Text 3469, 411 rader
Skriven 2006-10-20 23:31:04 av Whitehouse Press (1:3634/12.0)
Ärende: Press Release (0610201) for Fri, 2006 Oct 20
====================================================

===========================================================================
Remarks by the President at a National Senatorial Committee Reception
===========================================================================

For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
October 20, 2006

Remarks by the President at a National Senatorial Committee Reception
The Mayflower Hotel
Washington, D.C.



11:53 A.M. EDT

THE PRESIDENT: Thanks for coming. Please be seated. (Applause.) I
appreciate you being here. On the way down, Mr. McConnell said, keep it
short, they haven't had their food yet. (Laughter.)

But I want to thank you all for coming. As you well know, we're heading
down the stretch here in this important political season. I want to thank
you for helping our Senate candidates. It means a lot. I don't know about
you, but I am absolutely confident that Mitch McConnell will be the leader
of the United States Senate in 2007. (Applause.)

I appreciate Mitch's leadership, and I appreciate the leadership of
Elizabeth Dole, as well. These are two of the finest United States Senators
we have.

Laura sends her best. She is a patient woman. (Laughter.) She is doing just
fine. I'm real proud of her. She is a fabulous First Lady. (Applause.)

Oh, there's going to be a lot of noise here at the end of the campaign.
There always is. And sometimes it's all meant to obscure the main issues.
Sometimes folks don't really want to talk about the core issues that will
affect the future of this country. I think there are two big issues that we
need to stay focused on and I know our candidates are talking about, and
they're issues in which there are big differences of opinion. And the first
issue is taxes.

There is a difference of opinion between what we ought to be doing with
your money, see. There are people in the Democrat Party who think they can
spend your money far better than you can. And we believe that you're plenty
capable of spending your own money. As a matter of fact, we believe that
when you have more of your own money in your pocket to save, invest, or
spend, all of us benefit; that the economy grows; that hope expands; that
the entrepreneurial spirit is invigorated.

And so, in times of economic difficulty, I worked with members of the
United States Senate and the United States House to pass the largest tax
relief since Ronald Reagan was President of the United States. (Applause.)
We didn't think the tax code ought to penalize marriage, so we reduced the
marriage penalty. We cut taxes for small businesses. There's a reason why
we cut taxes for small businesses -- because we understand that 70 percent
of new jobs in America are created by small business owners. (Applause.)

We cut the taxes on capital gains and dividends, because we wanted to
encourage investment. We understand that when people invest it means that
someone is more likely to be able to find a job. We cut the taxes on -- we
doubled the child tax credit. In other words, we cut the taxes on families
with children. We put the death tax on the road to extinction. We don't
think it's fair to tax you twice, once while you're living and once after
you're dead. (Applause.) As a matter of fact, we cut taxes on everybody who
pays taxes. (Laughter.) We don't believe in this selective tax cutting. We
said, if you're going to pay income taxes you ought to get relief.

And we had a spirited debate about whether or not the tax cuts made sense.
A lot of the Democrats in the United States Senate said, these tax cuts are
going to make the economy worse. They went around the United States saying
tax cuts don't make any sense. But they did make sense.

We've created 6.6 million new jobs since August of 2003. This week a new
report showed that real wages grew 2.2 percent over the past 12 months.
That's faster than the average for the 1990s. Because of our pro-growth
economic policies, this economy is strong. People are working. The
entrepreneurial spirit is up. People are buying homes. Our plan worked. And
our candidates have something to run on come this November. (Applause.)

There's a difference of opinion here in Washington, and I'm going to
continue reminding people of the clear difference of opinion in this
campaign. Let me tell you what the recent -- the top leader, the Democrat
leader in the House of Representatives said recently. This is a person who
aspires to be the speaker of the House. She said, "We love tax cuts." She
actually said that. Given her record, she must be a secret admirer.
(Laughter and applause.) Over the past five years, she and her Democrat
colleagues voted against every major tax cut that we passed. Time and time
again when she had her opportunity to show her love for tax cuts, she voted
no. If this is the Democrats' idea of love, I wouldn't want to see what
hate looks like. (Laughter.)

