

precisely that

the dignity of individual

and only that
- - --

•

•

C •

-

initiative,

10

the mora1 compass of individual conscience.

Will that be your answer?

I pray to God that will always be America's answer.
And now, with God's blessing, let us together determine that

it always will be!
---30---

..

·. .

NEWS

FROM:

NEWS

NE

REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE
1625 Eye Street, N.W.
Washington, D. c. 20006

Phone:

(202)

NA 8-6800

FOR AUTOMATIC RELEASE
At 9:30 P.M. (EDT) WEDNESDAY

September 9, 1964

CAMPAIGN S_PEECH AT SEATTLE WASH., COLISEUM SEPT . 9, 1964
BY SENATOR BARRY GOLDWATER
REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE FOR PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES

Men in politics get more advice on how to run their affairs than
anyone I can think of including railroad conductor.i, the managers

of

baseball teams, and the weatherman.
Even so, I think

we may be breaking some records in our campaign

this year.
The press in general has been particularly helpful.
they advised us not to run in the primaries.

First

After all it would just

be a waste of time ••• especially in California.
And now in the same wholeheartedly constructive manner, a number of columnists are advising us on what we should or shouldn't discuss during the campaign.

Even the leader of the present Adminis-

tration advises us to avoid certain subjects.
From reading some papers, as a matter of fact, we even learn
that there's a serious split in our campaign organization ••• over
whether to avoid one particular item.

And oddly enough it 1 s the very

same item that President Johnson wants to avoid discussinq ••• FOREIGN
POLICY.

Well, I hate to disappoint so many people but let me make a
couple of things perfectly clear here and now.
Our campaign organization knows and you know that we haven't
got where we are by dodging issues.
we Republicans are united right down the line on the importance
of foreign pol icy

in

the

campaign.
(more)

(2)

We are not going to be diverted, foreign policy is an issue.

It is going to remain an issue ••• right up until the moment that this
Administration finally gets around to doing something that really
serves the cause of freedom in this world.
Republicans and millions of independent Democrats have a
straightforward view of foreign policy.
doubtedly would call it a simple view.

This Administration unAfter all, this Adminis-

tration avoids simple and clear statements like the plague.

It is

a master at hiding behind the complex and the vague.
Our view is just this: if an element of foreign policy helps
the cause of freedom, do it.

If it hurts the cause of freedom, re-

ject it.
But what does this Administration say?

If an element of foreign

policy hurts Lyndon Johnson's election chances, forget it.

If it

helps his election chances, assign ten press agents to it.
Bill Miller and I do not believe that foreign policy is a
political football.
we do not believe that the fate of millions of captive people
should be kicked around as a political football.

We do not believe

that the fate of our great allies in Europe should be kicked around.
we don't believe that the gallant people of Latin America, or our
allies in Asia should be kicked around just to make Lyndon Johnson
look good or, worse, just to make Nikita Khrushchev smile!
No! even at the risk of seeming ungrateful for all that good
advice we are .going to stand up for what we believe in the field of
foreign policy.
we do not intend to rubber stamp
----·
-------- ---· and weakness in world affairs.

four years of mistake, retreat,

·-

And I do not think that Americans

intend to forget the mistakes, the retreats, and the weaknesses.
Just look at the record!

This isn't a political campaign talk.

This is history; tragic, real, and undeniable fact.

(3)

Every major foreign policy problem that we faced in 1960 including those in which solutions were hopefully near ••• every single

one of those problems remains with us today.
shape.

Most are in worse

Some are in critical shape.

Throughout four years, this Administration has piled up a record
of disaster unmatched by any Republican Administration in

history.

We could almost say that it is a record unmatched by any administration of any party in our history ••• except for the fact that under
three Democratic Administrations we have gone into full scale wars.
That has never happened under a Republican Administration

and

I can promise you here and now it will never happen as the fault of
the next Republican Administration.
Let me add one more point to this record of international disaster that has become a Democratic specialty.

The third war of this

century to begin under a Democrat Administration, the Korean War, is
also the first war in the history of this country that can be marked
down as a defeat.
Defeat, disaster, retreat, chaos, confusion.

Those are the

index tabs on the foreign policy file of this Administration and the
similar ones that preceded it.
The record of this Administration shows every one of those
black marks.
The Bay of Pigs was a shock and a shame equal to any Americans
ever have had to bear.

Brave men, filled with brave words, were cast

up on a bloody beach and left to die and to be captured.
More than promises of support were broken on that beach.

The

heart of freedom was broken for millions who watched, waiting for a
sign of American dedication but getting only a sign of American
resignation ••• resignation from a committment to freedom, resignation
to a communist tyranny in our hemisphere and at our southern shore.
(more}

4

-4The shock wave of the disaster
our conscience for months.

they would spend

at the Bay of Pigs

But where Americans

once

ran through

had proclaimed

millions for defense but not one cent for tribute,

this Administration went hat in hand to the bearded tyrant in
Havana .. and the hat was loaded with tribute!
America, which had forsaken
forsook

conscience at the Bay of Pigs,

hon.or when it ransomed the prisoners

It forsook

of that disaster.

honor when it tricc1 to make it appear that the ransom

was purely private, to avoid assuming the governmental guilt with
which the Bay of Pigs reeked then and still reeks.
It forsook honor when it tried to caj ole individual Americans
in to sending

tractors and then actually coerced busincssm.:!n into

sending drugs and food.

And

what

Cuba today?

The tyranny remains, while this

Admini s tra tion s eems to we lcome
The nations

any excuse for tolcra ting it.

of Latin America have proved beyond any

doubt that

Cuban Communism is poisoning the hemisphere ..• but the promised ironclad blockade

around Cuba remains a tin sieve, through which sub-

version can pour almost at will.
And the missile crisis?

Where

did it lead?

What did it prove?

First, of course, it proved that an Administration which long had
planned on tho basis that the S-o vict never would
this hemisphere,

move missiles into

was dead and dangerously wrong •

Andit proved that des pi te weeks, and months, of warning, abou t
the missiles, an Administration totally political in its goals and
instincts could and would wait until the perilous last moment to take
action •.. take action at

a ti1-;ic that would have maximum domestic

politicnl impact.
Beyond past proof,

1 t offers

a future warning.

Americans must

be prepared under such an Administration to be faced by crisis of
some sort just before an election.
What will it be this time?
(more)

-5-

Was the so-called

things to come?

crisis in the Gu1f of Tonkin a hint of

It should be a warning as well.

It should remind us of policies so confused that the Vietnamese
enemy, scarcely a great naval power,

felt they could attack our ships

It should be a reminder of a policy so lacking in purpose
that it provoked banner headlines just to announce that the mightiest
nation on earth was going to protect itself on the high seas.
It should be a reminder of a policy so unsure of itself that
it issued a deliberate advance warning to the enemy, telling them
when and approximately where we were going to attack in retaliation.
Its failure to solve anything, or to point a new path, should
remind us of other sudden movements up to or over the brink of
crisis ••• follcwed only by an equally sudden

retreat to a silence in

which solutions · and even purpose seem lost.
What actually happened after the missile crisis in Cuba?
Have we obtained the on site inspection that was one of our supposedl
firm demands?

We have not!

But have we removed our own missiles from NATO, the ones which
supposedly irritated Khrushchev, the ones which suddenly became an
issue at precisely the time of the Cuban crisis?
them?

Have we removed

We have indeed.
And still, we lack final,

from Cuba-

firm proof of the removal of weapons

We have only the firm fact that the Communist garrison

remains.

And we have only the hope that, should this Administration .
find it attractive for domestic political gain, we might still
exercise

some of the pressure, some of the leadership, some of the

strength that might begin the end of Communism in this hemisphere.
What else must

this Administration answer for to you and to

history?
(more)

'

'

-4The

shock wa ve of the disaster

our conscience for months.

a t the Bay of Pigs ran

But where Americans

through

once had proclaimed

they would spend millions for defense but not one cent for tribute,

Administration

this

Havana

went hat

in hand

to the bearded

tyrant

in

and the hat was loaded with tribute! .

America, which had forsaken conscience at the Bay of Pigs,
forsook

honor

It forsook

when it ransomed the prisoners

of that disaster.

honor when it tried to make it appear thcit the ransom

was purely private, to avoid assuming

the governmental guilt with

which the Bay of Pigs reeked then and still reeks.
It forsook
into sending

honor when it triccl to cajole individual Americans

tractors and then actually coerced businessmen

into

sending drugs and food.
And

what of Cuba today?

Administration

The tyranny remains, while this

seems to welcome any excuse for tolerating it.

The nations

of Latin America have proved beyond any

Cuban Communism is poisoning the hemisphere

but the promised iron-

clad blockade around Cuba remains a tin sieve, through
version can pour almost

doubt that

which sub-

at will.

And the missile crisis?

Where

did it lead?

What did it prove?

First, of course, it proved that an· Administration which long
planned on the basis that the Soviet
this hemisphere,
And

never would

had

move missiles into

was dead and dangerously wrong.

it proved that despite weeks, and months, of warning, about

the missiles, an Administration totally political in its goals and
instincts could and would wait until the perilous last moment to take
action •.• take action at a time that would have maximum

domestic

politicul impact .
Beyond past proof, it offers a future warning.

Americans must

be prepared under such an Administration to be faced by crisis of
some sort just before an election.
What will it be this time?
(more)

·

And you will

a

-

reject the men who talk

of peace but lack

the

strength to keep it.

You will

that is painted new.

You will, I pray, vote for an Administration

reject the fa1se picture of peace

that is pledged to the strength of purpose, and to the purposeful
power to keep the peace.
You will vote for an Administration that understands that
only a strong nation can keep the peace.

You will vote for -an

Administration that understands that weakness and indecision
tempt war, incite war, and have always led to war!
You will vote for an Administration that wants to rebuild
the great NATO alliance, not one that has let it drift into dangerous disarray.
You will vote for an Administration that realizes that at
least two of our NATO partners already are well on their way to
becoming independent nuclear powers.

You will reject one that

shuts its eyes to that reality, talking of a nuclear monopoly that
no longer exists.
You will vote for an Administration that is prepared to deal
with our allies on a basis of mutual trust and interest, rather
than one that rejects our allies, misunderstands our allies, and
mistrusts our allies even while it befriends our enemies.
You will vote for an Administration that forthrightly faces
foreign policy problems rather than one that wants to forget
them.
Bill Miller and I pledge you an Administration that will restore respect for this nation and leadership by this nation in
world affairs.
As one immediate and great step toward that end, we have appointed a task force on peace and freedom whose members will, in
the weeks ahead, discuss with leaders of the free world ways in
which freedom's cause can best be advanced while keeping the peace .
The stature of the men who will direct this task force raises
it far beyond

a

mere

election

campaign

(more)

gesture.

-

This is,

is serving

as you will

a serious

surely

9

-

appreciate when I tell

you who

and historical1y significant attempt to

regroup freedom's badly scattered forces while there is still
time.
We offer this effort in sincere evidence of our concern for
the state of the world in which we live.
on those who are captiv.e.

We cannot turn our back

We will not seek votes by forgetting

them.
We cannot turn our back.

on those who are dying.

We will

not forget them because their death is distant.
We cannot forget those who, still free, should be our partners
in a great cause.

We will not seek the smiles of our enemies

at the expense of our friends.
We will not silence the voice of our conscience at the threemile limit!
We will not heed that pitiful advice to remain silent while
freedom writhes and freedom dies around the world.
Let those who have lost their faith, their courage, and their
vision turn away from the world and its challenge.
it as individuals concerned only with personal gain.

Let them do
But, I

pray to God it will never be said that most Americans, or even
many Americans, were so short of sight, so deprived of hope, so
stripped of courage.
Peace can be kept only by those strong enough to keep it.
Freedom can be deserved only by those dedicated enough to
strive for it.
And in this world, this means more than prosperity at home.
It means a place in the world.

It means an America whose purpose

and whose people can inspire the world.
It means the greatness for which our heritage equips us and
and to which our future clearly calls us!
---30---

FO R RELEASE

FOR AUTOMATIC RELEASE
At 8:30 P . M. (EDT)
September 10 , 1964

CAMPAIGN SPEECH AT MINNEAPOLIS, MINN., SEPT. 10, 1964
BY SENATOR BARRY GOLDWATER
REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE FOR PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES

You are here tonight because you know in your hearts that some thing is wrong in your land and in your world.
we are together here because we want to do something about it.
And we know where to start!
No.

Let me change that.

We want a change in leadership.
we want some leadership.

we know that

it is lack of leadership that has brought the peace and freedom of
the world to the edge of disaster time after time in the past four
years.
we know that it is lack of leadership that has turned our
streets into jungles, brought our public and private morals into the
lowest state of our history, and turned out the lights even at the
White House itself.
There isn't a facet of your life or a fraction of your future
that isn't touched by all of this.
Your very nature as citizens is deeply touched by it.

Do you

belongto the federal government or does the government belong to
you?
we say it is yours!
It is yours to perform certain clearly defined tasks that individuals or local governments cannot perform.
master.

It is not your

It must be your servant.

You have a clear choice on that score in this election.

(2)

The present Administration has brought the federal government

snooping, probing, grabbing, and even strong-arming into more of your

private life and your community life than ever before in our history.

Vote to continue this present Administration in power and you
will have voted to end the federal system, with its checks and

balances--you will have voted instead to institute a form of federal
tyranny.

Yes, federal tyranny over your jobs, your families, your

towns, your schools, your discussions and, possibly, even your prayers.
Vote to continue the present Administration and you will have
voted to discard a government of law in favor

of a government of men.

What darker shadow of such things to come could there be than
the words and the actions of the leader of the present Administration.
How does he view the very purpose of the presidency?

Does he see

it as Lincoln saw it, as our founding fathers saw it--as any other
president in our recent history has seen it?
Not at all.

Listen to Lyndon Baines Johnson describing the

presidency, as quoted in Time magazine in May of this very year.
Here is what he said: "You always have to bear

in mind that

people are the purpose and object of this endeavor, from the biggest
corporation president down to the poorest sharecropper.
babylike faith in me.

They have a

11

How far have we come in this troubled land if we new have a president who, with a profound lack of humility considers his fellow citizens
as babylike, and obviously considers himself their kindly, all-wise,
all knowing father!
No-one who recalled that remark, who recalled that the leader of
this Administration regards you as babylike in your faith, in his
inf allibility--no-one who recalled that would have been surprised

by the spectacle of this same President's virtual coronation at
Atlantic City.
(more)

(3)

I t was called

a Democratic convention--and there were many

hundreds of fine Americans, good Democrats in attendance.
was democracy?

But where

Where was the exercise of the right to debate, the

right freely to vote?
It was all replaced by the new commandment of the tragic remnants
of the once proud and independent Democratic Party--the commandment
that says that

11

love the leader" is the first rule and the last and

every one in between.

I wondered, during that poor excuse for a meeting of free men,
whether the people in the auditorium were supposed

to clap their

hands or click their heels!
We Republicans, and millions of Democrats are just itching for
a chance to set this whole thing straight.
When we go to the polls in November we are going to remind all
men who seek power without limit, that we Americans do not elect
to be ruled--we consent to be governed.

Now I can imagine that Hubert Horatio Humphrey was a good mayor.
He has been a pretty good senator.

But when I think, and when you

think of an official of the radically yes, extremely, socialistic
A.D.A. being just a heartbeat away from the Presidency, we can understand just how important every single vote will be this November.
And, as I say, you good people should lead the way.
you sent him to us in the first place.

After all,

All we ask now is not that

you take him back but simply that you retire him.
But, in your zeal, don't ever take your eyes off the major issues
of this election.
course.

They do involve political personalities, of

But more importantly they involve the impact that those

political personalities have upon the great issues of the day.
What of peace?

What of freedom?

The personality of the leader of the present Administration
is printed deeply upon those issues.
(more)

-4-

Communism is the only substantial

threat to the peace in the entire

world today.
But what did the leader of this Administration say about communism

in his acceptance speech?

He said exactly nothing.

He didn't even

mention the word.
His foreign policy avoids the hard facts of communist aggression
and subversion.

The peace and freedcm of the world is paying in blood

and time for this blindness in this Administration's vision.
Americans die in Vietnam and governments come and go by a
revolving door--but this Admin.ttration will not admit that it has
become involved in a war and that the war is going very badly.
Fires that could scorch a continent are lighted by Communism in the
Congo--part ially · ·because of this Admin.istration 's past mistakes and
yet there is no candid and hopeful policy to dampen the flames.
Malaysia stands at the brink of crisis, pushed there in part by this
Administration's coddling of the aggressors in Indonesia.
Cuba remains a Communist garrison.

Berlin remains a cruelly

divided city.
And how does this Administration deal with the cause of it, with
Communism?

By ignoring it!

What does this Administration pay attention to?

It pays attention

to its own power over the people.
The leader of the present Administration launched his campaign this
week, he defined its three ingredients:
peace.

prosperity, justice, and

Again he overlooked a little something.

overlooked freedom!
down in a prison.

Slaves can be prosperous.

This time he merely
Justice can be handed

Peace can follow a surrender.

What meaning is there in such concepts without freedom?
America lives and thrives today because its people have valued
freedom above all material gain.
(more)

-sAmericans will

be tested in this election

by the same standard.

Will freedom be forsaken for the security of a regimented, uniform,

numbered, society?
Do you want your children to live in a collectivized ant heap, or
in the open spaces of freedom?
Those are some of the questions you will answer in November.
In your answer will lie the answer also to another matter that is
never far from your minds and always close to your hearts and homes
today.

That is the matter of law and order.

Just last week we had the latest coldly factual evidence of how
very far down the road of lawlessness we have come these past few
years.
The FBI's current report shows that serious crimes have increased
by 15 percent in this first half of 1964 as compared to the same

period last year.
The figure is shocking but it is not new.

Crime has been rising

faster than population for several years.
Lawlessness of other sorts plague us too. Young people have run
riot in Oregon and in New Hampshire in just the past few days.

And,

throughout the year, racial tensions have sent men into the streets
to seek with violence what can only be found in understanding.
In all of this, men who break the law have found loud champions,
eager investigators, and nearly fanatic apologists.
Meantime, brave and honest men who have tried to support the law-the men of local and state police forces, the sheriffs, the agents of
the FBI--have found loud criticism, eager interference, and actually
fanatic attackers.
I had hoped never to see the day when you could say that it might
be more advantageous to be a law breaker than a law enforcer.
that day, in many an incident, in many a city, is here.

(more)

But

-6-

On

the one hand,

those who seek

redress

the streets have been tol.d to wait until
taking to the streets anew.

o of gr i evances violently

in

after E lection Day before

There is no respect for law and order

there--only a patient, political strategy.

On the other hand, the Administration that seeks political gain

by

this postponement of violence, pledges itself to continued violence .
through one of its principal spokesman.
We have, in that instance, the appalling spectacle of this country's
ambassador to the United Nations, Adlai Stevenson, actually telling
an audience--this year, at Colby College--that "in the great struggle
to advance civil and human rights, even a jail sentence is no longer
a dishonor but a proud achievement.

Perhaps we are destined to see in

this law-loving land people running for office not on their stainless
records but on their prison records."
When men will, thus, seek political advantage we can well understand why lawlessness grows even while we pass more laws.
The violence of the street will grew, I fear, until there is a
leadership in this land that will demand respect for law.
The violence will grow until Americans know that conscience and
heart, not laws and conflict, are the answer and will be given a
chance to be the answer.
I charge, with a sincerely heavy heart, that the more the federal
government has attempted to legislate morality, the more it actually
has incited hatreds and violence.

And I charge that the more it does,

the worse this situation will become.
All the progress that men of good will have made and can make is
at stake in this situation, along with the legitimate aspirations of
those who have been wronged.
We must ask and demand, however, that wrongs not continue to be
piled on wrongs.

They will never in all this world or all this life

make a right.

(more)

-7-

It is not only that tragic area of human misunderstand-

ing, however that is

deeply affected by government's attitudes and

government's spokesmen.

The general moral climate also is.deeply affected.
The attitudes

that have promoted a breakdown in private

responsibility flourishes, government centralization is unnecessarry
·and rejected where private responsibility flourishes, so does
respect for law and order.
Under this Administration, private responsibility has
been withering, parched by the paternalism of a power seeking
central bureaucracy.
Society is said to be responsible for an individual's
welfare, rather than the individual himself.
A man's hardships automatically are assumed to be

beyond his control.

Government is automatically sought as the

arbitrator of every grievance and alleviator of every deprivation.
Under such circumstances are not men encouraged to
believe that they can take the law into their hands with the
full and nodding approval of this same anonymous society?
If it is entirely proper for government to take from
some to give to others, then won't some men be led to believe
that they can rightfully take from anyone who has more than they?
If everything is society's fault,
individual's fault.

then nothing is an

So, why not grab what you can?

