Of course, at an opportunity like this, with
a great crowd with your time limited, you having to wait, it presents a
great problem to the speaker, the candidate for the Presidency of the United
States, because there are so many things you are interested in, so many
things you would like to know my views on. So, I would like to, as quickly
as I can, let you know what I think you ought to consider as you vote this
November, the standards you should apply in determining which of the two
candidates should be elected President.
I would like you to know where I stand on
the issues of greatest interest to you and to the American people, and
then at the conclusion I'm going to leave to your judgment the decision
that you should make.
First, what should be the standard you apply
in electing a President of the United States?
I want to preface what I say at this point
by saying I am proud to be on the platform here with our Republican candidates
for the Congress and our other Republican candidates in the State of Tennessee.
We have a fine group of candidates, and I am proud to pay my tribute to
Howard Baker, to Carroll Reece and the others who are here with me. I support
them all. I recommend them to you. I do not, however, stand before this
great audience and say to you that as far as my candidacy is concerned
that, if you're a Republican, you should vote for me because I'm a Republican.
My opponent in a speech a few days ago said
that the test that people should apply should be the party. I want to make
it clear what test I believe should be applied. I think the tradition of
America has been that when we elect a President of the United States we
don't think of the party first; we think of the country first - and I say
that what is best for America is what you want.
I say that for another reason. I say it knowing
that in this great audience, as was the case when I was in Memphis a few
days ago, where the rain came down, and the audience still stayed - I want
to say that, recognizing that in this audience are many Democrats as well
as Republicans, if you were to apply the test of party certainly you could
not, in good conscience, support the platform, the program, of the candidate
your party selected this time, and I want to tell you why. If you will
read that platform, if you will see what it stands for, if you will read
the speeches of the man who has been nominated and his running mate, I
can say here standing on ground which has been hallowed by Andrew Jackson
that he would turn over in his grave if he thought that this party of Schlesinger,
of Bowles, and Galbraith was the Democratic Party of which he was proud
to be a member.
And to all of the Democrats here who say:
"Mr. Nixon, how can I desert my party? What am I going to say about party
loyalty if we vote again as we did in 1952 and 1956 for the candidate of
your party?" My answer is that is no problem for you because it was solved
by the national leadership of the Democratic Party when in Los Angeles
they deserted the great principles of Jackson, Jefferson, and Wilson and
adopted principles so that, by deserting you, you now can come to us because
we stand for the principles which many Democrats in this country still
adhere to, we believe.
Now, naturally, you would all expect me to
say that because we want the votes of Republicans and we want the votes
of independents and we want the votes of Democrats, but I want to tell
you I think it can be proved and I want to prove it by discussing the issues
and give you our position and theirs and then say for you to decide which
represents the point of view that you have with regard to the leadership
America needs.
First of all, I stand and I am proud to stand
for programs that would produce the greatest progress this Nation has ever
had for programs that will build schools, for programs that will provide
medical care for our older people, for programs that will provide for the
exploration of our great resources in this country, for further development
of the TVA and of our great projects in the West, which is essential if
we're going to maintain the lead which we presently have economically over
the man in the Kremlin, which Mr. Stahlman so eloquently referred to a
few moments ago.
In order to do all these things, we need to
move forward in America; and I am proud that our program is one that will
move America forward, that will provide progress for all of our people,
better jobs, better housing better health, better schools.
And now, course, what must come into your
minds is this: Don't our opponents stand for that? What is significant
about being for these things?
The answer is, of course, that all Americans,
Democrats and Republicans, want progress for our country, but here is where
the difference comes in: In the first place, we have programs that will
work and they have programs that won't - and the record proves it.
My opponent, in speech after speech, has equated
himself with Mr. Truman and me with his opponent in the campaign of 1948.
Well, I say if he wants to be equated with Harry Truman let him take Harry
Truman's record with him, because the American people don't want any part
of Harry Truman.
And I'll tell you what that record is.
Do you want better schools? We built more
schools than they did in 20 years.
Do you want better hospitals and more? More
hospitals built in the Eisenhower administration than were built in the
Truman administration.
