Ask the Scholar

{
    "localId": "4526463",
    "label": "Republican Rally, Kankakee, IL, October 28, 1972",
    "core": "doc",
    "dtoType": "document",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/4526463"
}

{
    "id": "4526463",
    "sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/4526463",
    "contentType": "document",
    "title": "Republican Rally, Kankakee, IL, October 28, 1972",
    "description": "This file contains material relating to George McGovern.",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/4526463",
    "collections": [
        "Gerald R. Ford Congressional Papers",
        "Speeches"
    ],
    "subjects": [
        "National security",
        "Presidential campaigns"
    ],
    "iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/ford/grf-0054/642080/4526463.pdf",
    "thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/ford/grf-0054/642080/4526463.pdf",
    "largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/ford/grf-0054/642080/4526463.pdf",
    "imageCount": 1,
    "hasImages": true,
    "source": "import",
    "hasTranscription": false
}

{
    "url": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/4526463",
    "naId": 4526463,
    "coverageEndDate": {
        "logicalDate": "1972-10-31",
        "month": 10,
        "year": 1972
    },
    "coverageStartDate": {
        "logicalDate": "1972-10-01",
        "month": 10,
        "year": 1972
    },
    "levelOfDescription": "fileUnit",
    "recordType": "description",
    "ocrSource": "nara-archive"
}