Rising crime in the midst of prosperity must feed
upon such lacks, such temptations, such lapses from individual
rasponsibility.
And it can feed, as well, upon the doctrine of the
fast buck and the fast answer which, to the everlasting shame
of the Administration, has become a fact of life in the center
of government today.
(more)

-aThere i s a

use of political

frankly

shadow across the White House itsel.f .

The

power for personal gain is discussed but never

answered.

The incredible case of Bobby Baker is a

national spectacle but an official silence, despite little squeaks

and promises of investigation.
There is a shadow, as well, across the entire city of
t·lashington -- the one city in which the President could be
expected to have the most influence, the one city which should
reflect rnost brightly the President's concern fo r law and order,
for decent conduct.

Instead, it is a city embattled, plagued

by lawlessness, haunted by fears.
Under the last Republican Administration, Washington
became a symbol of peaceful progress and was not so striken by
crime.

Under the next

Republican Administration it will regain

its place in the sun and · come out from under the cloud this
Administration has cast across it.
Under the next Republican

Administration, also, the

sense of individual responsibility · which is the heart of orderly
society, a law-abiding society, will be restored.
It will be ·restored by, an Administration

that believes

in individual - responsibility and will take every step possible

to remove governmental discouragement of individual responsibility.

It will become America's model city.

A sense of individual responsibility, Of respect for
other people! s person and property, a sense of self-reliance,

can.not be expected to live happily in company with belief in
collective society, with the right of the state to do -what it
will with person and property

and the assumption by the state

of the obligation to keep men in the style to which demagogues
encourage them.
This - can never again be truly a nation of law and order
until it is again fully a nation of individually responsible
citizens.

(more)

(9)

Under the present Administration that day never could

come.

This Administration seeks power over the citizens--not power for
the citizens.

Perhaps, with crime growing so restlessly, with public safety
so endangered, with violence so obviously threatened in the months

ahead--perhaps this Administration may have to move to restore law
and order rather than just talk about it.
But how would it move?

With eyes focused only upon federal

power, would it not be tempted to move with that power whether
constitutionally proper or not?
We do not want and do not need a federal police power or federal
police force in this nation!

We resist this.

We can do this job in our cities and, most importantly, in our
hearts and in our individual coromittments to law and order.

We

can do it if we just clean up the mess we have and clean out the
men who have made it!

Let the light shine again in Washington.

Every ballot can be a broom to get the job done.
And I pledge to you, as President, I'll use that broom for a
clean sweep in Washington.
A

clean sweep for law and order.

A clean sweep for individual responsibility.
And a clean and decent tomorrow, under God, for this great
Republic and its magnificent people.
---30---

FROM:

REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE

1625 Eye Street,

N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20006
Phone: (202) NA 8-6800

FOR AUTOMATIC RELEASE
PMS FRIDAY

September 11, 1964

CAMPAIGN SPEECH BEFORE THE AMERICAN POLITICAL SCIENCE ASSOCIATION,
CHICAGO, ILL., SEPT. 11, 1964, BY SEN. BARRY GOLDWATER,
REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE FOR PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES

Your science is responsible for discovering a psychological
principle that is almost as important as the discovery of the wheel,
so far as politics is concerned.
You call it selective perception.
filtered listening.

I've always thought of it as

People, by and large, let only those things with

which they agree get past their filters.
According to some of your learned works--and this is very bad
for the ego of a politician--a great many people make up their minds
about candidates even before the conventions open.
Then, during the campaign, which is supposed to be a solemn debate, they turn on the filters and hear only those arguments which
bolster their previous conviction.
Finding an open-minded audience to hear a discussion of
fundamental issues poses a real problem.
lighted to accept your invitation.
business of selective perception.
your filters.

That's why I was so de-

I know that you understand this

I know that you will turn off

You can always blame anything you don't like, on

static from the transmitter.
seriously, the fundamental question I ask you ladies and gentlemen to examine with me is where the two major parties--and their
spokesmen--stand now, today, in regard to their understanding of
the nature of political freedom.
The tradition handed down to us by the founding fathers, was
a tradition of legitimacy combined with limited government.
(more)

(2)

The Philadelphia convention gave us a government by the consent

of the governed, but i t gave us a something more--it gave us a system
of checks and balances.

It divided the powers of government both

between the nation and the states, on the one hand, and among the
executive, the legislature, and the judiciary, on the other.

The

divisions were not designed primarily to promote efficiency_.

On the

contrary, as Justice Brandeis pointed out, they guarantee a certain
amount of inefficiency.
new and concentrated "power

Yet, today, we hear pleas for
to govern".

Those who seek this concentration of power, apparently

reject the idea that the surest guarantee of individual freedom is
the absence of concentration of power, either within or without the
government.
We hear praise of a power-wielding arm-twisting President who
"gets his program through Congress

11

by knowing the use of power.

Let me remind you that there have been other such wielders of
power.

There have been dictators who regularly held plebiscites, in

which their dictatorships were approved by an ivory-soap-like percentage of the electorate.

But their countries were not free, nor

can any country remain free under such despotic power.
Some of the current worship of powerful executives may come from
those who admire strength and accomplishment of any sort.

Others

hail the display of Presidential strength, or judicial strength, as
the case may be, simply because they approve of the result reached
by the use of power.

This is nothing less than the totalitarian philosophy that the
end justifies the means; or, put in culinary terms, that you have to
break some eggs to make an omelette.

If ever there was a philosophy

of government which was totally at war with that of the founding
fathers, it is this one.
To a constitutionalist, it is at least as important that the use
of power be legitimate as that it be benefinical.
(more)

(3)

This principle

doesn't receive headlines

that any of you, ladies

nowadays,

but

I

believe

and gentlemen who ignore this as a fundamenta1

issue in this election are missing the whole point of political

science in the real and present world of today .
To me, the political heroes of this nation are not the men who
have indiscriminately used power to gain their ends--whether those
ends were selfish or unselfish.

The real heroes are those who re-

£rained from power when they doubted the legitimacy of its exercise.
These are the constitutionalists.

These are the apostles of

legitimacy.
One of the best known examples of this sort of political heroism
is that of the Republican senators who despised Andrew Johnson and his
program, but nonetheless voted to acquit him in his impeachment trial.
The strongman philosopher would have said that if you believed that
Andrew Johnson was a bad President it didn't make much difference
whether you really thought he was guilty.

But Fessenden of Maine,

Trumbull of Illinois, Ross of Kansas and many others felt that the
illegitimate use of the power of impeachment could not be justified
by a desirable end.
Those Democratic senators who, in 1937, voted to recommit Franklin
Roosevelt's court-packing plan, even though they violently
with the decisions of the "nine old men,
political heroes.

11

disagreed

are also my kind of

They thought it more important to preserve the tri-

party system of government than to accomplish a more immediate
· political end.

This we might term the exercise of legislative

restraint.
Until recent years the Supreme Court itself has exercised the
same sort of restraint, judicial restraint, with respect to acts of
Congress with which it disagreed but which were founded on legitimate
exercise of legislative power.
(more)

-4-

But not the supreme Court of today !

I weigh my words c arefully

when I say that - -of all three branches of government - -today 1 s Supreme

Court is the least faithful to the constitutional tradition of l imi ted government, and to the principle of legitimacy in the exercise of
power.
Let me mention only two leading examples of its recent decisionsboth of which the Republican Platform of 1964 is committed to overturn
by constitutional arnendment--the so-called school prayer cases, and
the so-called reapportionment cases.
I suppose, since I am not a lawyer, that I should leave the
analysis of the merits of the court's decisions in these cases to the
constitutional lawyers.
Yet, just as it has been observed that war is too important a
business to be left to the generals, so I feel that constitutional
law is too important a business to be left to the constitutional
lawyers.
At any rate, as I understand it, there has been only the most
half-hearted effort, either within or without the court, to justify
these decisions on the basis that they were within the intent of the
framers of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution.
Instead, the decisions are defended, implicitly or explicitly, on
the grounds that the results are desirable:

That it isn't really

good for children to say prayers in school, and that it really is
.desirable to have state legislatures in their entirety apportioned
on a one man, one vote basis.

Now there is raw and naked power.
The question, under our system of government, is not simply what
decision is right--but who has the right to

decide!

Only when the latter question is answered should the former be
considered.
(more)

- -- - --

-5-

Yet

we

hear

it

said

by

political

scientists

by

lawyers--yes

even by that exa.lted c1ass known as the "opinion makers"--that the

Supreme Court had to act because the states wouldn't

reapportion

themselves, or because the school boards just weren't being fair to
the atheists.
If this is true, then it must be that all legislative power in
the country is held at the pleasure of the Supreme Court.

The Court

just steps in and exercises it when the legislative body, to whom the
power was originally delegated by the Constitution, fails to act in
accordance with the Court's wishes.

I do not doubt for one minute that law must keep up with the
changing times.

But the job of keeping the law up to date should be

in the hands of the

legislatures, the Congress, and the common law

courts, not just in the hands of the nine appointed justices of the
Supreme Court.
Perhaps the constitutional restrictions on the popular branches
of government aren't enough to protect the right of minorities and
individuals.

If this is the case, the remedy is to change the re-

strictions by the normal process of amendment, rather than by the
process of judicial revision of the Constitution.
It is easy to slide into the belief that just because we are a
great nation today, we will always be great.

Anyone who thinks that

our greatness stems from the power wielded by government officials
has

misread

the history of our institutions.

If we exalt a "strong executive" or a "strong judiciary 11 --or,
indeed, a "strong legislature"--at the expense of the checks and
balances of Federalism, and the principle of legitimacy in government,
we travel away from greatness as a nation.

We will no longer be a

true constitutional republic, or even a truly representative government.
·(more)

--------(7)

No member of Congress felt

more strongly

than I

that the dis-

crimination against which the bill was directed was wrong.

But I did

not feel that I had an unrestricted right to employ the federal govern-

ment to legislate my moral convictions.
The Constitution is capable of almost unlimited flexibility.

We

can say of it what Winston Churchill once said of the true statesman,
that the only way it can remain consistent amidst changing circumstances is to change with them, while preserving the same dominating
purpose.
But the trend of constitutional interpretation under the influence of the prevailing Democratic Party doctrine, has been such
that the Constitution is now widely held to mean only what those
who hold power. for the moment choose to say that it means.
They ask us to believe that all we have to consider when examining a proposed piece of legislation, is whether it is desirable.
According to this doctrine, anything that is desirable is by that very
fact, constitutional.
What the proponents of this doctrine seem never to ask themselves is, what of liberty?

What will this legislation do to that

balance of power between states and 'nation, which is the genius of the
entire system?
They do not consider that legislation, otherwise desirable,becornes undesirable, when it violates the principle upon which our
who

le

federal form of government depends.
"E Pluribus Unum" is not only our motto but should be our guide.
For the union is a union only so long as the states are states.

Federal power, indefinitely extended to any limit that a temporary
majority in control of the central government may wish, crushes the
concurrent powers of the states in one field after another, until the
states have no will, and finally no resources, moral or financial, of
their own.
(more)

----------8-

Let us be clearer than we have been,

recent years:

in this country in these

That the concentration of all the powers of government,

in the same hands, either by the breakdown of the separation of powers,
or by the breakdown of the lines separating states from nations, will
mean a breakdown of liberty.

I urge upon you the thought that the very magnitude of our accomplishments in the nine score years of our nation may breed impatience with our imperfections.

But we must strive with the awareness

that our Federal system is not an antiquated hobble to be cast off
when it appears to slow or stop some immediate reform.
On the contrary.
cal achievement.

The Federal system is itself our great politi-

It is the very

foundat i.on

day, today, and tomorrow.

-30-

of

our

greatness

yester

- - - --- -FROM:

Republican

National

PMs

Committee

1625 Eye Street, N.W.
Washington,
D.C. 20006

Phone:

TUESDAY

September 15,

Contact:

(202) NA 8-6800

1964

Paul. Wagner,
Press Secretary
to Sen. Goldwater (aboard
campaign air-

craft)

EXCERPTS FROM CAMPAIGN SPEECH AT WINSTON-SALEM, N.C., SEPT
BY SEN. BARRY GOLDWATER,

15,

1964

REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE FOR PRESIDENT OF U.S.

This Administration seems struck deaf, dumb and blind by the
mounting crisis in South Vietnam.

Every morning, it seems, we awaken

to scme new hint of disaster, to a new mistake, a new policy, or even
a new government.
Tragically, we also awaken each day to the probability of new
American casualties.
And still, this Administration will not admit its past mistakes,
take open action to correct them, or even admit that there is a war
there -- a war in which Americans are dying.
Let me call the attention of the American people to part of the
record of failure and mistake -- to the facts of this Administration's
unbelievablybad judgment in Vietnam.
The man apparently charged with the major responsibility in
Vietnam is Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara.
t rips t o evaluate

the

there.

situation

And what has he found?

On the first trip, in May 1962, he was
The

next trip was in October.

for the Diem government.

was going very

u. s.

encouraged."

Victory was in sight.

blessing.

badly indeed.

ced that Secretary

"tremendously

This time he had nothing but praise

Trip three came in December 1963.
that obviously had

He has made five

McNamara

Diem was gone -- in•a coup

And the war, McNamara discovered,

Nevertheless, the White House announand

General

Maxwell Taylor expected us

to wind up our military task the r e by 1965!
(more)

-2-

Trip £our came in March 0£ this year .

This time,

.r :Lght in the

face of the White House dead.l.ine of 1965, McNamara reported that we

would have to keep cur military support and participation "for as

long as that is required. 11
Trip five came this May.

It resulted, mainly, in a defense of

the use of obsolete aircraft in the f i ghting there.

we have no plans

to introduce jets into the fighting, McNamara said.

Jets can't do

any good in Vietnam, he indicated.

And then came tbe action at the Gulf of Tonkin with cur harborblasting attack by jet aircraft of the Seventh Fleet .

Back and

forth,

up and down -- the record of this Administration

in Vietnam has
been
one of evasion,
frankness in

misjudgment, and a lack of

telling the American people w h
weaare
t doing there --- ·

why we are there -- and what we hope eventually

to accomplish there.

I challengeMr. Johnson to· set this record straight; to -tel.l us
what is happening, or whether we even

-30-

know
what is happening.

NEWS

FROM:

NEWS

. I.

REPUBLICAN
NATIONAL

1625

COMMITTEE

Eye Street, N.W.

Washington, D.c. 20006
Phone: (202) NA 8-6800
AUTOMATIC

RELEASE

6: 30

(EDT)

P.M.

TUESDAY

September 15, 1964

CAMPAIGN SPEECH AT AL LANG FIELD, ST. PETERSBURG, FLA., SEPT. 15, 1964

BY SEN. BARRY GOLDWATER, REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE FOR PRESIDENT OF THE U.S,
..

..

Let me recall some words I used in accepting my party's nomi-

nation for President of the United States.

I said then that "nothing ·

prepares the way for tyranny more than the failure of public officials
,

to keep the streets safe from bullies and marauders."

These words bear repeating -- over and over.
This is a serious· matter, a

tragic matter.

And the greatest

tragedy of all is that the breakdown of law and order should be an

issue in this campaign for the highest office in the land.
But it must be an issue, a major issue.

How can a candidate

for the Presidency brush aside the fact .that there were two and a
quarter million serious crimes -- major crimes -- committed in our
nation last year?

How can he ignore the six thousand· or so major

crimes committed in the last twenty-four hours?
And even that is not the whole story.

Crimes in our country--

and I am still speaking of serious crimes -- rose 10 per cent last
year

over the year before, and 16 per cent over the year before that.

In the last six months alone they have risen 15 per cent!
You know, I

sometimes wonder what my opponent means when he

purses his lips and calmly says:
Let

us continue what?

"
"Let us continue·."

A crime rate that climbs five times

faster than population, as it has over the last four years?

A crime

rate that rapidly accelerates, as i t has over the last four years?
A moral decay that can

only lead to the ruin of our nation?
(more)
•

I

(2)

In your hearts,

you k now this is

know there must be a c h ange.
Millerand I

I

wrong.

In

your hearts, you

And in your hearts, you know that Bill

will be
that change.

..

No th ing is more clear from history than that moral decay of a

.',

people begins at the top.
into all walks of life.

It seeps down from the highest offices

And what do we see today in those unlighted
.
·:
.

highest offices?

'
•

••

.

I

.,

.

We see a shadow cast across the White House itself.
'
political power used for personal gain.

-·•'

we see

We see a national spectacle
•

I

1·,

in the incredible cases of Bobby Baker -- my opponent• s protege
and of Matt McCloskey, .his close associate.
,;

.

And what do we hear about all this from our highest officials?
:. ,

We hear official silence

broken by the scrambling of official
I

cover-up.

And we hear more.

•

We hear the Ambassador to the United
•

l

Nations, a major spokesman for the present

Administration, condoning

. .: i

lawlessness and even exhorting our educated youth to break the law.
That's right.

Break the law.

was the advice of Adlai

That

Stevenson to an audience at Colby College this year.

"In the great

'·
struggle to advance civil and human rights",

11

he said,

even a jail

I

11

sentence is no longer a dishonor but a proud achievement.
1

last century who said, so

It was an American statesman of the
briefly and clearly: "He who strikest'i at
.

A
-

law strikes at

THE
-

law." •

I

For those blessed, as we are, with a representative
is always true -- no "ifs", "ands",

or

.It

republic, that

"buts" about it.

high and low, is obliged. to obey the law.
l.

Everybody,

If the law is bad, it
,

should be changed, not defied. And everybody
has the right and duty
.
·.
.• .,·
'
to work toward that change _through his lawful representatives in
legislative bodies.

•

..

yet our highest executive officers have done more than forget

this fundamental principle, this pillar
of domestic security.
,,
I•

And to what end?

have openly and knowingly shattered it •

They

That I

.

leave for you to decide.

(more)'
.,.

-

··--·-·

---

.

-3Nothing

ation

i s more v i t a l

of domestic security.

th is as one· of the principal
tic tranquility."

to

every

The

one o f us

today t h a n t h e restor-

founders of our great nation set

duties of government,

,

"to insure domes-

We have had the good fortune during most of our

hiS t ory to be able to take a stable civil order for granted.

All

the more reason that we must not underestimate the crisis facing us.
We

are headed toward the law of

take who have the power, and they

the jungle,

where "they shall

shall keep. who can. "

person and property are secure from the marauder,

We

Unless

have no gov-

ernment worthy of the name.
How, you will

rightly ask, will Bill Miller and I restore

domestic tranquility to this land?

Well, let me tell you how we

will do it.
I

First, by example at the top

It is idle to expect

delin-

quents and thugs to . respect the law if those in high office do not
act with integrity.

And this means more, much more, than merely

keeping out of the criminal courts.

It means following the highest

moral standards in every aspect of conduct.
dent

'It means that the Presi-

and his associates must be, like caasar•s wife, wholly above

suspicion.

It means' that the burden of ·p roof rests squarely on

their shoulders when the slightest doubt arises about their conduct.

I hardly need remind you that : this is not the case today.
There would be little reason 'for alarm if we were confronted only
with occasional minor abuses of power, promptly detected and punished

In all ages there will be some who abuse

the trust of power.

But an Administration is sick when it is riddled with abuse
\

when those abuses are concealed, swept under the rug because they

.

· reach
.

orities

too high or touch too· many.

It is sick when our highest auth-

refuse to ferret out and punish corruption.

We can on l y con-

clude that there is simply too much scandal to allow any of it to
come to light.

• (more)

•

.

----·---·· --·--------- - - - --------·----· .

-

Press

and image

agents

They can give him many

interests.

man,

B

ut

t

th

there

and that i

4

-

can do much

makers

· faces, looking

is one face

the face

of

for

many ways,

which

a

candidate.

•

to many

appealing

· · ··

press agents can't give a

integrity

t

t

That a man must give to

himself or not have at all.

a

that must be done -- to

then, is the first thing

This

new Administration at the

whose honesty

top.

It must be an Administration

put

.

to

..

Bill Miller ·and I will give you that kind of Administration.
In your hearts, · you know I

'm

right

..

I

I

·,.

But example alone 1s not enough

The President must use the

.

.
power and influence of his office to strike

breakdown

at the roots of the

in law enforcement.

Now, my opponent in this election would not understand what

this means.