Now they're trotting out their old lines. I'm sure Elizabeth and Mitch will
tell you what they're hearing out there. They're saying, listen, we're just
going to tax the rich. It is the same old, tired excuse for raising taxes.
It sounds good, but that's not what they believe. Look at the record. In
1992, when they took over the White House, and they campaigned on middle
class tax cuts, when they got the capacity to deliver on their promises,
they passed one of the largest tax increases in American history.

Raising taxes is what the Democrats want to do, make no mistake about it.
If they take over the Senate, they will run up your taxes. Raising your
taxes would hurt our economy. Raising our taxes would diminish the
entrepreneurial spirit. Raising taxes would be bad for small business
owners. Raising taxes is a Democrat idea of growing the economy, and it
won't work. The best way to keep this economy strong is to make the tax
cuts we passed permanent. (Applause.)

The other issue in this campaign is which party, which group of leaders can
keep America safe. We are at war, and it's a tough war, but it's a war that
is necessary to protect you. Our most important job, the solemn
responsibility of those of us who are honored to serve you in Washington,
D.C. is to do everything in our power to protect the American people from
further attack. (Applause.)

We face a cold-blooded enemy. You can't negotiate with these people. You
cannot hope for the best, because they are ideologues bound by the desire
to inflict damage on nations which love freedom. They will murder the
innocent. They have no conscience. And they murder to achieve an objective,
and that's what's important for our fellow citizens to understand. It may
sound far-fetched to some Americans out there, but this group of ideologues
wants to establish a caliphate, a governing body, a -- they want to spread
their ideology of hate from Indonesia to Spain. That's what they have so
declared. And they recognize in order to do that they must inflict serious
damage on America to the point where we're willing to retreat from the
Middle East so they can topple moderate governments.

Imagine a world in which radical extremists not only topple moderate
governments so they can have territory from which to plan, plot, and attack
America and our allies, but they have the capacity to control oil
resources, which they would be more than willing to use in order to
blackmail America and our allies into further retreat. You can imagine a
circumstance in which these radicals say, we'll run up the price of oil by
denying oil on the markets unless you abandon your allies such as Israel,
or unless you further withdraw from the world. And compound that with a
nuclear Iran, and the world 20 or 30 years from now is going to say, what
happened to them in 2006? How come they couldn't see the threat? What
blinded these people in order that they did not do their job?

One of the key issues in this election is who best sees the future and who
best has the plan to deal with it? I firmly see the threats we face, and
the best way for America to protect ourselves is to go on the offense and
to stay on the offense. (Applause.) Thank you all.

However, going on the offense is not going to be enough to protect you.
It's a part of a comprehensive strategy. You know, we've got to be right a
hundred percent of the time in protecting this homeland from those who
still want to attack, and the enemy has got to be right one time. And,
therefore, I felt it was vital that our professionals who are in charge of
protecting you have all the tools necessary to do so. And so, right after
September the 11th, we worked with Congress, in some cases -- and in some
cases, we felt like we didn't need to -- to put tools in the hands of
professionals.

One such tool was to tear down a wall that prevented law enforcement from
talking to intelligence. I know it's hard to believe, but that's the
reality of what had happened in our country; that's what grew up to be the
case. How can you protect our country, when you've got people gathering
intelligence and they can't tell the law enforcement who are in charge of
protecting you what they know?

And so after September the 11th, I went to the United States Congress and
said, let's pass what we call the Patriot Act. It was a chance to make sure
that we gave our folks on the front lines of protecting you all the tools
necessary to do so. Right after September the 11th, both the House and the
Senate overwhelmingly passed the bill, but the bill needed to be
reauthorized some years later. And when it came up for reauthorization,
Democrat members of the United States Senate tried to kill the bill --
they, what we call here in Washington, filibustered. They didn't want to
give that tool necessary to those who protect you.