Do you want better jobs? You find a greater
increase in real wages in this administration than in the Truman administration.
We have all this, and we have, in addition
to that, held down the cost of living, and in the Truman administration
the greatest inflation that we've ever seen.
And so I say that when we find that our opponent
here stands for the principles and the policies that America left behind
in 1953 - I say the American people are not going to go hack to that. They
want to build on and go forward with us into the future which we can present
to the American people.
But let me tell you the philosophical difference,
and I think it is just as well to describe that difference in terms that
I think may be of great interest to all of you.
I just noted as I came in here that Mr. Kennedy,
speaking from this same place on September 21, made this statement: "Today
I stand on ground hallowed by a first citizen of Nashville, of Tennessee,
and of America, Andrew Jackson. I come here as the standard bearer of the
party which he helped to build."
Here is what Andrew Jackson said in his second
inaugural: "My countrymen will ever find me ready to exercise my constitutional
powers in arresting measures which may directly or indirectly encroach
upon the rights of the States or which may tend to consolidate all political
power in the Central Government."
And I say to you - I say to you - I am proud
today to stand with Andrew Jackson and against Jack Kennedy who is against
Andrew Jackson on that great principle, because in every program I have
described what is their answer? They say turn it over to the Federal Government.
They say weaken the States. They say weaken the responsibility for individuals.
And what do you say? We say the way to progress
in this country is not simply by turning over these programs to the Federal
Government, but by the Federal Government doing what it needs to and always
supplementing what individuals or the States cannot do, as for example,
in a great project like TVA, but where the individual can do it he should
be allowed to do it. Where the State can do it it should be allowed to
do it.
Let me put it another way: The way to progress
in this country, my friends, is not through weakening the States, but strengthening
the States. The way to progress in this country is not through weakening
the rights and responsibilities of individuals, but by strengthening the
opportunities for a hundred and eighty million free Americans. That's the
difference in our policies and in our programs.
Now, I must say there's another difference
I should point out. I know there are those who will say, "Well, now, just
a minute, Mr. Nixon. How can you say your programs are going to produce
more progress than his when his cost more than yours do?"
And they do. They cost about $10 billion more
when you cost them out; but let me tell you this: Who's going to pay for
those programs?
Remember, when anybody makes promises like
this, when he makes these promises, it isn't Jack's money he's going to
spend, but your money - and that's the answer to that.
And I say to you that because we stand for
progress that will spend money that is necessary, of your money, but that
will save all that we can and leave it for you to spend, that the fact
that our programs will produce more progress at less money, that this is
something that recommends your support of those programs rather than opposing
them.
May I go on to another issue, an issue in
which there will be disagreement in this audience with both of the party
platforms. I refer to the issue of civil rights, and here again I want
to say I have spoken on this issue in every State I have visited where
it was a problem, as well as in the Northern States. I want to tell you
why I have. I think it's the responsibility first of a candidate to talk
the same North, East, West, and South, and be the same man throughout the
country - and I intend to do that.
In the second place, I do not talk here trying
to preach to the people of the South. I went to school there, and I know
that this is not just a southern problem - it's a western problem - and
we've all got to work together to solve it so that all Americans can have
equality of opportunity, and I congratulate the citizens of this State,
the men of good will, for the progress you have made in this field.
And may I just say one other thing: We had
reference to Mr. Khrushchev a moment ago. This is a difficult and complex
problem, but, my friends, let us work together as men and women of good
will to solve it for many reasons, but if you need a very good one, let
me give it to you. Let's get a solution so that we cannot have a man like
Mr. Khrushchev, who has enslaved millions, and I have seen them, who has
slaughtered thousands; and I have seen Hungarians come across the line,
getting away from the tyranny of Khrushchev in Budapest - this enslaver
of millions and slaughterer of thousands must not be able to come into
the United States and point the finger at us and say, "You're the ones
who are denying the rights of people."
That's why we must make progress - and I am
sure we will go forward together - on this and other issues, as I have
indicated.