To .him, the way to solve a

problem is to

a few hundred million dollars of taxpayers

appropriate

money, and see if the

'

.

problem will disappear along with the money

If that doesn•t happen,

the next thing to do 1s to create a new bureaucracy in the White
House to meddle in the affairs of others
•

And while he meddles, the nation' s capital ls being consumed
by crime.

·,: ·
•

I

Here !2, a Federal responsibility

of the District of Columbia.

·the

ity

toward law and order in

.,·I

our capital city?
We

domestic tranquil

What, you might ask, has my opponent

. done to fulfill his grave responsibility

have heard of and seen many wars in the time of the present

\

.

Administration.
,

war against

But have

crime?

we

yet heard

No, not even in

of the only needed war -- t h e

thec i

1

ty whose

rule

lies in· the

hands of the federal government.
This I can pledge to you -- that Bill Miller and I will launch
th a t a ttack
k

We will first of all use our power and influence to

see that law enforcement officers, on the state and local level,
get back the power

they need to carry out their job.
(more)

- --- ------

.

· ··

.

and integrity speak so loudly that you won't have

hear what it, or its press agents, say.

in

-

Let me make

st ate and local

this

crystal

responsibility.

a federal police force.

5

-

clear:

enforcement

of

the

iaw

~s

a

There is no room in this country for

And there is no need for one.

But there is urgent need to return to state and local

authorities

he traditional powers to apprehend and punish criminals, powers that

have only recently been taken away from those authorities by federal
courts -- particularly the Supreme cc,urt.
Now, as I understand it, the Supreme Court has been given only
very limited power over state criminal convictions under our Constitu-

In order to reverse a judgment of a state court, it must first

tion.

I

determine conclusively that a convicted defendant was denied some specific right guaranteed by the Constitution.
l.

There was no problem up to a few years ago.

But then the Supreme

Court began stretching
two phrases in the Fourteenth Amendment, often ·
•
by five to four decision, until the state
courts lost virtually all
..
.

• I

their powers over judicial process.
. ·;

The result has been severe restriction of state administration of
I•

.

restriction so severe . that thirty-six of the chief jus. ·.
tices of our states joined in calling...upon the Supreme Court to exercise
c.r criminallaw

..

.

restraint.

:

Let me just recall some of the key decisions.
.

}

•

Three years ago, five members of the Supreme Court decided that
I

•,

.

state courts must follow federal rules of evidence whether they wanted

,.

.

Specifically, no evidence could be used if police investiga-

to or not.

·1
· J.

tors made some mistake

any mistake-•

in gathering the evidence.

This

C

rule must hold even if it means an obviously guilty defendant will go
,:

free.

'

l aw

.

It is a rule squarely contrary to

common law and to constitutional

up to three years ago •. As one of

our greatest common law judges

once said,

er iminal is to go free because the
i . ..
,t .

such a rule means that "the
•

•

I

•

constable has blundered. 11

•

·t. 1•

•· •

•

•

•

••

..
.. ' .
, , •: • •
(more) ... ·
I

..

.

!

.
•

.

':

.. l:'
,' \

.. .

.

.

•

',

,,.

•

.

.•.

viction

should be reversed,

no matter how guilty

the defendant,

if it

were shown that some technica1 vio1ation of constitutional rights occur-

red anywhere in the course of investigation

flaw in one confession,

and trial.

If

is any

there

all confessions -- whether challenged or not --

must be thrown out!
The trend has now reached its logical end. · Five justices of our
Supreme Court have held that a voluntary confession made by a state
prisoner was inadmissable because his lawyer was not present when it was
made.

This was held despite the fact that the prisoner admittedly knew

of his right to remain silent.
Let me make
cases

this absolutely clear -- there was no question in these

that confessions were extorted or untrue .

long, and rightly, been invalid.

This

Such confessions have

is a new rule.

It seems to say

that a criminal defendant must be given a sporting chance to go free,

.·

even though nobody doubts in the slightest that he is quilty.

No wonder .

our law enforcement officers have been demoralized and rendered ineffec.

tive in their job. ·

..

,

Something must be done, and done ,.immediately, to swing away from
this obsessive concern for the rights of the criminal defendant.
course he is entitled to a fair and speedy trial.

Of

Of course he is entit-

led to protection of his constitutional rights.
But is he to be so needlessly pampered that the rights of lawabiding citizens become hollow claims?
fices

Are law and order to be sacri-

just to give criminals a sporting chance to go free?

...
I

I know you will agree with me that something needs to be done •

.

And let me suggest three things that • can be done.
\

•

i...First,
,
..

in making appointments to the federal judiciary, the

'

President

• ••

must consider the need to redress

constitutional interpre- .

•

· tation in favor of the public.

Here it

is important to stress again

•

that the recent decisions open to criticism
closely divided Supreme court.

·
.

(more)

'

.

have been made by a

r

th

Second,

e

-

Court

s

President has the obligation

Such amendment

necessary

should

decisions

should

remain

unaltered

the

to urge amendment of the constitution.

give back to the states those powers

absolutely

for fair and efficient administration of criminal

law

It

should safeguard basic rights of defendants, while giving the states

power to enforce law and order.
Third, the President should urge congress to consider changing
some of the rules of judicial procedure in the federal courts.
gress clearly has

Con-

this power under the constitution.

I have in mind rules such as the one recently established in
a case involving the criminal law of the District of Columbia.
That rule, set in the Mallory case, holds that any statement made
by a defendant to police officers is inadmissible if arraignment is

delayed.

It makes no difference whether the delay had any connec-

tion with the statement or not.
Let me say that, within five yaars after this ruling, the
robbery rate in the District increased by 115 per cent!
tion• s capital now ranks third out

of

our na-

sixteen comparable cities in

robberies--a place of shame and dishonor that reflects directly on
lack of leadership and concern in the White House.
These three proposals are constructive steps in the direction
of sounder law enforcement.

But they can be advanced only by the

right leadership.
To restore public virtue, and .thereby law and order, there is
no place for the dealership of a clever compromiser, a scheming

wire-puller, a master politician.
leadership,

..

There is instead urgent need for

dedicated to the principle that moral. law binds both

.

t he high and the low, that public law must and shall be enforced.
,

.

with your help and God• s blessing,

give you that leadership.

Bill Miller. and I will

That is our solemn pledge.
-30:
'
•

. . 1;

•

,-.

-

- -

·

j

I

-

FOR RELEASE

AUTOMATIC RELEASE
6:30 P.M., EDT, WEDNESDAY

September 16,

1964

CAMPAIGN SPEECH, MONTGOMERY, ALA., SEPT. 16, 1964,
BY SEN. BARRY GOLDWATER,

REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE FOR PRESIDENT OF THE U.S.

This nation of ours has grown great and strong and prosperous
through its free economy.
Private property, free competition, hard work -- these have
powered the engine of our progress.
Our system has preserved and protected our freedom, our right
to disagree, our creative diversity, our independence from arbitrary
intervention in private affairs.
And it has been a mighty engine of progress.

people

It has enabled the

of this country to rise from a small but independent citizenry

scratching out a hard living on the margins of a great continent, to
a multitude spanning the continent and living at a level that is the
envy of the world.
The miracle of our great engine of progress is nowhere better
seen than here in the South.
cities are growing.
dustrialization.

clear.

Your

You are undergoing rapid and sustained in-

Production and income are rising faster than in

the nation at large.

we

Your economy is flourishing.

Unemployment is below the national.average.

are often asked why industry is moving South.

The answer is

Industry is moving South because you have created a healthy

climate for the private economy.
Progress through freedom has been your heritage as it has been
ours throughout the land.
It must remain our guide and our goal.
(more)

(2)

Our constitutional

play,

government has played,

and must continue

an important role in securing progress through freedom .

rnust provide for the common defense.

protect person and property.

to

It

It must maintain law and order,

It must enforce private contracts and

encourage freer and more effective markets at home and abroad.

It

must promote monetary stability to eliminate the danger of either
inflation or deflation.
And, yes, it must stand ready to aid the helpless and support
those in need.
To preserve freedom, government·must be both limited and dispersed.

It must be as close to the people as possible.

Only in this

way can government be kept responsible to the people it serves.
Only in this way can government be kept from becoming so arbitrary
and so strong that it threatens freedom.

Only in this way can there

be variety, creative diversity, and experimentation in policies -healthy competition between units of government.
Increasingly, however, government is becoming master instead
of servant.

Increasingly, power is gravitating to the White House,

away from our towns, counties, cities, and states.

Increasingly,

government is engulfing our precious resources.
Unfortunately, in the present state of the world, military expenses are and must remain high.

Of course we must have economy in

defense, but we cannot afford the false economy of weakened defenses.
If the need arises, we must stand ready to spend even more than we
now do -- to maintain our defensive strength and preparedness.

How can we practice economy and improve our defensive strength,
both at the same time?
One obvious course is to revamp our system of military recruitment.

The present Administration continues to use the outmoded

and unfair military draft to man our armed forces.
Republicans will end the draft altogether, and as soon as
possible.

That I promise you!
(more)

-3-

I t i s easy enough to detail

draft.

the many inequities of the current

We are inducting only a fraction of those eligible for service

and nobody knows for sure when or if he will be called to duty.
certainty reigns in the lives of our young men and women.

Un-

They cannot

plan their careers with assurance.
Those who are called to duty are made to bear a burden not imposed on others equally liable to call.

In the most real sense, a

tax in kind is levied on these draftees and their

used to support the defense effort.

families, a tax

All too often, dra f t calls dis-

criminate against many of the poor and less well-educated--against
those who cannot afford the various escape hatches now open.
But this is not the whole story.

Forced service is a wasteful

and inefficient way of manning our forces in these times.

Re-enlist-

ment rates are low, turnover rapid, and training costs high.

Misuse

of personnel is encouraged by the artificially low price tag placed
on the individual soldier.

Republicans understand that it is long

past time to scrap this enefficient and wasteful system.

Republicans

understand that the military forces need professionally trained and
properly paid volunteers who make the military service a career.

They

understand that this is the most ec9nomical way to man our defenses.
The heavy burden of defense makes it all the more important that
we stop the growth of wasteful non-defense spending.
four years, non-defense spending rose twice as much as

Over the last
defense spending

Spending for defense, in fact, now accounts for substantially less
than half of total Federal spending.
This explosive growth in non-defense spending must stop.

The

spread of Federal bureaucracy must be arrested--before it cannibalizes
us all.
As our economy grows--and we all know that it has been growing
under both parties--the amount of taxes collected by the Federal
government has grown even faster.
(more)

-4-

We

can

see

the

pay off our Federal
new
Federal

result

debts.

The

No t

money

added

at all.

I t

hasn • t

been

u sed

to

has been used to sta r t

programs whi c h have ended up increasing o u r

debt s.

Each year, while the Administration works overtime to dream

up new spending schemes to spend and even overspend all the new
tax money -- Congress is pressured to raise the ceiling on the
national debt limit.
This merry-go-round of fiscal irresponsibility has to stop!
In particular, we have to find ways to keep more money in

your pockets .

If you work harder, or more skillfully, and earn ·

more money, you should keep more of it -- not have to turn it over
to a growing bureaucracy .
Fundamentally we must have a complete reform and reconstruction

of our Federal tax structure .

Under a Republican Administra-

tion we will have that reform!
But we need not wait for that total overhaul before we begin
stopping the abuses .
As I have already promised in this campaign, I will, as one
of my first actions in the White House, ask the Congress to enact

a regular and considered program of ta:K reduction.

I will also

urge that Congress stop the wild spending spree begun by this
Administration.
This reduction would represent part of the increase in revenues
that our growing economy is producing .

The balance of that increase

would be used to eliminate our present deficit, to cut nuisance
taxes imposed on so many of the things you buy, and to reduce the
debt.
And let me emphasize that point.

If spending is held in check-

and, believe me, a Republican Administration will hold it in
check -- we can cut taxes and still balance revenue against spending.
We can not only keep the national debt from rising -- we can even

reduce it .

And Republicans will reduce it!
(more)

_5_

The

legislation

the-board reduction

for

which

wil.l.

of 5% per year in

individual and corporate.

treatment for all.

I

ask

woul.d provide

al.l. income taxes

an across-

-- both

This follows tha fair principle of equal

The initial request would provide for such regu-

lar, prudent reductions in taxes in each of five years.
Each year you would take off the 5% so that by the fifth year
the total reduction would be 25%.
Let me make it clear

that this is no hastily-conceived proposal.

It is the product of careful study and deliberation.

It is fully

consistent with the considered opinion of Arthur F. Burns, Chairman
of the Council

of Economic Advisors under President Eisenhower.

This is what he had to say in a recent speech delivered to an aca-

demic audience:
"When

our economy grows at something like the normal rate,

it is reasonable to expect that the e:dsting structure

of tax

rates . will add about 5 or 6 billion dollars a year to Federal
revenues.

This means that we could reduce tax rates every

, year, and still have sufficient

revenues to meet any

increases in Federal spending that may be needed.

modest

I can think

of no policy that is better designed to stimulate the growth
of our economy than a continuing policy of modest, year-by-

ycar reductions in tax rates.

This, in effect, is what Japan

has done in the postwar period, and the policy has worked remarkably well in that country.
implies, of course,

The policy that I speak of

that the growth of Federal expenditures

will be curbed effectively.
This is a safe and sane way to return to your pockets, within
five years, more than 25 per cent of the taxes you would normally
have to pay.
(more)

-6-

It

i s not the

impulsive,

massive,

politically

motivated tax

cut gimmickry that we have seen employed by the present Administra-

tion.

I opposed that tax cut and would do so again under the same

circumstances.

That reckless cut was not intended as a return to

responsible fiscal policy, designed to puta brake on endless growth
of spending by the centralized bureaucracy.
Quite the contrary.

It was designed to create deficit spend-

ing when the economy was already in the midst of good times.

It

was designed to drug the economy into an artificial boom that
would carry at least past election day.
Our
proposal

means instead a return to sound Republican prin-

ciples of fiscal responsibility.
principles.

In fact, it reinforces those

It will not, as this Administration's reckless slash-

ing surely does, lead to credit-card spending in good times at the
risk of bad times in the future.
perities that breed inflation.

It will not create false prosIt will, instead, create the base

for a stable, flourishing, and expanding economy -- an economy in
which you, the individual citizen, can decide how to use the money
you earn, and not scrne distant bureaucrat.
Another way to give you, the individual citizen, greater
control over the use of your own money is to return to the states
functions that have been taken from them by the Federal bureaucracy.
Over the years, state and local government have beccme increasingly dcminated by the ever-growing system of so-called Fed-

eral grants-in-aid.

There are now over a hundred such programs

totalling over $10 billion in annual Federal spending.
every major activity of state and local governments.

They cover
In this way,

those governments have been made subservient to a huge Federal
bureaucracy with its center in the White House.

We have, in effect,

replaced our traditional three-layer horizontal government of Federal, state, and local governments, with a vertical government
issuing orders dcwn the line from Washington.
(more)

-7-

We must

Republican

bring

government

Administration will

back

closer

to

the

people.

And

a

do just that.

States, counties, cities, and towns can make their cwn de-

cisions on public services if we change the system of prograrrmatic
grants-in-aid which now keeps local officials under Federal domination.
Because of existing commitments, we cannot do this overnight.
But we can gradually replace this undesireable and complex system
with a much simpler and more sensible one.
The Federal government, for inst ance, should return to the
states a share of the income taxes collected from them, and permit
a greater credit on estate taxes.

Low-income states and cities

could be helped further by a system of purely fiscal grants for
general purposes.

Such a system of unconditional grants -- in

place of the present programmatic grants -- would give each state
needed resources for use within the state, free of control by the
Federal bureaucracy.
Let the state and local governments decide how to provide
local services.

Then the President and Congress can concentrate

their time and effort on their critical responsibilities -- on
foreign relations, national security,

and the general welfare.

The President and Congress now waste much of their valuable
time studying -- and arguing over -- matters that are none of their
How can they put the attention they should and must on

business.

defense

and

foreign

policies?

The results are grave and threaten our national existence.
And there is another benefit from transferring decisions on
domestic services to governors, legislatures, mayors, city councils,
boards of education, and similar local agencies -- where they
belong.

Then our top officials can be freed from most of the

pressure groups which now beset them, demanding a multitude of
special benefits for special interests or areas.
(more)

-8-

The

program which

I

have

outlined

will

keep the

government within its proper and 1egitimate ro1e.

Federal

It will

promote

the freedom and initiative of the individua1, without making

dangerous cuts in national defense or in necessary domestic

pro-

grams.

This is a program for progress through freedom.
With your help and God's blessing, Bill Miller and I will
bring it to pass.

-30-

FOR RELEASE

AUTOMATIC RELEASE
6:30 p.m
Friday

September 18, 1964

W. VA., SEPT.· 18, 1964

CAMPAIGN SPEECH AT CIVIC CENTER, CHARLESTON,
BY SEN. BARRY GOLDWATER

REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE FOR PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES

We have ·seen many wars in the time of the present Administration.

Some are real -- all too real.

one is now raging in

Vietnam, a war this Administration has stumbled into through weakness
and irresolution.

In that war American boys -- your sons and grand-

sons -- are being killed by Communist bullets and Communist bombs.
Across the world there are tragic conflicts that threaten the

very future of our civilization.

You would think that our interim

President would have his hands full just trying to stop the war his
policy of weakness has spawned.
But, no.

Of this he says "let us continue."

For he is too busy with other things.
another war

a war as phony as a three dollar bill.

He calls it a "war on poverty".

not what it is at all.
pocketbooks.

He is declaring yet

But you and I know that's

It is plainly and simply

a raid on your

And it's being launched plainly and simply as a

camp aign to get votes.
Nothing is more cynical and irresponsible than this sham
warfare.

our interim President is doing his best to use the sympathy

of you Americans -- a people of unsurpassed generosity and compassion -- to further selfish political ambitions.
His scheme is simple and transparent.

Throw together a hodge-

podge of handouts -- a little bit of everything.
(more)

Shake well, put in

before

election

day.

Just

make

sure

the

bill

isn't

presented

until

the election i s over.

This, my f e ll ow Americans,
your

is t h e medic i ne man at work.

hearts you know this i s so .

In

And you don • t want to throw your

money away on his worthless nostrum any more than I do .
You don't want to because you know it is wrong, deeply wrong,
to play politics with the misfortunes of the poor.

You know that

their plight deserves the serious and sincere attention of every one
of the more fortunate .

Human misery is not to be trifled with just

to get votes in an election .
Now, let me make this abundantly clear .

Bill Miller and I have

the same deep concern over poverty that all thoughtful and
passionate Americans have .

com-

We want no part of a society that would

forsake the helpless and abandon the needy .
reservation, in a society of compassion .

We believe , without

But we also believe in a

society that is free, just , and orderly .
That is precisely why we renounce this phony Johnson war on
poverty.

That is why we label it for what it is, a raid on pocket-

books -- of rich and poor alike .
Just look at those work camps, the pet scheme of my opponent .
They are, in fact, the only new thing he added to a motley assortment
of gadgets already on the books, in one form or another , when he
concocted his poverty panacea.
wornout depression gimmick dug

And they are nothing more than a
up from the past .

In these camps a small fraction of our unemployed youth is to
be mobilized for training •• These recruits are to be paid much less
than the minimum wage established by law .
with that.

No business could get away

But never mind -- anything goes for the distant and

arbitrary bureaucracy .
While in these work camps, these young people will presumably
be trained for useful and fruitful work in our economy .
(more)

And who will

do

th e

training?

Government

borrowed for this phony war

bureaucrats,

of

course

--

no

doubt

from the bureaucratic batt1es in

Washington.

And how much will i t cost you, the taxpayer -- rich and poor
alike

to do whatever is done with these hapless recruits?

In the

first year, it will cost you only ten thousand dollars for each
recruit.

Ten thousand dollars

Yes, you heard me right.

for each and

every one of these young men.
It would be cheaper to give them four years of education in
your own fine state university, where they would learn a lot more.
For that sum

of money they could even spend a few years at Harvard

or Yale -- two apparent favorites of my opponent.
Your hard-earned money is simply being poured down the bureaucratic drain.

And to what end?

once again, my opponent thinks the

way to solve a problem is to appropriate a few hundred million dollars
of your money, and see if the problem will disappear with the money.
We do have a problem of unemployed youth.
for productive work.

They do need training

But they never can and never will get it this

way.
Why not mobilize the vast resources of private business, already
in place, to give training on the job to our unemployed in need of
it?

If we are to spend taxpayers• money for this purpose. why not

spend it wisely and economically in encouraging private business to
take on the task?

Why expand the centralized bureaucracy and create

vast new bureaucratic facilities -- both at great waste -- when far
more suitable means of solving the problem are already at hand?
Can the answer be that my opponent simply craves more power,
more control over your lives and mine -- more and more, without end?
can it be that he craves power just as much as he craves land and
treasure?