There's just a difference of opinion. We believe we're at war and we should
give all the folks protecting you the tools necessary to do so. Evidently,
Democrats don't. As a matter of fact, the Democrat leader, the person who
aspires to be the Majority Leader in the United States Senate, when asked
about his filibuster, he said -- he proudly proclaimed he killed the bill.
And a reporter gave him a chance to recant -- he said, no, I'm proud of
that.

I don't think that's the kind of attitude we can afford, if the biggest job
we have in Washington, D.C., is to protect you. Fortunately, cooler heads
prevailed, and I was able to sign the reauthorization of the Patriot Act,
thanks to people like Mitch McConnell and Elizabeth Dole. (Applause.)

I felt it was important that our professionals at the Central Intelligence
Agency questioned people we picked up on the battlefield, in order to find
out what they know, see. If you're at war, you need to make sure that you
get as much information as possible in order to protect you. It's a
different kind of war. We can't measure the size of an infantry against
these people; we don't go out and count the number of airplanes they have.
This is a war that requires precise intelligence, good information, if the
task is to protect you before an attack comes.

And so, yes, sir, I sent up a program that gave our CIA professionals the
opportunity to question people, like Khalid Sheikh Muhammed, the person our
intelligence officials think is responsible for the killings on September
the 11th -- the mastermind. You could imagine my thought processes -- they
tell me they captured Khalid Sheikh Muhammed; my first question was, what
does he know; does he know anything else that we need to know?

And so as a result of a Supreme Court ruling, I took this bill to the
United States Senate. The Court said work with the Senate to set up a
military tribunal. I felt it was important for us to give these killers the
justice that they had denied others. But as a result of that bill, we also
worked with the Senate to put legislation in place that would make it clear
to our professionals that they could interrogate.

I view this as a clarifying moment for the country, a chance for
Republicans, Democrats and independents to learn firsthand the differences
of opinion we have in Washington, D.C., because 70 percent of the people in
the United States Senate who call themselves Democrat voted against giving
our professionals the tools necessary to question people so we can prevent
attacks. These are fine people, they're patriotic people, but they're
wrong. They don't understand the stakes in the war on terror. In order to
protect America, we must stay on the offense against the enemy and give our
professionals the tools necessary to protect you. (Applause.)

It is interesting what's happened to the Democrat Party. I'm reading a lot
of history these days, and I read about Franklin Roosevelt, who was strong
in his confrontation of Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan. His strength of
character, his vision helped set the course for victory in World War II --
strong wartime leader. It was a Democrat, President Harry Truman who
confronted the rise of Soviet communism, and he set the course for victory
in the Cold War. John F. Kennedy declared America's commitment to, in his
words, "pay any price and bear any burden" in the defense of freedom. These
Presidents understood the challenges of their time and were willing to
confront those challenges with strong leadership. And at the same time,
they had great faith in the power of liberty and freedom.

And then something began to change. In 1972, the Democrats nominated a
presidential candidate who declared, "I don't like communism, but I don't
think we have any great obligation to save the world from it." It was a --
it began a slow shift of philosophy in the Democrat Party. A few years
later, at the height of the Cold War, a Democrat President told the country
that America had gotten over "inordinate fear of communism." In the
mid-1980s, a senator from Massachusetts, whom Democrats would later choose
as their presidential nominee, declared that Americans should "abandon the
kind of thinking that suggests we can gain a meaningful advantage over the
Soviet Union in the nuclear arms race."

In other words, this is a different attitude. The philosophy of that party
began to shift. Fortunately, in the 1980s, America had a Republican
President who saw things differently. Ronald Reagan declared, "My theory of
the Cold War is that we win and they lose." (Applause.)