{
    "seq": 1,
    "pageIndex": 0,
    "type": "document",
    "url": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/ford/grf-0054/642080/4526463.pdf",
    "mediaId": "2f14ef951ba854bf",
    "ocrText": "The original documents are located in Box D34, folder \"Republican Rally, Kankakee, IL,\nOctober 28, 1972\" of the Ford Congressional Papers: Press Secretary and Speech File at\nthe Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library.\nCopyright Notice\nThe copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of\nphotocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. The Council donated to the United\nStates of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections.\nWorks prepared by U.S. Government employees as part of their official duties are in the public\ndomain. The copyrights to materials written by other individuals or organizations are presumed to\nremain with them. If you think any of the information displayed in the PDF is subject to a valid\ncopyright claim, please contact the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library.\nDistribution 20 to 70mg\nMOMice Cakey\nCONGRESSMAN\nNEWS\nGERALD R. FORD\nHOUSE REPUBLICAN LEADER\nRELEASE\n--FOR RELEASE AT 6:30 P.M. SATURDAY--\nOctober 28, 1972\nExcerpts from a Speech by Rep. Gerald R. Ford at a Republican Rally at Kankakee, Ill.\nAs Nov. 7 nears, every American should be asking himself this question: Which\nof the two Presidential candidates is more likely to secure peace with honor for our\ncountry, and which is better qualified to offer new hope to the whole world?\nNowhere is the choice facing America this November more clear--or more\ncrucial--than on the foreign policy stands taken by President Nixon and Sen. McGovern.\nIn the era from World War II to the present, America has been led by six\nPresidents of both parties. And all of these Presidents believed that America had\nto remain strong if the United States was to negotiate effectively for peace and\nthe American people were to remain secure in their freedom.\nThe need for strength is no less today than it was under Roosevelt or Truman\nor Eisenhower or Kennedy or Johnson. As President Nixon has said: \"A strong\nAmerica is not the enemy of peace; it is the guardian of peace.\"\nPresident Nixon has made this sound observation: \"In negotiations between\ngreat powers, you can only get something if you have something to give in return.\"\nIn other words, you can only negotiate successfully if you have something to\nnegotiate with. You cannot hope to negotiate a mutual reduction of arms or of\ntroop strength if you begin by throwing away the arms you have and cutting your\ntroops in half.\nBut listen to Sen. McGovern. In 1969 he said: \"I am convinced that we will\nsome day rue the phase, 'negotiate from strength,' as one of the most damaging and\ndangerous cliches in the American vocabulary.\"\nMcGovern has backed away from nearly every one of the proposals he made during\nthe Presidential primaries, but on defense cuts he has been the very model of\nconsistency.\nHe has spelled out his formula for defense: Don't wait to negotiate; cut the\ndefense budget by $32 billion; strip away our strength--cut the Air Force by a third,\nthe Navy by a quarter, our aircraft carriers from 16 to 6, and our Marines by a third.\nOne has to believe that he means what he says when he asserts that it is\ndangerous to negotiate from strength--because his program would assure that we would\nLIBRARY\nhave no strength to negotiate from.\n(more)\nDigitized from Box D34 of the Ford Congressional Papers: Press Secretary and Speech File at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library\n-2-\nWould the Russians be more or less anxious to sign a second SALT agreement\nif we had a McGovern unilaterally putting his massive defense cuts into effect?\nWould the Chinese be more or less eager to work for peace in the Pacific--if\nMcGovern was already \"coming home\" to Hawaii and Alaska?\nMcGovern's foreign policy calls for a program that flows from the benign\nbut naive assumption that peace can be built on nothing more substantial than good\nintentions.\nNo delusion could more dangerous in the office of the Presidency.\nMcGovern tells us to \"Come home, America\" home from Asia, home from Europe,\nhome from those outposts in which our forces guard the defenses of freedom. No\nwonder our allies quake at the thought of a McGovern Presidency.\nThe world knows what McGovern apparently does not--that peace and freedom\nstill depend on a strong America.\nLet's look at another aspect of the proposed McGovern cuts in America's\ndefenses and what this would mean in the event of an international crisis.\nThe strength he proposes to cut away is conventional, tactical strength. He\nwould bring home the men, the tanks, the guns, the fighter aircraft from Western\nEurope. He would bring home the aircraft carriers that support our allies in the\nMediterranean and give muscle to our commitment to Israel.\nStripped of these conventional forces--left to rely on nuclear power--how\nwould the United States handle a sudden confrontation?\nI submit that the future George McGovern offers the American people is not\none of peace, but of deadly danger.\nMcGovern is an isolationist--and as such he is a dangerous man.\nThere is a long isolationist tradition in this country--the 19th century\nPopulists, the recalcitrant Republicans at the time of Versailles, the pre-World\nWar II appeasement lobby. And what all of these representatives of the isolationist\nstream had in common is that they were all wrong.\nModern America cannot afford to be alone in the world, cannot afford to\nshirk its responsibilities for the peace and freedom of men everywhere, cannot\nallow one error in world affairs to obscure its broader mission.\nYet George McGovern would take us down the isolationist path once again. He\nwould leave the fate of Israel in the hands of the Kremlin. He wants to cut and\nrun in Vietnam, pull back in Europe and weaken our commitments to our other allies\naround the world. In my view, he is supporting a posture of surrender.\nThe true peace candidate in this election is the man who truly understands\nthe world and who has already done more to build a generation of peace than any\nother President in modern times--Richard Nixon.\n# # #\n20 to Mr. Fortonly\nO Office Copy\nCONGRESSMAN\nNEWS\nGERALD R. FORD\nHOUSE REPUBLICAN LEADER\nRELEASE\n--FOR RELEASE AT 6:30 P.M. SATURDAY--\nOctober 28, 1972\nExcerpts from a Speech by Rep. Gerald R. Ford at a Republican Rally at Kankakee, Ill,\nAs Nov. 7 nears, every American should be asking himself this question: Which\nof the two Presidential candidates is more likely to secure peace with honor for our\ncountry, and which is better qualified to offer new hope to the whole world?\nNowhere is the choice facing America this November more clear--or more\ncrucial--than on the foreign policy stands taken by President Nixon and Sen. McGovern.\nIn the era from World War II to the present, America has been led by six\nPresidents of both parties. And all of these Presidents believed that America had\nto remain strong if the United States was to negotiate effectively for peace and\nthe American people were to remain secure in their freedom.\nThe need for strength is no less today than it was under Roosevelt or Truman\nor Eisenhower or Kennedy or Johnson. As President Nixon has said: \"A strong\nAmerica is not the enemy of peace; it is the guardian of peace.\"\nPresident Nixon has made this sound observation: \"In negotiations between\ngreat powers, you can only get something if you have something to give in return.\"\nIn other words, you can only negotiate successfully if you have something to\nnegotiate with. You cannot hope to negotiate a mutual reduction of arms or of\ntroop strength if you begin by throwing away the arms you have and cutting your\ntroops in half.\nBut listen to Sen. McGovern. In 1969 he said: \"I am convinced that we will\nsome day rue the phase, 'negotiate from strength,' as one of the most damaging and\ndangerous cliches in the American vocabulary.\"\nMcGovern has backed away from nearly every one of the proposals he made during\nthe Presidential primaries, but on defense cuts he has been the very model of\nconsistency.\nHe has spelled out his formula for defense: Don't wait to negotiate; cut the\ndefense budget by $32 billion; strip away our strength--cut the Air Force by a third,\nthe Navy by a quarter, our aircraft carriers from 16 to 6, and our Marines by a third.\nOne has to believe that he means what he says when he asserts that it is\ndangerous to negotiate from strength--because his program would assure that we would\nhave no strength to negotiate from.\n(more)\nRARY\n-2-\nWould the Russians be more or less anxious to sign a second SALT agreement\nif we had a McGovern unilaterally putting his massive defense cuts into effect?\nWould the Chinese be more or less eager to work for peace in the Pacific--if\nMcGovern was already \"coming home\" to Hawaii and Alaska?\nMcGovern's foreign policy calls for a program that flows from the benign\nbut naive assumption that peace can be built on nothing more substantial than good\nintentions.\nNo delusion could more dangerous in the office of the Presidency.\nMcGovern tells us to \"Come home, America\" home from Asia, home from Europe,\nhome from those outposts in which our forces guard the defenses of freedom. No\nwonder our allies quake at the thought of a McGovern Presidency.\nThe world knows what McGovern apparently does not--that peace and freedom\nstill depend on a strong America.\nLet's look at another aspect of the proposed McGovern cuts in America's\ndefenses and what this would mean in the event of an international crisis.\nThe strength he proposes to cut away is conventional, tactical strength. He\nwould bring home the men, the tanks, the guns, the fighter aircraft from Western\nEurope. He would bring home the aircraft carriers that support our allies in the\nMediterranean and give muscle to our commitment to Israel.\nStripped of these conventional forces--left to rely on nuclear power--how\nwould the United States handle a sudden confrontation?\nI submit that the future George McGovern offers the American people is not\none of peace, but of deadly danger.\nMcGovern is an isolationist-- and as such he is a dangerous man.\nThere is a long isolationist tradition in this country--the 19th century\nPopulists, the recalcitrant Republicans at the time of Versailles, the pre-World\nWar II appeasement lobby. And what all of these representatives of the isolationist\nstream had in common is that they were all wrong.\nModern America cannot afford to be alone in the world, cannot afford to\nshirk its responsibilities for the peace and freedom of men everywhere, cannot\nallow one error in world affairs to obscure its broader mission.\nYet George McGovern would take us down the isolationist path once again. He\nwould leave the fate of Israel in the hands of the Kremlin. He wants to cut and\nrun in Vietnam, pull back in Europe and weaken our commitments to our other allies\naround the world. In my view, he is supporting a posture of surrender.\nThe true peace candidate in this election is the man who truly understands\nthe world and who has already done more to build a generation of peace than any\nother President in modern Richard Nixon.\n# # #"
}