If so, this would not be the first time such a phony war were
(more)

This war on poverty i s phony because i t i s an attempt to divert

attention

from the truly

massive ' prob1erns facing us as a peopl.e.

Above all, i t is an attempt to divert us from the failure of

the present Administration to check the disin_tegration of the peace
and the spread of communist tyranny.
And it is phony because the dimensions of the problem itself
and the means at hand for dealing wi th it have been misrepresented
For example, in 1929, the last year before the impact of the grea t
depression, more than half of the nation's families were "poor" by
the present Administration's standard.

Today, measured by this same

standard and in constant dollars, the figure is less than a fifth.
And let me add that the average income of our

11

poor", by this

Administration's standard, represents material well-being beyond the
dreams of a vast majority of the people of the world outside these
United States.
If we project current economic growth, this figure will be
further reduced to less than a tenth within the next several years.
Now I do not say that this is good enough, because I want to
see the development of our economy proceed even more rapidly, and I
think wise governmental policies can let that happen.
But just ask yourself whether the tremendous progress we have
made

in this country in overcoming poverty in the last 25 years has

been due to federal spending programs.

The answer

is that it has

not.

The overwhel ming cause of new

jobs, new wealth, higher wages, higher incomes of all klnds, has been
our system

of

free enterprise

Not government pump priming, but the

electronics industry, television, jet aircraft, the plastics and
synthetic fiber industries, the revolution in drugs and pharmaceuticals, the frozen food industry, the vast new range of service
industries

the revolution in retail marketing and distributjon, the

superma rkets .
(more)

5

These

have

licked

the

poverty

problem o f

the

hungry

thirties,

not the federal bureaucracy .

The vitality

of the free enterprise system, even in the face of

political overregulation and red tape, has been amazing.

What I

propose to do is to build upon this strength and vitality, not harry
and hinder it.

And the secret of our strength is our system of

individual incentives and individual initiative.

except by all becoming poor together

solve the poverty problem
if we

We will never

remove the rewards and penalties from the private sector and

transfer them to a collectivized public sector.
The phoniest thing about these phony poverty warriors is this:
What they are really concerned with is not poverty at all.

Their

anxiety is not to see that the ill-fed, .ill-clothed, and ill-housed

shall have food, clothing and shelter.

It is not that the weak and

sick shall be cared for.
The theorists of the much-advertised "great society" have
redefined the luxuries of yesterday as the necessities of today,
and those who fall behind in this race constitute the new class of
the "poor".

It is unwholesome, they say, for anyone to feel deprived

by looking around and seeing others who have more than he.

someone who ought to feel deprived doesn't

And if

respond that way, some

politician in my opponent's curious camp -- perhaps the great
panjandrum himself -- will drive up to his door to see to it that
he feel1 s

the way he ought.

In the so-called "great
to fall below the average.

society", no one is to be permitted
And that average is not to be struck

for necessities alone.
It is to be struck for the necessities and luxuries which
together constitute

well-being,

as defined by the bureaucrats in

Washington.
(more)

-6-

I f you think that saying that no one should

average is a statistica1 joke, let

fall

below

the

me assure you i t is not.

The

politicians in my opponent's curious camp may scarcely understand

the implications of the doctrines they have endprsed but the logic
of those doctrines is remorselessly at work upon the freedom of us
all.
For make no mistake about it:

A society in which no one is to

be permitted to fall below the average is one in which no one can be
permitted to rise above it.

The dreadful "great society

11

is one in

which there will be no penalty for failure, because in it there will
be no reward for success.

In it, there will be no individual

responsibility and, therefore, no freedom.
Perhaps all this sounds too much like a bad dream to be true.
It does sound like a bad dream, but we have seen too many nightmares
in our time not to believe in their possibility.
The task of the true statesman, said Aristotle, is to see
dangers from afar.

Now, I do not claim to be a statesman, for after

all a statesman is a retired office seeker.

But I do know this, and

say it to you with sober heart, those dangers are not as far off as
I would wish.
Already we hear the "advanced" thinkers of the ADA persuasion
calling for an abolition of the age-old connection between income and
work .

Think of that!
Does not this
it?

11

Abolish the connection between income and work.

advanced

11

idea have a suggestion of the familiar about

I believe it does.
I believe it is nothing but a disguised version of the

discredited formula, "from each according to his abilities, to each
according to his needs."

It is a formula that has failed whenever

and wherever it has been tried.
(more)

-7-

We

are

beset

by

ideology is mellowing

stories

these

days

about h o w
communist

-- but what of Nikita Khruschev's

arrogant

boast just this week that he now ho1ds in his hand the power to

annihilate all human life?

A wise and firm American foreign policy can encourage the

withering away of Communism within its captive nations.

But surely

this will not happen if we in these united States turn toward the
false idols of collectivism.
We will not convert the heathen by losing our own souls!
We can be, we will be, freedom's missionaries in a doubting world.
we will do this by keeping the faith of our past -- faith in
personal freedom and in limited

government,

under

the

rule of law

and the blessing of the Almighty.

By so doing we give the best pledge we can for our children's
future, and for the future of all mankind.
-30-

,

_

FOR RELEASE
AMs

SATURDAY

September 19, 1964
CONTACT: James L. McKenna

News Editor-RNC
(202) NA 8-7810

F IRST NATIONWIDE TELEVISION ADDRESS, 9 : 30-10 P.M., SEPT. 18, 1964

BY SEN. BARRY GOLDWATER,
REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE FOR PRESIDENT OF .THE U.S.

The following is the text of Sen. Barry Goldwater's first halfhour television program, which was carried nationwide by more than
200 CBS network stations, from 9:30-10 p.m.
Good evening, my fellow Americans.

(EDT), Friday, Sept. 18.

This is the first opportunity

I've had in this campaign to talk directly with all of you, and I
certainly welcome it.
When I say I'm going to speak directly -- I mean just that.
Before this half-hour is over, you will know exactly where I
stand reg arding the most important problem in the world today.

And

that problem is peace, peace for you and your children, and peace in
a world in which free people and free nations can live the kind of
lives they choose for themselves.
This is the matter upon which everything else depends -- everyth i ng we care most about -- our material possessions -- our hopes and
our dreams -- our families and their good futures.
And this is the matter about which no one who seeks leadership
and an office of public t r u s t c a
remain
n
silent.

We must speak about

peace, and about the threat of war -- about the requirements of keeping the pe a ce, and about the sure road to war, the way of weakness
and indecision and appeasement.
(more)

(2)

No man who r e f u s e s

of

th ese things,

rea l world,

--

as

my

opponent

refuses

--

to

speak p l a i n l y

who refuses to debate or discuss the facts of

the

no such man deserves the confidence of the American

people .
No such man has fulfilled the responsibilities of public trus t.
No such man has earned the privileqe of American leadership .
Now, you have probably heard many things said about me:•·

- -by men w h o f ethat
a r you cannot be trusted with the truth;
- -by men who dare not debate the issues so that you may
know the truth .
You may have heard it said that I am impulsive -- imprudent -that I am trigger - happy .
You deserve an answer .
If you have heard any such things said or rumored or insinuated
about me, I am here tonight to give you an opportunity to form your
own opinion.
In forming your opinion, I think you should bear in mind that,
for political purposes, a deliberate campaign has been and is being
waged to create such an image of me .
Before this evening's visit is through, I hope you will be convinced beyond the shadow of a doubt that my every deed, my every
prayer, will have one goal in mind .. • and that goal is peace .
Peace for you, for your children - - and my children .
wiTh honor and justice .

Peace

Lasting, permanent peace -- which is simply

another way of saying the very same thing .
This is my goal , my prayer, and my pledge to you .
Now, it is perfectly true that much of my comment , as I toured
this country during the primaries, and during the last few weeks of
campaigning, much that I have been saying has been concerned with
the state of our armed forces , our missile program, our whole defense
posture.

l do not apologize for this -- I insist upon it.
(more)

speak of peace,

ourselves,
a

unless

i t i s related to our ability

to take care of

to defend our security and our sovereign independence,

in

torn by conflict?

world

If I talk about these things, it is because.I must.

I am obliged

to talk about them, because of the failures in the pursuit of peace
which characterize the Administration of Lyndon Baines Johnson.
I ask you to consider with me some of the problems we face-here and now, in this real world.

Just think about them for a mo-

ment.
Tonight, an American boy may die at the hands of the enemy in
Vietnam--the Communist enemy.
Tonight, a human life may be lost as someone in desperate search
for freedom scrambles over the Berlin Wall--that wall of shame which

Communists built while this Administration

obligingly looked the

other way.
Tonight, a bearded and arrogant dictator sits 90 miles from
Key West and counts his missiles--missiles supplied by the communists.
He

sits

safe and secure because this Administration bungled at the

Bay of Pigs and failed so miserably to follow through after the missile showdown.
Tonight, in many parts of the world, the masters and the puppets
of Communist
ti

imper i a 1 ism sit and plan our destruction--and work ac-

vely to bring it to pass.
If we are to talk about peace, w e m
talk
u sabout
t
these things_

We must talk about threats to the peace, and about the only real
source of these threats.
The times do not call for soft words, or half-truths, or simple
evasions of the truth.

The times do not permit them.

You've told me so yourselves.
you directly.

Everywhere I go, I hear it from

You know, even if my opponent does not, that this

nation, and the entire world, risk war in our time--unless free men
remain strong enough to safeguard the peace.
(more)

Winston

Churchill

once

sounded

this

and maligned.

You know,

as men who love

freedom a1ways have known,

that

only the strong can remain free.

As recently as four years ago, we had national leadership
that knew these things and acted upon them.

Under the Eisenhower

Administration, the watchword was peace through preparedness .

But

under . the Johnson Administration, it has become unilateral disarmament -- and the illusion

of peace .

We have simply got to set this record straight.

I pledge to you tonight that my Presidency will be dedicated
to securing a lasting peace, and to preserving it.
The Republican Party is the party of peace -- because we
understand the requirements of peace, and because we understand
the enemy .
We know he'll run risks, take advantage, push and prod for

openings, the minute he spots a weakness.

We have all met him in

our personal lives -- you and I and our children.
yard bully.

He's the school-

Our sworn enemy, in every basic way, is just like the

neighborbood tough guy.
you'll have to fight .

Let him push you around and eventually
Just stand up to him, though, just draw the

line on his aggressions, and see what happens.
He 1 ll back down and there will be no fight.

we have seen it

happen this way, again and again.
You know this from your own experience.

And you know this

from the plain record of every American Administration since World
War I I that had the nerve and the will and the ready strength to
draw the line on Communist imperialism.
This lesson was clear in the Truman Doctrine, which preserved
both peace and freedom in Greece and Turkey.

And it was clear, time

and again, in the peace-through-strength doctrine of the Eisenhower
years.
(more)

letting

the

p eace

three times since 1917

are

away once

slip

again

as

- - because i t would

n o t hrea ts t o peace in the world

I pointed

--

out , when I opened

has

it

slipped

away

rather pretend that

there

today .

this campaign in my own home state ,

that the present Administration does not understand the nature of
the threats to world peace .

It does not understand the nature of

the conflict which has been imposed

on the entire

world .

.And my opponent in this Presidential campaign proved

I was

right in his acceptance speech, at the coronation ceremony in
Atlantic City several weeks ago .
He never mentioned Communism .
The fact is , Communism is the only real threat to peace .
And my opponent

ignored it .

He ignored the only truly dangerous situations in the wo r ld
today - - as he painted hi s rosy picture of a dream-world

that never

was, and if his polic ie s are co ntinued, a world that will never be .
He ignored

Communism in the real world , but I dare not .

afraid to ignore the Communist threat to freedom .

I arn

And I know you

share my fears -- as you share my hopes for a better future .
Now

mark this well:

I do not intend

to be a wartime . Pre s ident.

I do not intend to see peace and freedom stolen from this nation and
this world

because we lack will , or weapons,

or

leadership .

So of course I am concerned with the 1r.ili tary security of this

nation.

Of course

I am concerned with the road the Johnson Admini-

stration has been fol 1 owing -- the

road to weakness,

and thus to war .

Because I have dared to express this concern, be c ause I have
dared

to talk about the real world, the charge of "war monger" has

been leveled at me .

I suspect the same charge was made about those

who dared speak of bows-and-arrows and of gunpowder -- simply as new

factors in the fundamental

r elations between men and between nations.

The factors may change - - but the principles remain .
(more)

If

i n

I

now s p e a k

o f

ye t

newer factors

the power equ a t i on between the forces

i t is for one r e as on only.

I simply

in

these

relations,

a n d

of freedom and of tyranny,

do n ot wish to see our nation

so weakened and so disarmed that we can be insu lted , a ssaulted, and

eventually attacked -- and have but one awful choice :

either surren-

der, or nuclear holocaust .

If our role is to be guardian of the peace and leader of the
free world -- then to fulfill that great role, we must be strong.
And we must remain strong .

And this is the whole point of all that I have been saying,
and all that I have been writing, in all my campaigning through
the years.
We can only keep the peace if we are strong - - strong economi-

cally, strong ·_. m ilitarily, and above all, strong spiritually .
We can only keep the peace if we are prepared for the aggressor,
in whatever quarter of the world he may appear .
The Administration thesis, however, seems to be that we should

cut back on military strength that may be

11

provocative

11

•

What a

terrible gamble this is with the lives of every free roan, woman,
and child, not just here in our country but everywhere in the world .

These are the reckless men .
impulsive men.

These are the imprudent and

These arc the irresponsible men .

And these are

the men, these leaders of the Johnson Administration, who are
riskir.g war -- war through weakness ..

Ask yourselves this very night how and where we are maintaining peace in the world, peace with honor?
the Berlin Wall?

Is it in Vietnam?

Along

In Cuba?

Where is our honor in all these battlegrounds of freedom?
Where is true and lasting peace?
Republicans have proved that they understand these things .

Republican performances in the White House and in the Congress have
derr.onstrated it.
(more)

(7)

Think

years ago .

back,

again,

Recall

Dwight Eisenhower .

to

the

crisis

i n Lebanon,

the swift and resolute

a

few s h o r t

action taken by President

Recall his action when a crisis developed in

the Formosa Straits, when the Communists threatened Berlin .
The Eisenhower-Dulles policy was based on firm purpose

and unshakeable dedication to the cause of freedom -- and this
purpose and dedication were made clear beyond question to friend
and foe alike.
There is just no room for argument.

Whenever the schoolyard

bully meets someone who stands up to him, whenever he realizes he
is up against someone who will meet toughness with toughness -or better yet, will meet arrogance and tyranny with confidence and
deep faith and resolute will -- then that bully will back dcwn.
These are basic truths.

These are common-sense lessons,

drawn from all human experience and from all the political wisdom
we have so painfully acquired during all the years of our history
as a great and proud nation.
This is our heritage, and this is our obligation -- to the
record of freedom, and to ourselves.
In our hearts -- yours and mine, my fellow Americans -- we
know that these lessons of peace 'through preparedness are true.
And we know that our country must have leadership dedicated to
the truth about the nature of war and peace.
Let me repeat:

I do not intend to be a wartime President.

I, like many of you, have seen war.

I know its ravages, its

horror, its destruction.
And I want no part of war -- for me or my family -- for my

children and their families -- for you and yours.
This is and will continue to be my major goal -- peace.
If my opponents choose to misconstrue my words and my concern, for their own short-range political gain -- then so be it.
(more)

people,

Western civilization

tant and of infinitely

or

itself--these

things are

more va1ue than the political

far more irnpor-

fortune of any

man seeking high office.

Many years ago, Winston Churchill concluded.his address to the
people of the United states on the defense of freedom and peace with
these words--and I want to quote them to you now.

The date was Octo-

ber 16, 1938.
Is this a call to war?

Does anyone pretend that prepara-

ration for resistance to aggression is unleashing war?
I de clare it to be the sole _9uarantee _of peace.

We need

the swift gathering of forces to confront not only military, but moral aggression; the resolute and sober acceptance of their duty by the English-speaking peoples and
by all the nations, great and small, who wish to walk

with them.

Their faithful and zealous comradeship would

almost between night and morning clear the path of progress and banish from all our lives the fear which already darkens the sunlight tc hundreds of millions of
men.
My fellow Americans, let me conclude this evening's visit with
a final thought that I commend to your consideration.
The motto on our coins affirms our belief in and our ultimate
dependence upon the Creator.
I am proud to affirm mY_ faith--which I know you share with me.
I say proudly and with deep conviction:
And with His blessing,

In God We Trust.

you and I together can and will prevail--

to insure that peace with freedom and honor and justice is secured
to us and to our posterity.
Thank you -- and good night.
-30-

.

.

)

FOR RE L EASE

FOR AUTOMATIC RELEASE
AT 3:30 P.M., EDT 1 SATURDAY
September 19, 1964

CAMPAIGN SPEECH AT THE NATIONAL PLOWING CONTEST, FARGO, N.D.
SEPT. 19, 1964, BY SEN. BARRY GOLDWATER,
REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE FOR PRESIDENT OF THE U.S.

Your fine state stands as a good neighbor to the West -- my own
beloved home.

It is also a bridge to our northern neighbor Canada --

the home of loyal friends of us all.

You understand the value of that

friendship, and you have done more than talk about it.

You have

joined hands with your neighbors in your splendid International
Peace Gardens.

we all take pride with you in this living tribute

to peace and good will .
Teddy Roosevelt, a great statesman who knew that peace comes
only through preparedness, chose this state for his ranch home.
And no wonder .

For here, in this fine state, we find men and

women who are faithful to the proven virtues and the proven ways of
our cherished federal union.
And that is why you are sick and tired, as Bill Miller and I
are sick and tired, of being dragged down the road of decline and
Fall by our interim President, his farm boss Freeman , and the rest

of his curious crew of camp followers!
You are sick and tired of hearing the cry
let us continue - - what?

11

let us continue .

11

This headlong retreat into dictation, moral

decay, and ruin?

I say - - and you join me in saying it - - let us stop!

Let us

stop before it is too late to stride forward again on the course
charted by the wisdom of our history.
(more)

( 2)

You men and women have seen and felt
day lives.

that decline

in your every-

You have seen farm prices p1unge down and costs shoot up .

You have seen farm parity -- the ratio of farm prices to costs
fall to 78 last year, the lowest level since 1939.

Last month you·

watched and felt it slip to 74, more than 10 points below the average
in the Eisenhower Administration.
Do you want that to continue?
Farm boss Freeman says you're prosperous now and never had it
so good.

He says farm income is up -- and he says, with usual

modesty, it's all due to his meddling in your affairs.
incorne isn't up for you wheat farmers here.

Well, farm

Y o u k you're
n o w getting

less for your wheat than you did last year.
And you know what farm boss Freeman has been up to.
right hand, he has pushed farm prices down.
handed out cash from the public till.
income?

With his

With his left, he has

And what has happened to farm

Well, 17 per cent of it -- 2.1 billion dollars --

is coming

to farmers from Freeman's left hand -- unless he decides not to give
it to you.

Do you want that to continue?
Farm income certainly should be improved.
how should it be improved?

But the question is--

By arbitrary handouts subject to the

whim and caprice of an arbitrary farm boss in direct contact with
the dealer in the White House?
of f 1 our i shi ng

and

expand i ng

Or by the healthy and fair forces

markets?

There is no doubt what your answer will be.
as

It will be the same

mine and Bill Miller's.
We know you will be guided by good common sense.

We know you

will not be taken in by medicine men hawking their gimmicks and
patent medicines, men who have become drunk with power on their own
medicine.
(more}

- 3 -

These are the men who have hi r ed thousands of new bureaucrats

in the Department o f Agric u lture while the f arm popu lation of this

country dropped by more than two million persons , and the number o f
farms by more than 400 thousand .

If this keeps up, there will soon

be two bureaucrats for every farmer .

They can ride two to a tractor .

Do you w a n t t h
toa continue?
t
Do you want spending by that Department to continue rising by
600 million dollars a year, as it has over the last four years?

Do

you want this curious crew to continue .dipping into one of your pockets
to put money in the other - -always taking out, of course, the house's
cut?
And what about the fancy new schemes farm boss Freeman has
dreamed up?

Sometimes I wish he'd send his farm experts either back

to Harvard or out to look at a farm .
One of these schemes is to impose marketing quotas on all live stock products.

Another is to put dairy farmers in prison if they

don't keep books and records the way boss Freeman says.

And then they

want to inflict strict mandatory controls on farmers growing feed
grains.