By this time the Democrat Party did not share his optimism, or his strategy
for victory. See, they'd gotten to the point where they didn't think that
we could win. Many of their leaders fought the Reagan defense buildup, they
fought his strategic defense initiative, they opposed the liberation of
Grenada. They didn't like America's support for freedom fighters resisting
Soviet puppet regimes. They heaped scorn on him. They mocked him when he
called the Soviet Union an "evil empire." Despite all the opposition that
the President faced from the Democrats, he didn't waver. He stood for what
he believed. And history will remember Ronald Reagan as the man who brought
down the Soviet Union and won the Cold War. (Applause.)

And now we're involved in what I have called the great ideological struggle
of the 21st century. It's a struggle between the forces of liberty and the
forces of a tyrannical vision that does not believe in freedom. It's a
struggle between moderates who want to live in peace in the Middle East and
extremists and radicals who will use murder to achieve their objective.

This is going to be a long struggle, but in order to prevail, it requires
perseverance and determination, and a strong belief in the power of liberty
to conquer the ideology of hate. The Democrat Party, that has evolved from
one that was confident in its capacity to help deal with the problems of
the world to one that is doubting, today still has an approach of doubt and
defeat. They believe that the war in Iraq is a diversion from the war on
terror. I believe the war in Iraq is a central part in defeating the
terrorists, in order that we protect ourselves. (Applause.)

If you don't believe me, and if the citizens of our country don't believe
me, then they ought to at least listen to Osama bin Laden -- (laughter) --
and the number two man in al Qaeda, Mr. Zawahiri, both of whom have made it
perfectly clear that Iraq is a central part of their strategy to establish
their caliphate. They believe America is weak, and it's just a matter of
time before we will lose our nerve and abandon that young democracy in the
heart of the Middle East. That's what they firmly believe, and they have
said so, and stated it clearly.

The same Democrats that doubt and don't believe this is a part of the war
on terror also argue that we should pull out our troops before the job is
done. The person I ran against for President said there ought to be a date
certain for withdrawal. That means it doesn't matter what's happening on
the ground, it just means, get out. You've had a leader in the House say,
well, the best way to deal with this is to put our troops on an island some
5,000 miles away from Iraq. There's all kinds of difference of opinions,
but none of them are, let's do the hard work necessary to secure America.

We have a difference of opinion. And that's why I have said that the
Democrat Party, the party that -- where some leaders have said we shouldn't
spend another dime on Iraq, others have said get out now; others said get
out in a couple of months -- that's why they are the party of cut and run.
(Applause.)

It's a difference of opinion, but it's a fundamental issue in this
campaign. The voters out there need to ask the question, which political
party will support the brave men and women who wear our uniform when they
do their job of protecting America? Which political party is willing to
give our professionals the tools necessary to protect the American people?
Which political party has a strategy for victory in this war on terror?

Listen, I fully understand it's a tough fight in Iraq. I know it, you know
it, and our troops know it. Last week -- or earlier this week, I spoke with
the Prime Minister of Iraq, Prime Minister Maliki, and we discussed the
violence in his country. I told him I was -- I was amazed at how tough the
Iraqis are when it comes to violence. Think about that. They haven't
abandoned their hopes for a government of, by, and for the people; 12
million people voted, they still long to live in a free society. Yet
they're putting up with unspeakable violence.

There's a reason why the violence is increasing. One reason is that our
forces, coalition and Iraqi forces are focused on operations to bring
security in Baghdad. In other words, we're on the move. We're confronting
those who would like to sow sectarian violence. We're confronting the
criminals who are taking advantage of the situation. We're confronting the
militias who are harming innocent people. We're operating in some of the
city's most violent neighborhoods to disrupt and bring to justice al Qaeda
and IED makers and death squad leaders. We're engaging the enemies, and
they're putting up a tough fight.

Another reason why is the terrorists are trying to influence public opinion
around the world and right here in the United States. They carry video
cameras, film their atrocities, email images and video clips to Middle
Eastern cable networks like Al-Jazeera, and opinion leaders throughout the
West. They operate web sites where they say their goal is to, "carry out a
media war that is parallel to the military war."