And now, if I could turn to the most important
issue of all, what could be more important than a good job, better schools,
housing? Being around to enjoy them.
And so, the most important test to which you
must put me and my opponent is: Which of the two of us is better qualified
by experience, judgment, and background, to keep the peace, keep it without
surrender, and extend freedom throughout the world?
This is the great test of this election campaign.
Now, I submit to you today - I submit to you
- these matters to consider: First, our record. Now, there has been a lot
of criticism of the President's record and this administration's record
in the field of foreign policy; but, my friends, all the criticism in the
world cannot take away or obscure the fact, and that is: We ended one war;
we have kept this Nation out of other wars, and we do have peace without
surrender today - and we want to keep it.
But I know some of my friends may say, "Now,
Mr. Nixon, though, what about this criticism that we hear that the United
States has lost the initiative, that our prestige is at an alltime low,
as Senator Kennedy and others have suggested? What about this?"
I know some of you may have read he statement
he made a couple of days ago to the effect, he said, "I'm tired of reading
in the paper what Mr. Khrushchev is doing. I'm tired of reading in the
paper what Mr. Castro is doing. I want to be able to read in the paper
what the President of the United States is doing." This is what Senator
Kennedy was quoted to have said.
Well, just let me say this, my friends: If
he would stop talking a little while and start reading, he'd find out what
President Eisenhower has been doing. He may not be doing some of
the things that we would want him to do. He has not. apologized or expressed
regrets to Mr. Khrushchev for attempting to defend the security of the
United States.
No, he isn't making a fool of himself in the
United Nations either, as Mr. Khrushchev is. And also he isn't trying to
muscle into the Congo and take it over unilaterally as Mr. Khrushchev is.
But he has been standing for the right. He
has been standing for peace, for real disarmament, for helping our friends
abroad. All these things he has been standing for.
And, my friends, I say that on this record
we can develop a program which will continue to keep the peace, but which,
beyond that, will extend freedom. It means keeping America militarily strong.
It means keeping this Nation economically strong. It means keeping our
diplomacy firm, but without being belligerent, and this is certainly something
that is absolutely essential. In this case, I can only say that Cabot Lodge
and I at least have had the experience of sitting down and talking with
Mr. Khrushchev. They can call it debating, or whatever they want, but we've
done a pretty good job talking with him, I think, and I think we'll do
a pretty good job if you will give us the opportunity in the future.
And, above all, I pledge to you that if you
give us the opportunity to lead this country, we will keep before the world
our major advantage and what America really stands for, and that is not
our military strength, which is tremendously important, or our economic
strength, but the strength of the things in which we believe.
I have reason to feel this very deeply, because
I have seen in countries abroad what it means when people are denied freedom.
I have seen in countries abroad what it means when people do not have the
opportunity to have independence for their nations, and I say to you that
we in this country must remember that it is the strength of our ideals
that will count in this struggle, and this must come from you as well as
from the leaders, because our faith in God, our belief in the dignity of
all men, our belief that the rights of men come not, from men, but from
God, and, therefore, cannot be taken away from men - these things - where
do they come from? Not just from a President. They come from the
people, and they are developed in the homes, in the schools, in the churches
of America.
And so I say to you: Strengthen the idealism
of America. Make our young people proud of our country. Make patriotism
fashionable in this country, as it should be.
And I say to you that as you strengthen the
ideals of America at home, those of us who represent America abroad will
be able to lead this country, to lead it to peace without surrender, but,
more than that, we will be able to continue to be the hope of all the world
for men who want to be free.
That, my friends, is the case as I want to
present it today; and I say to you: If you believe that Cabot Lodge and
I can provide the leadership that America needs in this critical period,
remember, this is probably the most important decision or election you
are going to participate in. Go out and make it important to you. Your
jobs, the prices of the things you buy, but, most of all, your survival
depends upon the leadership we get.
If you believe ours is the leadership we need,
let the people of Tennessee, Republican and Democrat and Independent, do
as they did in 1952 and 1956 - support our candidacy. Why? Because you
believe that we are the men who can do the job for America, and that is
what we pledge to you.
Thank you.