And to harness wheat farmers with a wheat certificate program,

To top these schemes all off, this curious crew wants to subdidize grazing when livestock are already flooding the market .
You know, the nation would be a lot better off if our interim
President would quit trying to run your farms and instead clean out
his own stables.

At least then his confused running mate, Hubert

Horatio Humphrey, wouldn ' t have to sidestep so many issues •
•
I give you this pledge , here and now- -that Bill Miller and I
will stop this bureaucratic meddling in your private affairs .

And

believe me, we'll keep our s tables clean--all the time and everywhere . ·
(more)

-4-

We pledge

a farm program good for the farmer, good for the ran-

cher, good for the nation.

We Support

the Republican frrrn platform,

plank by plank.
We know in our hearts that you are plagued with your special
problems.

And we know they are serious problems.

We will work with

you toward solutions, not schemes.
And we will do more than that.

We will succeed where this Admin-

istration has so miserably failed--in bringing peace to this land and
to this world.

That is the overriding problem of all.

That is the

overriding concern of all good Americans, no matter how trying their
special problems may be.

Peace is the overriding responsibility of

your highest Executive officers.

And Bill Miller and I solemnly

swear that we will keep faith with that responsibility.
It will not be easy to do so, and I would not be honest if I
said it will be.

We have to undo all the horrible bungling of the

last four years, bungling that has brought this country to war .
And let me make that absolutely clear.

Our country has lost the

peace--the peace left to it by the Eisenhower Administration .
Today we are at war as certainly· as the sun sets in the west.
And what does my opponent have to say?

He says "let us continue".

I say, and you say, let's put an end to this tragic mess.
Why have we lost the peace of the Eisenhower years?

Why has

· the peace of the fifties become the warfare of the sixties?
The answer is plain.
weakness, a policy

of

We are at war because of a policy of

indecision, a policy of indirection .

We had

peace with honor under Dwight Eisenhower for one reason and one
reason alone--because he pursued a policy of purpose, decision, and
preparedness.
(more)

(6)

The n,

suddenly,

i n October o f

that y ear, when the threat became

plain e v e n to th ose who would not se e , the Administration acted.

When it did , Republicans suppor ted the action .

In every mome n t

of national crisis, all good Americans rally to the support o f their
government .

The action, moreover, was right .

It was in fact the

very sort of action which Republicans had been urging for months .

My questions is this:
right?

Throughout that summer and fall, who was

Those in the present Administration who told us we had

nothing to fear from Nikita?

Or those who urged that we proceed on

a realistic assessment of the Communists'

intentions?

In your hearts you know that we
were right .
By ignoring the true intentions of the Communists, by ignoring
repeated evidence that aggressive action was under way in Cuba, the
present Administration allowed the Soviet Union to plant the weapons
of death 90 miles from American shores and to train them on American
cities!

By following the course of confusion and dream-world

diplomacy, it allowed the greatest threat to American security of
modern times to become a vivid and frightening reality .
Never in this century has ideological blindness s o endangered
the national interest .
But my opponent says
about it .

11

let us continue" .

Let there be no mistake

Weakness allowed the missile threat to be implanted in

Cuba.
On the historical record, on the facts of Communism, on the

grim evidence of two world conflicts and two undeclared wars in
Korea and Vietnam, the truth of the matter is plain beyond any doubt .
To confront the enemy with weakness is to invite attack .

To confront

him with strength is to keep the peace .
The best -- the only

way to avoid use of force, is to have

force to use.
(more)

(7)

Strength deeply held

and wisely

displayed

will

seldom

need

to be put to use.

You, my fellow Americans, are faced with a clear choice in

this election.

Will you choose war through weakness?

Or will you

choose peace through preparedness?
I, for one, have faith in your good and common sense to make
the right choice.

And Bill Miller and I stand ready to serve you

in this noble crusade for peace.
Let us, with God's blessing, face the future with faith,
purpose, and promise.

Let us look forward to the day when peace

shall reign secure and our mighty weapons of war can safely be

beaten into plows of peace.

Let us look forward to the day when

the only contests we are engaged in are classic plowing contests
like this one today.
That day will surely come if, in this age of trial, we make
the right choice: peace through preparedness, not war through

weakness.
---30---

FROM:

REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE

1625 Eye Street, NW
Washington,

Phone :

D . C . 20006

(202) NA

8 - 6800

FOR AUTOMATIC RELEASE
AT 6:30 PM Monday
September 21, 1964

CAMPAIGN SPEECH AT CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA, SEPTEMBER 21, 1964
BY SENATOR BARRY GOLDWATER, REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE FOR PRESIDENT OF THE
UNITED STATES

You have heard me discuss many things in this campaign, all important.
Ycu have not heard my opponent discuss

anything at all.

We are both running for the Presidency of the United States.

We are

both running for the first time.
Yet he will not face the issues, he will not face me -- he will not
face you
Instead, he sends forth his curious crew of camp followers to speak for
him.

Scme are socialistic radicals like his running mate, Hubert Horatio

Humphrey.

Some are bosses of big cities, big unions, and big business.

Some are bureaucratic lackeys.
We

Scme are even buildings.

keep hearing that the White House announces something or that the

P e n t asays
gon
such-and-such.

The Pentagon talks· so much that I've suggested

that it be given a name -- like Peter .Pentagon.

It is an interesting thing,

a building with five sides and a bole in the middle.

talk.
Can my opponent talk?
What dces my opponent have to say?

Apparently, it can

-2-

I challenge

my opponent, the interim President Lyndon Baines Johnson,

to face the issues.

I dare him to face me before the world.

I demand of him -- debate!
You and I demand that he debate tbe major issues in this campaign.
Will he face you and say how he really wants to govern you?
Leaders of the present administration believe that government is
master, not servant of the people.
Responsibility has shifted from

the family to the bureaucrat, from

the neighborhood to the distant agency.

Goals are set, roles are assigned,

premises are made -- all by the remote control of central government .
And now,

this so.me central government has even given you a number to replace

your name!
We want to

give you your freedom and your

names
back again. We want

to give the government of this nation back to the people of this nation.
An administraticnthat understands, rather than one that tries to

wreck the balances of constitutional

power can do ·the job

We do not want oppressive powers in the hands of the Executive
Branch --

or the Supreme Court! We don't want oppressive powers in the

hands of Congress or the states.
to the Congress and to the states!

But we do want proper powers restored
We do want the proper balance between

all branches and all levels.
Let us remember that the Declaration of Independence and the
Constitution were writt en by men who bad their bellies full of oppressive
government .

-3-

Nine score years ago,

the Philadelphia

by the consent of the Governed.

convention gave us a Government

And it gave us a something more -- it

Gave us a system of checks and ba.lances.

It divided the powers

of govern-

ment both between the nation and the states, on the one.hand, and among
the executive, the legislature, and the judiciary, on the other.
divisions were not intended to promote efficiency.

The

On the contrary, as

Justice Brandeis pointed out, they guarantee a certain amount of
inefficiency.
Yet, today, we hear pleas for new and concentrated "power to Govern."
Thoze who seek this concentration of power apparently reject the idea that
the surest guarantee of individual freedom is absence of concentrated
power, either ·.ri thin or without the government.
We hear praise of a power-wielding arm-twisting President who "gets
his program

through Congress" by knowing how to use pouer.

Let me· remind you that there have been other such wielders of power.
There have been dictators who regularly held plebiscites, in which their
dictatorships were approved by an ivory-soap-like percentage of the
electorate.

But their countries were not free, nor can any country remain

free under such despotic power.
Some of the current worship of powerful executives may come from those
.1ho admire strength and accomplishment of any sort.
display of Presidential strength, or judicial

Others hail the

strength, as the case may

be, simply because they approve of the result reached by use of power.
This is nothing less than totalitarian philosophy -- the principle
that the end justifies the means .
to make an omelette .

Or, that you have to break some eggs

If ever there was a philosophy of government totally

at war with that of the founding fathers, this is it.

-4-

To anybody who

that use

of

believes

in the Constitution,

it

is at least

as
important

power be legitimate as that it be beneficial.

This principle doesn't receive headlines nowadays,

but I believe that

anybody who ignores this as a fundamental issue in.this election does so

at the peril of our nation.
To me, the political heroes of this nation are not the men who have
wielded power to get things done, no matter what.

The real heroes are those

who didn't use power when they doubted it was riGht to do so.

These are the

true defenders and protectors of the Constitution.

A good example of this sort of political heroism occurred a hundred
years ago.

I speak of the Republican Senators who voted to acquit Andrew

Johnson in his impeachment trial even though they despised him and :rhat
he stood for.

According to the philosophy of government by strong men, they

should have done something else.

They should have declared him guilty

whether they thought he was or not.

But Fessenden of Maine, Trumbull of

Illinois, Ross of Kansas and many others felt that the power of impeachment
should not be used wrongly to achieve the right

end·•.

Those Democratic Senators who, in 1937, voted against Franklin
Roosevelt I s court- packing plan, even though they violently disagreed with the
decisions of the

11

nine old men," are also my kincl of political heroes.

They

thought it more important to preserve the tri -party system of government than
to accomplish a more immediate political end.

This was exercise of legis-

lative restraint.

Until recently the Supreme Court itself has also exercised restraint,
judicial restraint.

It had not struck do,m acts of Congress that it

disagreed with when they were founded on legtimate
power.

exercise of legislative

But not

when I

say

the Supreme Court

that -- of all

I

weigh

my words carefully

three branches of government -- today's

Supreme Court 1s least faithful
limited government, and

of today!

to the constitutional tradition of

to the principle of legitimacy in the exer-

cise of power.
Let me mention only two lending examples of its recent decisions -both of which the Republican Platform of 1964 is committed to overturn
by constitutional amendment.

These are the so-called school prayer

cases, and the so-called reapportionment cases.

Now, I am not a lawyer, and some would say constitutional law
should be left to the lawyers.

But, if war is too important to be left to the generals, constitutional law is also too important to be left to lawyers.
At any rate, there has been only the most half-hearted effort,
either within or without the court, to justify these decisions on
constitutional grounds.

Everyone agrees that they were not within

the intent of the framers of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution.
Instead, the decisions are defended, implicitly or explicitly,
on the grounds that the end justifies the means:

That it isn't really

good for children to say prayers in school, and that it really is
good to have all state legislatures of every form put on a one man,
one vote basis.
Now there is raw and naked power.
The question, under our system of government, is not simply what
decision is right -- but who has the right to decide!
Only when the second question is answered should the first be
considered.

Yet

we

even by that

hear it

exalted

said

by

political

scientists,

by

lawyers

- - yes.

cl.ass known as the "op1.nion makers" - - that the

Supreme Court had to act because the states wou1dn't reapportion

them-

selves, or because the school boards just weren't being fair to atheists .

If this is true, then it must be that all legislative power in
the country is held at the pleasure of the Supreme Court.

The Court

just steps in and exercises power when the legislative body, which

has it under the Constitution, doesn't do what the Court wants.

I do not doubt for one minute that law must keep up with the
changing times.

But the job of keeping

the law up to date should be

in the hands of the legislatures, the Congress, and the common law
courts.

It should not be solely in the hands of nine appointed jus-

tices of the Supreme Court.
Perhaps the constitutional restrictions on the popular branches
of government aren't enough to protect the right of minorities and

individuals.
by

If this is so, the restrictions should be tightened up

the normal process of amendment, not through judicial revision

of the Constitution.
It is easy to slide into the belief that just because we are a
great nation today, we will always be great.

Anyone who thinks that

our greatness stems from the power wielded by government officials
has misread the history of our institutions.

If we exalt a "strong executive" or a "strong judiciary" -- or,
indeed, a "strong legislature" -- at the expense of the checks and
balances of Federalism, and the principle of legitimacy in government, we travel away from greatness as a nation•

\'/e

will no longer

be a true constitutional republic, or even a truly representative
government.

in form

officials

but not

only

in

substance.

nominally

be nothing but a campaign

We will

responsible

have power concentrated in

to the public

will.

a

few

Freedom will

slogan.

The genius of our system was that it combined the size and power

of a great empire, with the freedom of a small republic.
It set out to combine, and did combine, all the concentrated force
of an absolut e monarchy with all the freedom of the freest democracy.
It set out to avoid and did avoid, the tyranny of the majority
of the many -- a tyranny which had characterized democracies all too
often.

It sot out to avoid, and •did avoid, the cruel oppression of kings
and privileged classes which had characterized governments not of the
many, but of the few.
"E Pluribus Unum" is not only our motto - it must be our guide.
For the union is a union only so long as the states are states.
Federal power, extended to any limit that a temporary majority in control of the central government may wish, crushes the concurrent powers
of the states in one field after another, until the states have no will,
and finally no resources, moral or financial , of their own.
Let us be clearer than we have been, in this country in these recent years;

That the concentration of all the powers of government,

in the same hands, either by the breakdown of the separation of powers ,
or by the breakdown of the lines separating states from nations, will
mean a breakdown of liberty.
I urge upon you the thought that the very magnitude of our accomplishments in the nine score years of our nation may breed impatience
with our imperfections.
to be cast

Our Federal system is not

an antiquated hobble

off when it appears to slow or stop some in:mediate reform .

-

-8On the contrary.

achievement.

It

is

The Federal

system is itself

the very foundation

today, and tomorrow.

####

of

our great political

our greatness -- yesterday,

FOR RELEASE

AUTOMATIC RELEASE
8:30 P.M., EDT, TUESDAY
September 22, 1964

CAMPAIGN SPEECH AT MIDLAND -ODESSA, TEX., SEPT. 22, 1964
BY SEN. BARRY GOLDWATER,
REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE FOR PRESIDENT OF THE U.S.

You are here because you know that there is something wrong in
our land and in our world.
You and I want to do something about it.
something about it.

We know how.

We know that we can do

We know when.

November third!

Let's make that the day that we Republicans, and independent Democrats
everywhere, turn on the lights in the White House!
Lights of honesty .
the people .

Lights of courage.

Lights of confidence in

Lights of individual responsibility.

Let's make that the day we elect an American President who will tell
Nikita Khrushchev that he is wrong!
I pledge that as President I'll make sure Nikita knows that he's
wrong.
No,

No, Mr. Khrushchev:

our grandchildren won't live under communism!

Mr. Khrushchev, your children will live under freedom!
You remember that Khrushchev has promised to. bury us.

The interim

President, Lyndon Baines Johnson, apparently doesn't remember.

He didn't

even bother to mention Communism in his acceptance speech.
But we remember Khrushchev's boast and we don't remember his having
taken i t back •.
All

right then, if Communism intends to bury us -- let us tell

communism loud and clear: we're not going to hand you the shovel!
(more)

(2)

If

Communism intends

to hang us,

we're

not going

to s e l l them the

rope!

We say that the time has come to make the wealth of the free world

work for the security of the free world!

We say that foreign aid and foreign trade that bolsters Communism
while doing nothing to aid freedom,

is merely foreign folly.

We say that the time has come to make the economy, the technology,
the psychological strength -- yes, the spiritual strength -- of the free
world start working for freedom's cause and against the cause of tyranny.
We know that Communism today is the only real threat to the peace.
We see it killing Americans in Vietnam.
Island of Cuba.

we see it garrisoning the prison

We see it lighting the fuse of war in Malaysia.

We see

it fanning the flames of war in the Congo.
This Administration has failed utterly to bring us closer to peace!
Instead, by a foreign policy that shifts with every breeze, by a
defense policy that stresses our one-sided disarmament, this Administration
has tempted Communism to grow bolder, to shove us closer to the brink of
disaster around the world.
We can have peace, and I pledge you every effort for peace.
real peace must be based upon the preparedness of this country.
be based upon the sands of indecision.
dwindling arsenal.

But
It cannot

It cannot be based upon a

It cannot be based upon the abandoning even of efforts

to protect ourselves against attack.
Peace never has, and never will, come to us as a gift.

The human

race is fated to struggle for peace, just as each of us must struggle
within himself to gain inward peace.

We must struggle for what our

conscience tells us is right and true, and against what our wayward
desires tempt us to do.
Peace must be won.

And it will be won only by those who have the

courage to follow their hearts and their conscience.
with nations as it is with ourselves.
(more)

This is as true

C3)

And peace

the physically

can be won only by the

and morally

strong.

strong in t h i s

struggle - - only by

Just as we must be free to be strong,

so we must be strong to be free .

How tragic it is that our interim President and his curious crew do
not understand this basic truth.
Make no mistake about it.

They have lost the peace -- the peace

passed on to them by the Eisenhower Administration.
Today we are at war as certainly as the sun sets in the west.
And what does my opponent have to say?

He says "let us continue."

Let us continue facing a bearded, ranting, red dictator 90 miles from
our shores.

Let us continue facing his Russian missiles, a gift from

Nikita.
Let us continue losing our sons and grandsons in a war thousands
of miles away -- a war this Administration has stumbled into and does not
know how to end.
Let us continue to hear the echo of gunfire in Cyprus, in Yemen, in
Malaysia, in the Gulf of Tonkin, arid in the Congo.
Let us continue the shame of the defiled American flag in Panama
and in Ghana, the burned effigy in Greece.
Let us continue losing our place and our pride in this world .
us continue down the path to decline and fall, to decay and ruin.

Let
Let

us continue the headlong retreat into disaster and oblivion.
That is the cry of my opponent and his curious crew.
That is a cry you and I will not heed .

We say let us stop!

Let

us stop before it is too late to stride forward again on the course charted
by the wisdom of our history .
Let us regain pride in our country, pride in our ways.

Let us regain

the prestige and respect our mighty nation has lost these last, long four
. years.
(more)

lost it

for

Shall we

us?

wants to stand a

regain

i t with Hubert Horatio Humphrey who

heartbeat away from the Presidency?

Hubert Horatio Humphrey, candidate of the radica1 group Lyndon

Johnson himself called "oddballs of the left"?

.

No, the job cannot be done by slick dealers and oddballs of the left.
It must be done by sound and sober leaders who understand the demands of
peace.

It must be done by leaders who know that the way to peace is

through preparedness, that the way to war is through weakness.
Look about you in the world and ask:

Who is the enemy?

Against

whom must we prepare ourselves?
The enemy is Communism -- and you know it.
Look about you and ask who is losing the struggle for peace?
The free world is losing -- and you know that too.
Bill Miller and I know these things along with you.
our opponents?

But what of

How many times have you heard even the word "Communism"

mentioned by my opponent or his curious crew in this campaign?

He did

not bother to bring the subject up in his coronation speech, and he's
done his best to keep your minds off it ever since.
Why?
bumbling ?

Is he, like you and me, ashamed of his record of stumbling and
or does he still believe, as Chamberlain did in 1938, that

appeasement is the answer?
You have heard me discuss many things in this campaign, all important.
You have not heard my opponent discuss anything at all.
we are both running for the Presidency of the United States.

We are

both running for the first time.
Yet he will not face the issues, he will not face me -- he will not
face you.
(more)

(5)

Instead,

for him.

he

forth

his

Some are socialistic

Horatio Humphrey.
business.

sends

curious

radicals

crew

of

camp followers

like

his running mate,

to

speak

Hubert

Some are bosses of big cities, big unions, and big

Some are bureaucratic lackeys.

Some are even buildings, like

the Pentagon, -- and apparently can talk.
But what does my opponent have to say?
I challenge my opponent, the interim President Lyndon Baines
Johnson, to face the issues.

I dare him to face me
-- before the world.

I demand of him -- debate.
What do you demand?
Above all, you and I demand that he debate the major issue in this
campaign -- the most urgent matter facing the people and the Presidency
of the United States.
That issue is peace.
Peace is the overriding concern of the American people.

Peace is the

overriding responsibility of the President -- and of the man who stands
a heartbeat away from the Presidency.
Don't be deceived by talk that politics ends at the water's edge.
Politics does not belong in foreign policy -- that's true enough.

But

foreign policy certainly belongs in politics -- when we're talking about
the President's job.
Maybe my oppone nt won I t talk about the overriding responsibili ty of
his office, but I certainly will.
And I say to you that this country and the whole world needs a
change -- and you know it.
On the historical record, on the facts of Communism, on the grim
evidence of two world conflicts and two undeclared wars in Korea and
Vietnam, the truth of the matter is plain beyond any doubt.
the enemy.with weakness is to invite attack.
strength is to keep the peace.
(more)

To confront

To confront him with

(6)

Strength deeply

held

and wisely

displayed

will

seldom

need to be put

to use.

That lesson we learned under President Eisenhower at Quemoy and Matsu,

and at Lebanon.

That is the lesson this Administration has so disastrously forgotten.
The choice is clear.

Will you choose war through weakness?

Or

peace through strength and courage?
I, for one, have faith in your good and common sense to make the
right choice.