Our goal in Iraq is clear and it's unchanging: a country that can sustain
itself, a country that can govern itself, a country that can defend itself,
and a country which will be an ally in the war against these extremists.
Our strategy is threefold: to help rebuild that country, to help the
political process move forward, and to help the Iraqis stand up security
forces that are capable of defeating the enemy themselves. (Applause.)

Our tactics are constantly changing. I talk to our generals who are in
charge of these operations, and my message to them is: Whatever you need
we'll give you; and whatever tactics you think work on the ground, you put
in place. Our goal hasn't changed, but the tactics are constantly adjusting
to an enemy which is brutal and violent.

My message to the United States of America is: Victory in Iraq is vital for
the security of a generation of Americans who are coming up. And so we will
stay in Iraq, we will fight in Iraq and we will win in Iraq. (Applause.)

Thank you. Sit down, now. Thank you. I'm not through yet. (Laughter.) I'm
almost through. (Laughter.) The waiter is signaling to me, you know, giving
me one of these things. (Laughter.)

I want to tell you one other thing we believe in, and I believe it's a
difference between the philosophies of our parties -- is that I believe in
the power of liberty to transform regions and countries, and yield the
peace we want. That's what I believe. I believe this is an ideological
struggle, and the way you defeat an ideology of hate is with an ideology of
hope. I believe in the universality of freedom. I believe there's an
Almighty, and I believe a great gift of that Almighty to every man, woman
and child on the Earth is freedom. (Applause.)

I believe people -- I believe America should never condemn anybody to a
society that does not embrace freedom. I believe in freedom so much that I
wasn't surprised when 12 million people defied car bombers and said, I want
to be free. And I believe free societies yield the peace we want.

A story that I share all the time with people is the story about my
relationship with the Prime Minister of Japan -- former Prime Minister now,
Prime Minister Koizumi. You might remember, the Prime Minister and I went
down to Elvis' place -- (laughter) -- in Memphis, Tennessee. I went down
there because I'd never been. (Laughter.) He went down there -- and asked
me to take him down there because he liked Elvis. (Laughter.)

But I wanted to tell a story to the American people. You see, my dad fought
the Japanese. They were the sworn enemy of the United States. And many of
your relatives did the same thing. They attacked us; we responded with the
full force and might of the United States. Kids signed up, many didn't come
home. They volunteered to fight for our freedom, just like the kids are
doing today, volunteering to fight for our freedom.

One of them was an 18-year-old Navy fighter pilot. I find it really
interesting that his son was on Air Force One with the Prime Minister of
the former enemy, talking about the peace. See, going down to Memphis from
Washington, we didn't spend a lot of time analyzing Elvis' songs.
(Laughter.) We talked about North Korea, and how Japan and the United
States could work together to convince the leader of North Korea to give up
his nuclear weapons ambitions. We talked about the fact that Japan had a
thousand troops in Iraq.

See, Prime Minister Koizumi knows what I know, that when you find a young
democracy that's battling against extremists, it's in our interests to help
that young democracy succeed. It's in the interests of not only this
generation, who has got the charge of protecting ourselves from terrorists,
but from future generations, to help democracies flourish. He understands
what I know, that the reason we're talking about the peace is because
something happened between World War II, when Japan was the sworn enemy of
the United States, and 2006, when they're flying from Washington to Memphis
on Air Force One. And what happened was Japan adopted a Japanese-style
democracy.

The lesson is, liberty has the capacity to change an enemy into an ally.
And some day American Presidents will be sitting down with duly elected
leaders from the Middle East, talking about keeping the peace, and a
generation of Americans will be better off for it.

Thank you for your help. God bless. (Applause.)

END 12:27 P.M. EDT

===========================================================================
Return to this article at:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/10/20061020-1.html

 * Origin: (1:3634/12)