And Bill Miller and I stand ready to serve you in this

noble crusade for peace.
Let us, with God's blessing, face the future with faith, purpose
and promise.

Let us look forward to the day when peace shall reign

secure across the world.
That day will surely come if, in this age of trial, we make the
right choice:

peace through strength, not war through weakness.

In your hearts you know I'm right.
---30---

FROM:

REPUBLICAN NATIONAL

1625 Eye Street,

Washington,

Phone:

D.

COMMITTEE

NW

c.

20006

(202) NA 8-6800

AUTOMATIC RELEASE
PMS Wednesday
September 23, 1964

CAMPAIGN SPEECH AT NATIONAL AMERICAN LEGION CONVENTION,
MEMORIAL AUDITORIUM, DALLAS, TEXAS. SEPT. 23, 1964,
BY SEN. BARRY GOLDWATER, REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE FOR PRESIDENT OF THE U.S.

I want to talk about peace.
I do.

No mah, anywhere, wants peace more than

No man, anywhere, wants to avoid war more than I do.

I know war.

I have sons and daughters whom I do not want touched by war.
We can begin, I know, with the assumption that all Americans share
the desire for peace.

They share also the responsibility for answering

the terrible question of how we are to have and to hold peace in a deeply
troubled and divided world.
We must, you must, all of us must search our hearts and heads for
an answer that rings true.
But we must search for the answer with facts, not merely with wishes
or wishful thinking.
In the first place, we must recognize that it is not possible
at least not honest -- to talk about peace in the abstract today.

or
We

cannot talk about peace without talking about and understanding Communism.
The great, harsh fact of today's troubled world is that Communism
is at war -- at war against us, at war against all non-Communist

nations.

The great, harsh fact is that Communism is the only major threat to

..

the peace of the world anywhere today.
The great, harsh fact is that Communism wants the whole world.
(more)

-2-

In Cuba,

in

the Congo,

at

the Berlin

Wall,

in

Indonesia,

Vietnam, wherever the flames of conflict are being fanned,

in

Communism

is the cause.

The methods it uses in its unrelenting drive to conquer the world
are based solely upon expediency.

What Communism will do, how far it

will go, at any given moment, depends upon their hard-headed, coldblooded assessment of the risks they must face.
If they can bury us, as they have promised to do
win in the world, as they have said they will

-- if they can

if they can do this

without nuclear war, then they will try to avoid nuclear war.
But remember this.
their attacking us.

It is not compassion or decency which prevents

It is not concern for our children.

It is fear.

They respect our power and they fear provoking its use against them.
This is the reason we must maintain the peace through preparedness.
But can I, in good heart and conscience, look forward to a cold war
which will last forever unless it ends suddenly in nuclear destruction
or takeover by a communist dictatorship?
We cannot, and I say we need not look forward to such a bleak future.
There is a rational solution to the problem which confronts us.

The

present policy that guides us, however, is based upon false answers.
American foreign policy based on those false answers has made it altogether
too easy for communists

to seize complete control of 18 nations and en-

slave one-third of the world's population.
The worst of the false answers is that the Communists will stop
being hostile if we accommodate them.

If we can convince them that we

really want to be friends, according to this theory, then they will become
friends.
communism.

This naive assumption is based on a complete misunderstanding of
It put us in the position of a lamb trying to convince a lion

that he is not really hungry.
(more)

-3-

Thirty years

of tragic experience have proven this

theory utterly

fal.se.

This thesis is what convinced Franklin Roosevelt that he should

recognize the Soviet Union -- and it is what led to American concessions
to Russia at the conferences in Yalta, Teheran and Potsdam.
It prompted so much American aid to Russia during and after World
War II that we can bonestly say that much of modern industrial Russia
is a creation of the American taxpayer.
This thesis directed the settlement of the Cuba crisis, the nuclear
test ban treaty and the sale of wheat to Russia

to mention just a few.

It should be clear to everyone that the "let's be friends" theory
has not worked.

Communism has not moderated its goal.

It has continued

to gain ground.

The Communists have been stymied in Europe by the mighty

shield of NATO which, incidentally, is cracking up under this administration
and they have been thrown back to the 38th parallel in Korea -- but these
reversals have been brought about by the use or the threatened use of
military force.
Almost everywhere else, the Communists have gained ground.

If we

want to halt these gains, if we want to save America's freedom, we must
be stronger than the enemy by far.

We can't make the Reds reasonable

but we can make Communism count the odds.
But merely possessing the weapons of strength is not the same as being
strong.

we need the will to be strong.

All the weapons in the world

cannot save us if our will is weak.
we must realize that the responsible use of power -- to deter those
with hostile intent -- is not nearly so likely to provoke all out war
as it is to prevent war by keeping the aggressor within bounds.

(more)

-4-

Whenever

free world leaders have shrunk

power at critical moments in history,

from responsible

use of

they have permitted litt1e prob1ems

to grow into gigantic and infinitely more dangerous problems.

This has

always been true, from Munich to the Bay of Pigs, and it is high time
that our leaders faced the fact.
If we follow the notion that a "let's be friends" approach, coupled
with a defense establishment we are reluctant to use, can save us from
Communism, we will run a very grave risk of war.
The balance of power cannot long remain static.

The threat of a

technological breakthrough by the Soviet must be considered.

If the

Communists believe the odds favor them, they will not hesitate to hit us
with their most fearsome weapons.
The first and central duty of the federal government is to provide
for the common defense.

In the present state of the world, military

spending is and must be high.
total federal expenditures.

But it alone amounts to less than half the
In the 12 months ending June 30, 1964, the

federal government spent the astounding total of $120 billion, or nearly
$650 for every man, woman and child in the United States.
$55 billion was spent on our military forces.

Of this amount,

Non-defense expenditures

amounted to $65 billion.
More important, the sharp rise in federal spending in the present
Administration has been mainly for purposes other than our common defense.
In 1960, the final full year of the Eisenhower Administration, the
federal government spent $94 billion, of which $46 billion was for defense.
In the four years since, total expenditures have risen by nearly $30
billion or by nearly one-third -- this is what the Administration calls
economy.

Federal expenditures on our military forces have risen by $10

billion, so two-thirds of the rise in expenditures was for other purposes.
Non-defense expenditures alone rose by 40 per cent in the past four years.
(more)

-5-

currently

spending, in

the Administration proposes

order to provide

actually

funds for sticking

t o c u t our military

their

fingers

in

a

still larger mess of pies -- for handouts here, subsidies there, all no

doubt said to be for good purposes but, like past efforts in these direc -

tions, likely to end up having effects quite the opposite of those
intended, yet draining the public'a purse.
That way lies national suicide.
There is no surer way to condemn this nation to the status of a
second-rate power, incapable of exerting influence in the world at large,
than to fritter away taxable capacity in do-goodor schemes that waste
our substance.

The experience of Britain is a striking example of how

that can happen. We must not let it happen here.
The defenses of the nation need to be strengthened not weakened.
We must be r eady to spend more on them when needed, not less.
We must not try to save money by putting all our trust in untried

missiles while scrapping tried and tested weapons.
We cannot afford to reduce our defense .establishment in the hope

that a friendly .Russian regime will accommodate us by doing the same.
we must not let our guard drop because of a temporarily friendly

mask.

we must seek true economy, not the false economy of weakening our
defenses.
The core of our defense consists of the men who serve in the armed
forces.
is

we

are currently manning these forces by an outmoded draft that

inconsistent with the values of a free people, that is grossly

inequitable and inefficient, and that besides

is

unduly expensive.

Never before have we had a conacr·i pt army except in time of declared
war.

Always we have relied on volunteers, ready to serve their country.

(more)

----

-

-- - - -

--

--

-6-

The present draft introduces uncertainty into the lives of all our
young men and women, makes it difficult for them to plan their careers
with assurance, and most important of all, discriminates grossly against
many of the poor and less well-educated, who cannot afford the various
escape hatches now open.

And it does not even meet the needs of the

armed forces.
The low re-enlistment rate and resultant rapid turnover of men
trained at great expense reduce the efficiency of the armed forces and
impose heavy financial costs.

It is long past time that we scrap these

arrangements, and return to a volunteer army, which induces men to
serve by offering them an attractive career.

That is a course of action

recommended alike by freedom and economy.
There are serious charges that must be placed against the present
civilian leadership of the defense department on both counts.
On the count of freedom, the present Secretary of Defense must be
charged with mistake after mistake in evaluating the intentions of
Communism and in understanding the dynamics of Communism.
His efforts to turn the defense department into a disarmament
department, his participation in the massive mis-evaluation of Soviet
intentions which led to the Cuban missile crisis, are parts of the
indictment on this score.
His ceaseless attempts to downgrade professional military men and
his · persistent attempts to turn basic defense decisions to political
purposes also must be included in the indictment.
On the count of economy, the present Secretary of Defense must be
charged with mistake after mistake in seeking to save pennies and dollars
at the expense of the weapons, equipment, and plans upon which the lives
of our citizens and our citizen-soldiers may depend.

And a careful account-

ing, I am willing to predict, will show that even the high claims for
saving will have to be lowered or denied.
(more)

- - -·

-

.,..__

--- -- - - -7-

There can be no second beet in our defenses, no matter the cost,
if we are to deter war, keep the peace.
The sorry record of the present civilian Administration of the
department of defense has been piling up in the hearings of committees
in both the Senate and the House.
of the record.

Technical writers have exposed much

It is to be hoped that all who are genuinely interested

in the defense of this nation will support efforts to continue the
exposure, despite the efforts of the Secretary of Defense to divert
attention by slick, figure-juggling performances.
There is more at stake here than the pet theories of the White
House's pet cabinet officer.

Peace and freedom and the future of your

world and your children's world is at stake.
I am speaking for peace when I say we must build a strength and
show the will to halt the Red's aggression.

I am speaking for peace

when I say we must quit helping the Reds -- by sending them wheat, for
example -- to keep their oppressive and unsound system alive.
Their system has so many intrinsic faults it would collapse if
it weren't braced

from the outside.

Appease an aggressor, try to make friends with him, and eventually
you'll have to go to war with him -- unless you're willing to hand over
your freedom without a fight.

History shrieks this lesson, but this

present Administration cannot hear.
Three times in the past, the way of weakness had led us to war under
eimilar Administrations.

Don't let it happen again .

The next war -- and
I

God forbid that it will ever come -- would be more devastating than all
the others put together.
Don't let it happen again.

,
I speak for peace, not war, when I say

that America must take a firm line with communist leaders until their
evil system ceases to threaten the freedom and peace of the world.
- 30-

NEWS

NEWS

NEWS

FROM: REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE

1625 Eye Street, N. w.
Washington, D. c. 20006
Phone: (202) NA 8-6800

AUTOMATIC RELEASE
At 6: 30 P.M. (EDT) THURSDAY

September 24, 1964
CAMPAIGN SPEECH AT FENWAY PARK, BOSTON, MASS.
SEPT. 24, 1964, BY SEN. BARRY GOLDWATER
REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE FOR PRESIDENT OF THE

U.

s,

A political campaign sometimes forces us to look at things we
don't want to see.

That is happening in this campaign.

We are forced by our hearts t o take a good look, a serious
look, at the breakdown of law and order in this nation.
How can a candidate for the Presidency brush aside the fact
that there were two and a quarter million serious crimes -major

crimes -- committed in our nation last year?

How can he

ignore the six thousand or so major crimes canmitted in the last
twenty-four hours?
How can he forget that our women are no longer safe in their
homes, on our streets, in our parks?

How can he forget the

bombing of churches and schools?
And even that is not the whole story.

Crimes in our country --

and I am still speaking of serious crimes -- rose 10 per cent last
year over the year before, and 16 per cent over the year before
that.

In the last six months alone they have shot up 15 per cent!

You know, I sometimes wonder what my opponent means when he
purs s his .lips and calmly says:
(more)

"Let us continue."

.

- - - - ---- - -

---

--

(2)

Let us continue what?

A crime rate that climbs

than population, as it has over the last four years?

five times faster
A

keeps gaining speed, as it has over the last four years?
pornographic literature that corrupts our youth?

crime rate that
A flood

of

A moral decay that can

only lead to the ruin of our Nation?
In your hearts, you know this is wrong .
there must be a change.

In your hearts, you know

And in your hearts, you know that Bill Miller and

I will be that change .
Nothing is more clear from history than that moral decay of a
people begins at the top .
all walks of life.

It seeps down from the highest offices into

And what do we see today in those unlighted highest

offices?
We see the shadow

of scandal cast across the White House itself.

We see public power used for personal gain.

we see the scandals of

Bobby Baker and Matt Mccloskey, close buddies of our interim President,
covered up by the full power of the Presidency.
No wonder the fast buck and easy morals have become the standards
of the day for so many.
And what do we hear about all this from our highest officials?
We hear official silence -- broken by the scrambling of official
cover-up.
This is not the only thing my opponent won't talk about.

You have

heard me discuss many things in this campaign, all ·important.

You have

not heard my opponent discuss anything at all.
we are both running for the Presidency of the United States .

We are

both running for the first time.
Yet he will not face the

issues, he will riot face me -- he will not

face you. ·
(more)

- --- - - - - ------- --- - - - - - -- -- - -3-

Instead he sends forth his curious crew of camp followers

for him.

to speak

Some are socialistic radicals like his running mate, Hubert

Horatio Humphrey.
business.

Some are bosses of big cities, big unions, and big

Some are bureaucratic lackeys.

Some are even buildings, like

"the White House" or "the Pentagon."
Is my opponent so frightened that he has lost his voice?
If not, what does he have to say?
I challenge my opponent, the interim President Lyndon Baines
Johnson, to face the issues .

I dare him to face me before the world.

I demand of him -- debate!
You and I demand that he debate the serious issue of law and order.
Or shall we take the word of his spokesman in the United Nations,
that this Administration urges our youth to break the law?
That's right.

Break the law.

That was the advice of Adlai Steven-

son to an audience at Colby College this year.
to advance civil and humanrights",he said,

"In the great struggle

"even a jail sentence is

no longer a dishonor but a proud achievement."
It was an American statesman of the last century who said, so
briefly and clearly:

"He who strikes at A law strikes at THE law."

For those blessed, as we are, with a representative republic, that is
always true -- no "ifs", "and", or "buts" about it.
low, is obliged to obey the law.
not defied.

Everybody, high and

If the law is bad, it should be changed,

And everybody has the right and duty to work toward that

change through his lawful representatives in legislative bodies.
Yet our highest executive officers have done more than forget this
fundamental principle, this pillar of domestic security.
openly and knowingly shattered it.

And to what end?

you to decide.
(more)

They have

That I leave for

-4-

The founders

of our great repub1ic set this

pal duties of government

as one of the princi-

"to insure domestic tranquility."

We have

had the good fortune during most of our history to be able to take a

stable civil order for granted.

All the more reason that we must not

underestimate the crisis facing us.
We are headed toward the law of the jungle, where "they shall take
who have the power, and they shall keep who can."

Unless person and

property are secure from the marauder, we have no government worthy of
the name.
And I would remind you that the big cities, where there is the
most lawlessness, are controlled by bosses of the Democratic Party.
How, you will rightly ask, will Bill Miller and I restore domestic
tranquility to this land?

Well, let me tell you how we will do it.

First, by example at the top.

It is idle to expect delinquents and

thugs to respect the law if those in high office do not act with integrity.

And this means more, much more, than merely keeping out of the

criminal couris.

It means following the highest moral standards in

every aspect of conduct.

It means that the President and his associates

must be, like Caesar's wife, wholly above suspicion.

It means that the

burden of proof rests squarely on their shoulders when the slightest
doubt arises about their conduct.
I hardly need remind you that this is not the case today.

There

would be little reason for alarm if we were confronted only with occasional minor abuses of power, promptly detected and punished.

In

all ages there will be some who abuse the trust of power.
But an Administration is sick when it is riddled with abuse --

.

when those abuses are concealed, swept under the rug because they reach
too high or touch too many.
refus

It is sick when our highest authorities

to see corruption when it stares them in the face.

We can only

conclude that scandal lurks everywhere in the darkened halls of the
White Bouse.
(more)

--

-5-

Press agents and image makers can do much for a candidate.
can give him many faces,

They

looking many ways, appealing to many interests.

But there is one face press agents can't give a man, and that is
the face of honesty and integrity.

That a man must give to himself or

not have at all.
This, then, is the first thing that must be done -- to put in a
new Administration at the top.

It must be an Administration whose hon-

esty and integrity speaksso loudly that you won't have to hear what it,
or its press agents, say.
Bill Miller and I will give you that kind of Administration.

In

your hearts, you know I'm right.
But example alone is not enough.

The President must use the power

and influence of his office to strike at the roots of the breakdown in
law enforcement.
Now, my opponent in this election would not understand what this
means.

To him, the way to solve a problem is to appropriate a few hun-

dred million dollars of taxpayers' money, and see if the problem will
disappear along with the money.

If that doesn't happen, the next thing

to do is to create a new bureaucracy in the White House to meddle in
the affairs of others.
And while he meddles, the nation's capital is being consumed by
crime.
Here is a Federal responsibility -- the domestic tranquility
District of Columbia.

of the

What, you might ask, has my opponent done to

fulfill his grave responsiblity toward law and order in our capital
city?
we have heard of and seen many wars in the time of the present
Administration.

But have we yet heard of the only needed war -- the

war against crime?

No, not even in the city whose rule lies in the hands

of the federal government.
(more)

,:

-

-

-

(6)

This I

attack .

can pledge to you

that Bill Miller and I will launch that

We will first of all use our power and influence to se e that law

enforcement officers, on the state and local level, get back the power they
need to carry our their job .
Let me make this crystal clear:
and local responsibility .
police force.

.

enforcement of the law is a state

There is no room in this country for a federal

And there is no need for one .

But there is urgent need to return to state and local authorities
the traditional powers to apprehend and punish criminals, powers that
have only recently been taken away from.those authorities by federal
courts -- particularly the Supreme Court .
Now, as I understand it , the Supreme Court has been given only very
limited power over state criminal convictions under our Constitution .
In order to reverse a judgment of a state court, it must first determine
conclusively that a convicted defendant was denied some specific right
guaranteed by the Constitution.
There was no problem up to a few years ago .

But then the Supreme

Court began stretching two phrases in the Fourteenth Amendment, often
by five to four decision, until the state courts lost virtually all their
powers over judicial process.
The result h as been severe restriction of state administration of
criminal law -- restriction so severe that thirty-six of the chief
justices of our states joined in calling upon the Supreme Court to exercise
restraint.
Let me just recall some of the key decisions.
(more)

.

,:

_
-7-

Three years ago, five members of the supreme court decided that state
courts must follow federal rules of evidence whether they wanted to or
not.

Specifically, no evidence could be used if police investigators

made some mistake -- any mistake -- in gathering the evidence.

This

rule must hold even if it means an obviously guilty defendant will go
free.

It is a rule squarely contrary to common law and to constitutional

law -- up to three years ago.

As Benjamin Cordoza, one of our greatest

common law judges, once said, such a rule means that "the criminal is
to go free because the constable has blundered."
In an earlier case, the Supreme Court·ordered that a criminal conviction should be reversed, no matter how guilty the defendant, if it
were shown that some technical violation of constitutional rights occurred anywhere in the course of investigation and trial.

If there is

any flaw in one confession, all confessions -- whether challenged or not-must be thrown out!
The trend has now reached its logical end.

Five justices of our

Supreme court have held that a voluntary confession made by a state
prisoner was inadmissable because his lawyer was not present when it
was made.

This was held despite the fact that the prisoner admittedly

knew of his right to remain silent.
Let me make this absolutely clear -- there was no question in these
cases that confessions were extorted or untrue.
long, and rightly, been invalid.

such confessions have

This is a new rule.

It seems to say

that a criminal defendant must be given a sporting chance to go free,
even though nobody doubts in the slightest that he is guilty.

No won-

der our law enforcement officers have been demoralized and rendered ineffective in their job.
(more)

.

-

-

--

.

-

---

-8-

Something must be done, and done immediately, to swing away from
this obsessive concern for the rights of the criminal defendant.
course he is entitled to a fair and speedy trial.

Of

of course he is en-

titled to protection of his constitutional rights.
But is he to be so needlessly pampered that the rights of lawabiding citizens become hollow claims?

Are law and order to be sacri-

fices just to give criminals a sporting chance to go free?
will agree with me that something needs to be done.

I know you

And let me . sug-

gest three things that can be done.
First, in making appointments to the federal judiciary, the President must consider the need to redress constitutional interpretation in
favor of the public.

He must appoint men fully qual.ified to carry out

their judicial duties and to respect the Constitution.
whether my opponent would appoint such men.

Ask yourselves

Remember that the recent

decisions open to criticism have been made by a closely divided Supreme
Court.
Second, if the court's decisions should remain unaltered, the
President can urge amendment of the Constitution.

Such amendment should

give back to the states those powers absolutely necessary for fair and
efficient administration of criminal law.

It should safeguard rights of

defendants, while giving the states power to enforce law and order.
Third, the President should urge Congress to consider changing
some of the rules of judicial procedure in the federal courts.
gress clearly has this power under the Constitution.
(more)

Con-

--

---- - -

- - ·-

--

--

-------

(9)

I

have in mind rules such as the one recently established in a

case involving the criminal law of the District of Columbia.

That rule,

set in the Mallory case, holds that any statement made by a defendant to
police officers is inadmissible if arraignment is delayed.

It makes no

difference whether the delay had any connection with the statement or not.
Let me say that, within five years after this ruling, the robbery
rate in the District increased by 115 per cent!

Our nation's capital now

ranks third out of sixteen comparable cities in robberies -- a place of
shame and dishonor that reflects directly on lack of leadership and concern in the White House.
These three proposals are constructive steps in the direction of
sounder law enforcement.

But they can be advanced only by the right

leadership.
To restore public virtue, and thereby law and order, there is no
place for the dealership of a clever compromiser, a scheming wire-puller,
a master politician.

There is instead urgent need for leadership, dedicated

to the principle that moral law binds both the high and the low, that
public law must and shall be enforced.
With your help and God's blessing, Bill Miller and I will give you
that leadership.

That is our solemn pledge.

---30----

---·
NEWS

N E WS

FROM:

----------NEWS

REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE

1625 Eye Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.
20006
AUTOMATIC RELEASE
6:30 P.M. EDT,FRIDAY
September 25, 1964

CAMPAIGN SPEECH TO THE NATIONAL FEDERATION OF REPUBLICAN WOMEN,
LOUISVILLE, KY., SEPT. 25, 1964 BY SENATOR BARRY GOLDWATER,
REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE FOR PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES

The theme o f ocampaign
ur
is clear.
peace through preparedness.
progress through freedom.
Purpose through Constitutional order.
Peace is the first element.

But we mean peace through preparedness.

We mean the real peace that can be kept only with real strength.
We do not mean the sleepwalker peace that relies on unproven hopes
that the enemy will mellow.
We see the enemy, we see Communism for what it is -- not for what
some theorists wish it were!
We take Communism's deeds to mean at least as much as its words.
No.
we mean .

Peace is for those strong enough to keep it.
That's what we pledge.

That's what

And that, unless I'm very wrong, is

what you want and is one of the government bills that you are willing
and ready to pay!
This nation has gone to war three times in this century.
under a Republican President!

But not

Republicans always have understood how

to preserve freedom while keeping the peace!
And, despite the most strident and lie-fi_lled campaign that the
opposition can launch, the next Republican President -- this Republican
President -- will keep the peace just as surely!
(more)

t

-- ·

( 2)

A major concern of ours has been the preparedness of this nation.

the ability of this nation to defend itself, to deter war -- the ability
of its soldiers, sailors, and airmen to protect themselves without
being straitjacketed or stripped of weapons.
This Administration is trying to distort that concern so that you
will be frightened into thinking that we want a war.
There is no greater political lie.
We want peace.

And we know how to keep it far better than the

present Administration with its policies of drift and crisis.
I have never suggested, nor would I as President move recklessly
with our great power.

But I would take every step to make sure that

the Communists did not move recklessly with theirs!

It is Communist

power that worries me!
I do not .intend to be a wartime President.
two fine sons and I do not want them in war.
I have grandchildren.

I know war.

I have

I have two fine daughters.

I want none of them, or none of your children

touched by war -- or by slavery!
That's why we want a strong

America!

we want an America strong in more than weapons, however.
Strength deeply held and wisely displayed will seldom need to be
put to use.
The interim President and his curious crew do not understand this.
That is the tragedy of the day.

They cannot defend this nation against

Communist bullies because they don't know bullies when they see them.
They cannot begin to unravel the real problems of the cold war because
they live in a dream-world where those problems don't exist.

They have

a wishbone where they need a backbone.
The result is a policy of weakness.

The result is war -- Lyndon

Johnson• s War.
{more)

. ..

(3)

In Cyprus,

in Laos,

in Vietnam,

in Yemen,

in the Congo -- in all

these places and more, we hear the echo of gunfire.

The free world,

hobbled by dealership and bereft of leadership, struggles fitfully and
without common purpose against the enemy.

It lapses into civil strife

among its members.
To know why Americans are dying today in Asia, we need only examine
this Administration's record of weakness and confusion.
In 1961, the present Administration pledged to support the antiCommunist government of Laos, a country which adjoins Vietnam and is
necessary to its defense.
that pledge.

Within a year, the Administration violated

It actually cut off crucial aid grants to the anti-Communists,

to force them into a "coalition" government with their enemies.
All this, mind you, was premised on the theory that we could
"do business" wi th the Communists -- that by concession we could win
the good will of our enemies, and achieve peace.
The coalition government of Laos fell apart.

It didn't work.

Laos became a virtual

open corridor of supply for the Communists in their attack on Vietnam.
The pro-Western government there was · subjected to new and more dangerous
attacks.
In 1963, this same Administration managed to overturn that
government too, yielding to the propaganda cries of those who wanted to
"neutralize" Vietnam.

It encouraged the overthrow of President Diem.

This loyal ally was ousted and then murdered.
As a result of these actions, our strategic position in Southeast
Asia has virtually collapsed.
After this Administration acquiesced in the destruction of the
Diem regime, governments have changed so rapidly in Vietnam, it is
difficult to keep track of them.

Robert Strange McNamara jets back and

forth and gives our people contradictory reports, sometimes optimistic,
sometimes pessimistic.

On his way over, he passes Maxwell Taylor coming
. (more)

.
. ...
,:

---(4)

back -- with more confusing stories to tell.

When are they going to t e l l

the American people the simple truth?

And what does my opponent say?

He says, "let us continue."

This Administration has even managed to garble the question of what
kind of weapons can be used in this conflict • .
Americans are asked to give their lives in Vietnam.

In return

they are given double-talk and evasion.
A few things, however, we do know.
We know our boys have been sent out to fight, and to die, with
obsolete equipment.

And we know my opponent gave the Communist enemy

an alert of one-and-a-half hours in advance of a crucial counter-attack.
What would have happened, you might well ask, if we had given such
an advance warning for General Doolittle's daring raid on Tokyo?

Or

for any one of the thousands of other flights our airmen have been
called upon to perform in the line of duty?
And why the alert?

You know why and I know why -- to play the

game of politics, no matter what.
Has there ever been a more mishandled conflict in American history
than Lyndon Johnson's war in Asia?

Has there ever been an episode in

which the American people have had more trouble in finding out what was
happening to their sons, to their treasure, and to the security of their
nation?

Has there ever been more agonizing proof that weakness and

indecision are the road to war?
We have had four years of weakness in Washington.

Let every

American examine the record and ask the questions:
Is America more respected in the world now than it was four years
ago?
From every corner of the globe, the answer is a resounding "No."
(more)

(S)

The reports of the central Intelligence Agency tell us our prestige

has dipped below the peril point.

confidence in us by the hour.

The leaders of Europe are losing

Mobs assault our consulates and defile

our flag in Panama, in Ghana, in Zanzibar.

No country is so small

that it dare not pull Uncle Sam's whiskers and get away with it.
Is America more secure now than it was four years ago?
Again the answer is a resounding

11

No.

11

The Communist epidemic has run rampant around the world.

It has

infected Latin America more deeply than ever, threatening our defenses
to the South.

Soviet groups and weaponry still stand in Cuba.

And

my opponent's spokesman on foreign affairs in the Soviet tells us that
Castro and Communism are matters of fact we must learn to live with.
Is America closer to peace now than it was four years ago?
Battle reports from every corner of the world ring out the answer
"No."
On every score, America's fortune and the world's hope are more
gravely threatened than they were four years ago.
has sowed the wind of weakness.

This Administration

It has reaped the whirlwind of war.

The challenge of this hour is great -- as great as any thrust
upon our nation at any time.

It can be met only by those who know

what they are about, who understand the nature of the enemy -- who
know that peace is the fruit of vigilance and resolve, not of daydreams
and double talk.
The cause of peace is too precious to be entrusted to men who have
. a wishbone where they need a backbone.

It will not be served by

founding our policies upon make-believe notions of an adversary that
never was, and never will be.
It will be served instead by men who comprehend the greatness of the
task, the lateness of the hour, and the imperatives of leadership.
(more)

(6)

The answer 1 my fellow

citizens, is in your hands.

With your help

and with God's blessings 1 Bill Miller and I will. dispel the mists of

defeat and delusion that envelop American diplomacy.
we will give -- this nation a government worthy of it

We can give
a government

that will replace the war through weakness with peace through preparedness.
---30---

NEWS

NEWS

NEWS

FROM: REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE
1625 Eye Street, N.W.
washington,
D.C.
20006

AUTOMATIC RELEASE:
At 6:30 P.M. Saturday
September 26, 1964

CAMPAIGN SPEECH AT COBO HALL, DETROIT, MICH., SEPT. 26, 1964
BY SEN. BARRY GOLDWATER,
REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE FOR PRESIDENT OF THE U.S.

This nation of ours has grown great and strong and prosperous
through its free economy.
Private property, free competition, hard work -- these have
powered the engine of our progress.
Our system has preserved and protected our freedom, our right to
disagree, our creative diversity, our independence from arbitrary
intervention in private affairs.
And it has been a mighty engine of progress.

It has enabled the

people of this country to rise from a small but independent citizenry
scratching out a hard living on the margins of a great continent, to
a multitude spanning the continent and living at a level that is the
envy of the world.
Progress through freedom has been our heritage.

It must remain

our guide and our goal.
But what does the interim President, Lyndon Baines Johnson,
have to say about the cause of freedom?

When he launched his campaign,

he described the three elements of his so-called great society.
Prosperity, Justice and Peace.
What about Freedom?

He didn't even mention it.

You know that there have been prosperous slaves.
more than just to be well fed.

Americans ask

Of course we are all working for a

(more)

.
.

.. . .

.

;

.

,·

.

(2)

society in which all may be well fed,

want more.

we

clothed, and housed!

But we

want to be free.

We've always looked down on the people who became Christians just
for a bowl of rice.

we call them rice Christians.

But what of this Administration's attempt to turn us into Dollar
Democrats!

we reject that too.

This generation of Americans deserves a better label in history
than being called a generation of dollar tag Americans!

And come

November we're going to tear that tag off -- and put on Freedom's!
We have never forgotten freedom.

We will never forget freedom.

We've been talking about it across the length and breadth of this
land.

It's the basic issue of this whole campaign.

Johnson try to forget freedom.
We'll remember it .

Let Lyndon Baines

Let him try to make you forget it.

And on November third, even Lyndon will wish

he'd remembered it.
we know that government has important things to do in our society.
Under constitutional rules, it must maintain law and order.
protect person and property.

It must

It must enforce private contracts and

encourage freer and more effective markets at home and abroad.

It

must promote monetary stability ·to eliminate the danger of either
inflation or defl a t ion.
And, yes, i t must stand ready to aid the helpless and support those
in need.
But to preserve freedom, government must be both limited and
dispersed .

It must be as close to the people as possible.

Only in

this way can government be kept responsible to the people it serves.
only in this way can government be kept from .becoming so arbitrary.
and so strong that it threatens freedom.

Only in this way can there

be variety, creative diversity, and experimentation in policies
healthy competition between units of government.
· (more)

I

.·..

. .

.

;

-

(3)

Increasingly, however, government is becoming master instead of

servant.

Increasingly, power is gravitating to the White House,

away from our towns, counties, cities, and states .

Increasingly,

government is engulfing our precious resources .
Unfortunately, in the present state of the·world , military expenses
are and must remain high .

Of course we must have economy in defense,

but we cannot afford the false economy of weakened defenses.

If the

need arises, we must stand ready to spend even more than we now do -to maintain our defensive strength and preparedness .
How can we practice economy and improve

our defensive strength,

both at the same time?
One obvious course is to revamp our system of military recruitment .
The present Administration continues to use the outmoded and unfair
military draft to man our armed forces .
Republicans will end the draft altogether, and as soon as possible.
That I promise you!
It is easy enough to detail the many inequities of the current
draft.

We are inducting only a small number of those eligible to

serve, and nobody knows for sure when or if he will be called to duty.
Uncertainty reigns in the lives of our young men and women.
plan their careers with assurance.

They cannot

·

Those who are called to duty are made to bear a burden not imposed
on others equally liable to call.

In the most real sense, a tax in

kind is levied on these draftees and their families, a tax used to
support the defense effort .

All too often, draft calls discriminate

against many of the poor and less well-educated - - against those who
cannot

afford the various escape hatches now open.

But this is not the whole story .

Forced service is a wasteful and

inefficient way of manning our forces in these times .
rates are low, turnover rapid, and training costs high.

Re-enlistment
Misuse of

personnel is encouraged by the artificially low price tag placed on the
individual soldier.

(more)

(4)

Republicans understand that it is long past time to scrap this
inefficient and wasteful system.

Republicans understand that the

military forces need professionally trained and properly paid volunteers who make the military service a career.

They understand that

this is the most economical way to man our defe·nses.
The heavy burden of defense makes it all the more important
that we stop the growth of wasteful non-defense spending.

Over the

last four years, non-defense spending rose twice as much as defense
spending.

Spending for defense, in fact, now accounts for sub-

stantially less than half of total Federal spending.
This explosive growth in non-defense spending must stop.
spread of Federal bureaucracy must be arrested

The

before it canni-

balizes us all.
As our economy grows -- and we all know that it has been growing
u n d e r b parties
oth
-- the amount of taxes collected by the Federal
government has grown even faster.
We can see the result.
off our Federal debts.

The added money hasn't been used to pay

Not at all.

It has been used to start new

Federal payments programs which have ended up increasing

our debts.

Each year, while the Administration works overtime to dream up new
spending schemes to spend and even overspend all the new tax money
Congress is pressured to raise the ceiling on the national debt limit.
This merry-go-round of fiscal irresponsibility has to stop!
In particular, we have to find ways to keep more money in your
pockets.

If you work harder, or more skillfully, and earn more money,

you should keep more of it -- not have to turn it over to a growing
bureaucracy.
Fundamentally we must have a complete reform and reconstruction
of our Federal tax structure.

Unde.r a Republican Administration we

will have that reform!
(more)

(5)

But we need not wait for that total overhaui before we begin
stopping the abuses.

If spending is held in check -- and, believe me, a Republican
Administration will hold it in check -- we can cut taxes and still
balance revenue against spending.

We can not only keep the national

debt from rising -- we can even reduce it.

And Republicans will reduce

it!
I shall propose to Congress an across the-board reduction of 5%
per year in all income taxes -- both individual and corporate.
follows the fair principle of equal treatment for all.

This

The initial

request would provide for such regular, prudent reductions in taxes
in each of five years.
Each year you would take off the 5% so that by the fifth year the
total reduction would be 25%.
Let me make it clear that this is no hastily-conceived proposal.
It is the product of careful study and deliberation.

It is fully

consistent with the considered views publicly expressed, in recent
speeches, by Arthur F. Burns, Chairman of the Council of Economic
Advisors under President Eisenhower.
This is a safe and sane way to return to your pockets, within
five years, more than 25% of the taxes you would normally have to pay.
It is not the impulsive, massive, politically motivated tax-cut
gimmickry that we have seen employed by the present Administration.
I opposed that tax cut and would do so again under the same circumstances.

That reckless cut was not intended as a return to responsible

fiscal policy, designed to put a brake on endless growth of spending
by the centralized bureaucracy.
(more)

. -

..

(6)

Quite the contrary.

It was designed to create deficit spending

when the economy was already in the midst of good times.

It was

designed to drug the economy into an artificial boom that would carry
at least past election day.
Our proposal means instead a return to sound Republican principles
of fiscal responsibility.

In fact, it reinforces those principles.

It will not, as this Administration's reckless slashing surely does,
lead to credit-card spending in good times at the risk of bad times
in the future.
inflation .

It will not create false prosperities that breed

It will, instead, create the

base for a stable, flourishing,

and expanding economy -- an economy in which you, the individual
citizen, can decide how to use the money you earn, and not some distant
bureaucrat.
Another way to give you, the individual citizen, greater control
over the use of your own money is to return to the states functions
that have been taken from them by the Federal bureaucracy.
Over the years, state and local government have become increasingly
dominated by the ever-growing system of so-called Federal grants-in-aid.
There are now over a hundred such programs totalling over $10 billion
in annual Federal spending.
and local governments.
subservient to a huge

They cover every major activity of state

In this way,· those governments have been made
Federal bureaucracy with its center in the White

House.
we must bring government back closer to the people.

And a

Republican Administration will do just that.
States, counties, cities, and towns can make their own decisions
on public services if we change the system of programmatic grants-inaid which now keep local officials under Federal domination.
Because of existing commitments,. we cannot do this overnight.
But we can gradually replace. this undesirable and complex system
with a much simpler and more sensible one.
(more)

(7)

The Federal government, for instance, could

return to the states

a share of the income taxes collected from them, and permit a greater

credit on estate taxes.

Low-income states and cities could be helped

further by a system of purely fiscal grants for general purposes.
Such a system of unconditional grants -- in piace of the present
programmatic grants -- would give each state needed resources for
use within the _ state, free of control by the Federal bureaucracy.
Let the state and local governments decide how to provide local
services.

Then the President and Congress can concentrate their time

and effort on their critical respons.ibilities -- on foreign relations,
national security, and the general welfare.
And there is another benefit from transferring decisions on
domestic services to governors, legislatures, mayors, city councils,
boards of education , and similar local agencies -- where they belong.
Then our top officials can be freed from most of the pressure groups
which now beset them, demanding a multitude of special benefits for
special interests or areas.
The program which I have outlined will keep the Federal government
within its proper and legitimate role.

It will promote the freedom

and initiative of the individual, without making dangerous cuts in
national defense or in necessary domestic programs.
This is a progr am for progress through freedom.
With your help and God's blessing, Bill Miller and I will bring it
to pass.
---30---

. ...

.
..

NEWS

NEWS

FROM:

NEWS

REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE
1625 Eye Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20006

AUTOMATIC RELEASE
At 6:30 P.M. MONDAY
September 28, 1964

EXCERPTS OF REMARKS AT UNION STATION RALLY, WASHINGTON, D.C.,
10 P.M., SEPT. 28, 1964, PRIOR TO START OF 'WHISTLE-STOP' CAMPAIGN,

BY SEN. BARRY GOLDWATER, REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE FOR PRESIDENT OF THE U.S.

Living in Washington, and reading newspapers that are solidly
committed against our campaign, you might well wonder what's happening
out in the real world.
Let me tell you!

It's going well.

I've been there.

I've seen the

record turnouts and I've heard the people speaking.
Our campaign has turned--and the turn is up!
This week should give us even more fuel.

I don't buy for a minute

the gloom and doom that some people are peddling.
still the underdog.
day.

I know that we're

We'll probable be the underdog right up to election

But the campaign is moving, and moving well, right now.
If things were going so well for Lyndon Baines Johnson, he'd

still be at home, walking the dogs, taking a swim, having a tea party,
and leading the press down and around the garden path.
In stead, he's burning up taxpayer money, a mile-a-minute,
campaigning all over this country.

If Lyndon Johnson really believed

those polls that he carries in his pocket, would he be running so
hard, so soon, and so fast?
No! Lyndon knows that this is no walk-away campaign and he knows
that Bill Miller and I are not walk-over candidates.
Everytime we ask an embarrassing question, Lyndon leaves town to
dedicate a new dam.
(over)

.. .
... ·- . .

, •

.

. ..

,:

(2)

well, I want him to know, and you to know, that we have more
questions than he has dams!
Lyndon's TV shows try to scare us to death, his polls try to
paralyze us, his tax-money campaign trips, I guess, try to tire us
out.
Let me assure you that we aren't going to fall for it.

We are

going to stick to the issues--whether they embarrass the interim
president or not.
hard.

we are going to keep on campaigning and campaigning

And so are you!

Last week, we covered 9,600 miles and saw a total of a quarter
of a million people.

They jammed auditoriums and they lined the

streets.
They know in their hearts that we are right in this campaign
crusade to give America back to the people.
This trip that we begin tonight will cover 35 very important
cities.

It will also cover more important issues.

The people we will

see also know that something is wrong here in Washington.

They want

a change.
And on November 3 that is exactly what they're going to get!
---30---

.,

......-...

.

NEWS

FROM:

NEWS

REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE

1625 Eye Street, NW
Washington, D. c. 20006
Phone: (202) NA 8-6800

AUTOMATIC RELEASE

At 6 : 30 PM, EDT, Tuesday
September 29, 1964

CAMPAIGN SPEECH AT CINCINNA'rI, OHIO, SEPT. 29, 1964
BY SEN. BARRY GOLDWATER,

REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE

FOR PRESIDENT OF THE U.S.

campaign for the Presidency of

We are in the midst of

the United States, but you would never know it from listening to
my opponent and

his

under the sun

curious

crew.

They

the President's

ob.

talk abou:

There is good reason for this .

ev,erything

The record shows that

ob.

the interim President doesn't understand the President's
record shows that
Lyndon

acquire fortune

is not suitec for

The

Bain
and

.es Johnson
power.

ning

run

twisting arms and banging heads together.
bludgeoning votes.

himself with
Matt

co mpanions

McCloskey

manipulating
craving and

like

a pr ivate.e f
Bobby

a country means

o

r tu ne.

Baker_, Billie

It

ing and

It means

monopoly i n his home

It means getting .g ·a

state so that he maa y build

· job.

the

o nly one thing -- how to

knows
-

To him
- ··

The

It meanss

surrounding

Sol Estes

into numbers and
with computers

grasping for power --

er••
(more)

in. the

White House.

It means

moreand more and more , without

-2-

And what about his curious running mate, Hubert Horatio
Humphrey, this ADA radical of the left?

Why does he want so

badly to be a heartbeat away from the Presidency?
nation into the swampland of collectivism?
into the United Nations?

To drag our

To bring Red China

To take hundreds of billions of dollars

from your pockets to spend on silly socialistic schemes?
Look closely, my fellow Americans, at this curious crew
who would run your country.
unity.

What a curious camp!

My opponent calls them the camp of
Here you find the unity of bosses

bosses of big cities, bosses of big unions, and bosses of big
business.

Here you find the corrupt, the power mad, and the

radicals of the left.
This is the curious crew who promise the people, cajole
the people, deceive the people.
Are these to be entrusted with the great power of the
Presidency?

Are these to be entrusted with the direction of our

foreign policy and with the leadership of this nation among all
nations of the world?
!hfil:_, my fellow Americans, is the President's job.

The

President is the man responsible for the state of our affairs
throughout the world.
And I charge that they are in shambles, from one end
of the world to the other -- and you know it.

I charge that this Administration has declared a moratorium
on government until the election is over
(more)

and you know it.

-3-

charge that this Administration is soft on Communism

I

-- and you know it.
I charge that this Administration has a foreign policy
of drift, de c e ption, a nd defeat.

And you know that, too.

Drift, deception, defeat

these are the watchwords of

my opponent and his curious crew.
They let us drift into the missile crisis in Cuba .

And

then they deceive the American public and the free world about
what is happening.

They label as irresponsible those who

persistently warned that the Soviets were bringing troops and
missiles into Cuba.

They say we have nothing to fear from good

old Nikita.
I

And the cause of peace suffers defeat.
They let us drift into a Berlin crisis.

And then they

deceive the free world and the American public into believing we
have no right or power to keep the East from literally walling
itself off from the West.

They deprive victims of Communism of

the only freedom left to them -- the freedom to leave Communist
enslavament.
And the cause of peace suffers defeat.
The y drift into crises in the Congo, in Laos, in
Malaysia, in Cyprus.

And each time they deceive the American

public and the free world.
and then betrayed.

our friends are labeled as enemies

Our enemies are labeled as friends -- and

then s upported.
And the cause of peace suffers defeat.
(more)

-4They drift into Lyndon Johnson• s War in Vietnam .

then they deceive and deceive and deceive.

They have never stopped

deceiving the American public and the free world.
and grandsons are being killed by communist bullets
bombs.

And

American sons
and Communist

And we have yet to hear a word of truth about why they are

dying.
And the cause of peace suffers a shattering defeat.
Drift, deception, defeat -- these are the watchwords of
Lyndon Baines Johnson and his curious. crew.
In Cyprus and in Laos, in Vietnam and Malaysia, in Yemen
and the Congo -- in all these places and more we hear the echo of
gunfire.
Ninety miles from our shore sits a bearded, ranting, red
dictator.

He sits and runs a firmly entrenched base of Communist

subversion, guarded by Nikita's soldiers and Nikita's missiles.
And they say this is Nikita the good, the friendly, the reasonable.
We are drifting into catastrophe as surely as the sun
sets in the west.

And they say "let us continue."

To help things drift

along, the interim President declares a moratorium on government.
He desperately hopes to keep out of trouble if he just does nothing
e le ction is over.
disasters

He hopes to put off crises and

_ til then, when the votes are in.
, you will ask, does he wait to lift travel

restrictions
: is

State

to Red China, North Vietnam, and North Korea as

Department
_·tment

recommends?
(more)

- --5-

Why does he delay the opening session of the U. N.
General Assembly from September to November?

Does he hope that he

can then safely seat Red China as Hubert Horatio's ADA recommends?
Does

he hope that he can then safely forgive the Soviet Union for

not paying its dues?
Why does he adjourn the Disarmament Conference in Geneva
until February of next year?

Does he hope that he can then safely

disarm this country without safeguards that the soviet Union will
do the same?
Why does he put off facing the question of what to do

about Vietnam?

Does he hope that he can wait until after the

election to confront the American public with the fact of total
(

defeat or total war in Asia?
Can you imagine, my fellow Americans, what it would be
like to have four more years of drift, deception, and defeat?
To have

four more years of a regime soft on Communism?
My opponent has not told you what he plans to do about

the Cold War.

He seems to be afraid to speak.

crew has not been silent.

Far from it.

But his curious

They have said every

wild and crazy thing .imaginable.
They have repeatedly proclaimed that the purpose of
foreign policy under this Administration is "accommodation" with
the soviet Union.

Make no mistake about it:

they mean what they

say.
Look at the first essay in the Liberal Papers, a book
edited and endorsed by Representative James Roosevelt, a spokesman
for Hubert Horatio's ADA.

In that essay, the authors make the

following incredible assertion:
(more)

- -----6-

"But as the Cold War continues, it becomes
increasingly difficult for decent Americans, humane
enough to prefer peace to egocentric national honor,
to be outspokenly and genuinely anti-Communist ."
Think of it!

We are told to put surrender to Communism

ahead of national honor

and everything else .

If you are a

decent American, you are told, you cannot be against Communism.
Is this what they mean by

11

accommodation 11 ?

.Does Lyndon Baines Johnson agree with this view? Does
Hubert Horatio Humphrey agree with his fellow members of the

ADA,

the organization which he helped to found and which he has served
as Vice Chairman?

-- until this campaign

Or do my opponent and his running mate repudiate
11

accommodation

II

to Communism?

Will Lyndon Baines Johnson come before the American
people and tell them he rejects this left-wing radicalism?

If

he says that he rejects left-wing radicalism, will he explain to
the American public and the free world why he wants the most
prominent left-wing radical in this country to be a heartbeat
away from the Presidency?
we must put an end to drift, to deception, and to
defeat.

We must stop, once and for all, being soft on Communism .
We have had four years of drift in Washington, and the

result is Lyndon Johnson's War.
the wind of weakness.

Lyndon Baines Johnson has sowed

He has reaped the whirlwind of war .
(more)

-7-

We have had four years of deception in Washington, and
the result is shattered prestige.

Even the Central Intelligence

Agency shouts that our prestige has dipped below the peril point .
Are you proud of our fight for freedom?
of Panama?

Are you proud

Are you proud of the burned effigy in Greece?

you proud of wheat deals with the destroyers of liberty?

Are
Are you

proud when no country is too small to pull Uncle Sam's whiskers
and get away with it?
Cast out this policy of drift, deception, and defeat
before it is too late.

Cast out this softness on Communism .

Be confident and strong.

Be proud again.

The challenge of the hour is great .

The cause of peace

is too_precious to be entrusted to men who have a wishbone where
they need a backbone.

It will not be served by those who practice

drift, deception, and defeat.
The cause of peace will be served instead by those who
know who the enemy is, and who know what he is.

know that

11

By those who

accommodation" to Communism can only mean collaboration

with Communism.

By those who know

that Communism will give way

to freedom if we stand up to the challenge, and that it will bury
us if we

"

accommodate" to it.
And the cause of peace will be served by those who know

who our friends are and how to build that friendship into citadels
of freedom.

Where are the grand alliances of freedom, so

patiently built in the Eisenhower- Dulles years?
to CENTO, SEATO, ANZUS NATO?
(more)

What has become

--------aThey have vanished in the mists of drift, deception,
and defeat of the last four years .

My fellow citizens, let us meet the greatness of the task,
the lateness of the hour, and the .imperatives· of leadership .

Let

us see, in the distant and yet recognizable future, the outlines of
a world worthy of our dedication, our every effort , our every
sacrifice along the way.
Let us look to the flowering of an Atlantic civilization:
the whole of Europe reunified and freed, trading openly across its
I

borders, communicating openly across the world.
Let us look and thrill to the advance of this Atlantic
civilization, joined by its great ocean highway to the United States.
What a destiny can be ours -- to stand as a great central pillar
linking Europe, the Americas, and the venerable and vital peoples of
the Pacific.
Let us look to the day when America extends its hand in

)

help, in teaching, and in cultivation so that all new nations will
be encouraged to go freedom's way.

Let us sweep away the drift,

deception, and defeat that make these new nations wander down the
dark alleys of tyranny and the dead-end streets of collectivism.
With your help and God's blessing, Bill Miller and I
will lead this nation forward again along the proven path charced
by

the

defeat.

wisdom of our history.

We will end drift, deception, and

We will bring purpose, integrity, and victory to the cause

of peace and freedan everywhere.

- 30 -

NEWS

FROM:

REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE
1625 Eye Street, N.W.
Washington, D . C.
20006

AUTOMATIC RELEASE
At 6:30 P . M. WEDNESDAY
September 30 , 1964

CAMPAIGN SPEECH AT TOLEDO UNIVERSITY FIELD HOUSE, TOLEDO, OHIO,
SEPT. 30, 1964 BY SEN. BARRY GOLDWATER,
REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE FOR PRESIDENT OF THE U.S .

This nation of ours has grown great and strong and prosperous
through its free economy .
Private property , free competition, hard work -- these have
powered the engine of progress.
Our system has preserved. and protected our freedom, our right
to disagree, our creative diversity, our independence from arbitrary
intervention in private affairs.
And it has been a mighty engine of progress.

It has enablea

the people of this country to rise from a small but independent
citizenry scratching out a hard living on the margins of a great
continent, to a multitude spanning the continent and living at a
level that is the envy of the worla.
Progress through freedom has been our heritage.

It must remain

our guide and our goal .
But what does the interim President, Lyndon Baines Johnson ,
have to say about the cause of freedom?

When he launched his

c;:;. cam
paign,

he described the thre e elements of his so- called great

society .

Prosperity, Justice and Peace .

What about Freedom?

He didn't even mention it .

You know that there have been prosperous slaves .
more

than jus ·t to be

well fed .

Americans ask

Of course we are all working for a

society in whi ch a:l may be well fed , clothed, and housed!
Wewant

to be free .
(more)

But we want

------

j

----

---

c.?!)

(2)

We' v e always looked down on the people who became Christians

just for a bowl of rice .

We call them rice Christians .

But what of this Administration's attempt to turn us into Dollar
Democrats !

We reject that too.

This generation of Americans deserves a better label in
history than being called a generation of dollar tag Americans!

And

come November we're going to tear that tag off -- and put on Freedom's !
we have never forgotten freedom.

We will never forget freedom .

We've been talking about it across the length and breadth of this
land .

It's the basic issue of this whole campaign .

Baines Johnson try to forget freedom.

Let Lyndon

Let him try to make you

forget it .
We'll remember it.

And November third, even Lyndon will wish

he'd remembered it.
You have heard me discuss many things in this campaign, all
important .

You have not heard my opponent discuss anything at all.

we are both running for the Presidency of the United States.

We

are both running for the first time .
Yet he will not face the issues -- he will not face you.
Instead. he sends forth his curious crew of camp followers to
speak for him.

Some are socialistic radicals like his running mate,

Hubert Horatio Humphrey .
and big business .

Some are bosses of big cities, big unions,

Some are bureaucratic lackeys .

Some are even

buildings .
We keep hearing that the White House announces something, or
that the Pentagon says such- and- such.

The Pentagon talks so much

that I've suggested it be given a name -- like Peter Pentagon .
If my opponent won ' t say anything himself about the issues,
perhaps he will tell us whether he agrees with the opinions of his
curious crew.
(more)

- - - -- (3)

Let's take Arthur Schlesinger, Jr.,

as an example.

This man

has long been a loyal member of Hubert Horatio's ADA, was for
several years a member of this Administration, and now is on Hubert
Horatio Humphrey's staff.

In 1947 he said:

"There seems no inherent

obstacle to the gradual advance of socialism in the United States
through a series of New Deals.

11

Does my opponent agree with that?

Or does he disagree?

If he agrees, does he share Mr. Schlesinger's obvious satisfaction at the prospect of socialism in America?
Does he endorse these views or does he repudiate them?
The American people have no desire to live under socialism.
They are entitled to know my opponent's opinion of the views of a
man so closely involved in his campaign.
Will my opponent face the real economic issues of the age?
Will he explain why our youth festers in the streets, unable to
find jobs while the economy is drugged into an artificial boom for
the sake of votes?
Will he tell us what he intends to do about the steady drift
of this country into the swampland of centralized collectivism?

Will

he explain why he wants all power in this country to come from the
White House?
we know that government has important things to do in our society.
Under constitutional rules, it must maintain law and order.
protect person and property.

It must

It must enforce private contracts and

encourage freer and more effective markets at home and abroad.

It

must promote monetary stability to eliminate the danger of either
inflation

or deflation.

And, yes, it must stand ready to aid the helpless and support

those

in need.
But

to preserve freedom, government must be both limited and

- dispersed.
It must be as close to the people as possible.
(more)

Only

(4)

in this way can government be kept responsible to the people i t

serves .

Only in this way can government be kept from becoming s o

arbitrary and so strong that it threatens freedom .

Only

in this

way can there be variety, creative diversity , and experimentation
in policies -- healthy competition between units of government.
Increasingly, however, government is becoming master instead
o f servant .

Increasingly, power is gr a vitating to the White House,

away from our towns, counties, cities, and states.

Increasingly ,

government is engulfing our precious resources .
Unfortunately, in the present state of the world, military
expenses are and must remain high.

Of course we must have economy

in defense, but we cannot afford the false economy of weakened
defenses.

If the need arises, we must stand ready to spend even more

than we now do

to maintain our defensive strength and preparedness.

The heavy burden of defense makes it all the more important that
we stop the growth of wasteful non-defense spending.

Over the last

four years, non-defense spending rose twice as much as defense
spending.

Spending for defense, in fact, now accounts for substantially

less than half of the total Federal spending.
This explosive growth in non-defense spending simply has to be
stopped.

The spread of Federal bureaucracy must be arrested -- before

i t canniba:izes us all.
As our economy grows -- and we all know that it has been growing
under both

parties -- the amount of taxes collected by the Federal

government has grown even faster.
We can see the result.
o ff our F ederal a ebt s.
Federal payments
Each year
new

•Not at all •

It has been used to start new

programs which have ended up increasing our debts .
While
the Administration works overtime to dream up

spending
.. scheme
is

The added money hasn't been used to pay

s

to spend and even oversp e nd all the new tax money

pressured to raise the ceiling on the national debt limit.

(more)

(S)

This merry-go-round of fisca1 irresponsibi1ity has to stop!

In particular, we have to find ways to keep more money in your

pockets.

If you work harder, or more skillfully, and earn more money,

you should keep more of it -- not have to turn it over to a growing
bureaucracy.
Fundamentally we must have a complete reform and reconstruction
of our Federal tax structure.

Under a Republican Administration we

will have that reform!
But we need not wait for that total overhaul before we begin
stopping the abuses.
If spending is held in check -- and, believe me, a Republican
Administration will hold it in check -- we can cut taxes and still
balance revenue against spending.

We can not only keep the national

debt from rising -- we can even reduce it.

And Republicans will

reduce it!
I shall propose to Congress an across-the-board reduction of 5%
per year in all income taxes -- both individual and corporate.
follows the fair principle of equal treatment for all.

This

The initial

request would provide for such regular, prudent reductions in taxes
in each of five years.
Each year you would take off the 5% so that by the fifth year
the total reduction would be 25%.
Let me make it clear that this is no hastily-conceived proposal.
It is the product of careful study and deliberation.

It is fully

consistent with the considered views publicly expressed, in recent
speeches, by Arthur F. Burns, Chairman of the Council of Economic
Advisors under President Eisenhower.
This is a safe and sane way to return to your pockets, within
five years, more than 25% of the taxes you would normally have to pay.
It is not the impulsive, massive, politically motivated tax-cut
g immickry that we have seen employed by the present Administration.
(more)

(6)

I

opposed that tax cut and would do so again under the same circum-

stances.

That reckless cut was not intended as a return to responsible

fiscal policy, designed to put a brake on endless growth of spending
by the centralized bureaucracy.
Quite the contrary.

It was designed to create deficit spending

when the economy was already in the midst of good times.

It was

designed to drug the economy into an artificial boom that would carry
at least past Election Day.
Our proposal means instead a return to sound Republican principle.s
of fiscal responsibility.

If fact, it .reinforces those principles.

It will not, as this Administration's reckless slashing surely does,
lead to credit-card spending in good times at the risk of bad times in
the future.

It will not create false prosperities that breed inflation.

It will,instead,· create the base for a stable, flourishing, and expanding economy -- an economy in which you, the individual citizen, can
decide how to use the money you earn, and not some distant bureaucrat.
Another way to give you, the individual citizen, greater control
over the use of your own money is to return to the states functions
that have been taken from them by the Federal bureaucracy.
Over the years, state and local government have become increasingly
dominated by the ever-growing system
There are now over

a

so-called Federal grants-in-aid.

hundred such programs totalling over $10 billion

in annual Federal spending.
state and local governments.
been

of

They cover every major activity of
In this way, those governments have

made subservient to a huge Federal bureaucracy with its center

in the White House.
we must bring government back closer to the people.

And a

Republican Administration will do just that.
States •s , counties, cities, and towns can make their own decisions
on p·
aid

lie services if we change the system of programmatic grants-in-

which

now

k

eeps local officials

under Federal domination.
(mo re)

(7)

Because of existing commitments, we cannot do this overnight .

But we can gradually replace this undesirable and complex system with
a much simpler and more sensible one .
The Federal government, for instance, could return to the states
a share of the income taxes collected from them,. and permit a greater
credit on estate taxes.

Low-income states and cities could be helped

.

further by a system of purely fiscal

)

grantsfor

general purposes .

Such a system of unconditional grants -- in place of the present
programmatic grants -- would give each state needed resources for use
within the state, free of control by the Federal bureaucracy .
Let the state and local governments decide how to provide local
services .

Then the President and Congress can concentrate their

time and effort on their critical responsibilities -- on foreign
relations, national security, and the general welfare .
And there is another benefit from transferring decisions on
domestic services to governors, legislatures, mayors, city councils,
boards of education, and similar local agencies -- where they belong .
Then our top officials can be freed from most of the pressure groups
which now beset them, demanding a multitude of special benefits for
special interests or areas.
It is particularly important that our educational system be
managed at the local level.

I have been saying for years that the

best way the federal government can encourage education is to provide
tax credits for educational expenses.
pay

Our millions of parents have to

property taxes whether or not their children go to public schools .

Let them have a credit on their federal income taxes based on the

share

of local property taxes allocated to public school costs.
Let there also be tax credits, graduated in favor of the low
middle - income families , to help parents meet the ever growing

tu ition

of schools,

colleges, and universities.

And let there be tax

cre dits for donations to educational institutions .
(more,

(8)

Such a system of tax credits to aid education would pose no
threat of federal control.

It would maintain creative diversity

and freedom of education while improving its support.
The general economic program which I have outlined will keep
the Federal government within its proper and legitimate role.

It

will promote the freedom and initiative of the individual , without
making dangerous cuts in national defense or in necessary

domestic

programs.
This is a program for progress through freedom.
With your help and God's blessing, Bill Miller and I will bring
it to pass .

That is our solemn pledge.
--- 30---