[Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents Volume 40, Number 44 (Monday, November 1, 2004)]
[Pages 2579-2585]
[Online from the Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]
<R04>
Remarks in Council Bluffs, Iowa
October 25, 2004
The President. Thank you all for coming. Thank you all. Thanks for
coming. I appreciate you being here. Laura and I are so honored so many
came out to say hello. You're lifting our spirits.
I want to thank all the Iowans who are here. Thank you for coming. I
want to thank those of you from the great State of Nebraska who took
the--[applause]. We are here to not only ask for the vote in this part
of the world; we're here to ask for your help. We're here to say that we
need your help coming down the stretch. We need you to make the phone
calls, find your friends and neighbors and encourage them to go to the
polls. With your help, we will carry Iowa and win a great victory on
November the 2d.
So when I asked Laura to marry me, she was a public school
librarian, and she said--and some of you will probably be able to relate
to this--she said, ``Fine, I will marry you, but make me a promise.'' I
said, ``What is it?'' She said, ``Promise me I'll never have to give a
political speech.''[Laughter] I said, ``You've got a deal.''
Fortunately, she didn't hold me to that promise. She's giving a lot of
speeches, and when she speaks the American people see a warm, strong,
great First Lady.
Audience members. Laura! Laura! Laura!
The President. I'm proud of my runningmate, Dick Cheney. Now, look,
I fully admit he does not have the waviest hair in this race. [Laughter]
But I want to assure you, I didn't pick him because of his hairdo.
[Laughter] I picked him because of his experience. I picked him because
of his judgment.
We had breakfast with Rudy at our ranch in Crawford. We've just come
from Greeley, Colorado. We're headed to Davenport, Iowa. I tell you,
it's a great joy to travel with Rudy Giuliani. I'm proud to have his
support, and I'm honored to call him friend. And by the way, his wife,
Judith, is traveling with us too.
So the last time I saw Senator Grassley, I turned to Laura and said,
``Laura, you know the South Lawn has got a lot of grass on it, and we're
looking for somebody to come and mow it.'' [Laughter] Let me tell you
something about your Senator. When it came time to cut the taxes on the
working people of this country, Senator Grassley led the charge in the
United States Senate. When it came time to strengthen Medicare to make
sure our seniors got prescription drug coverage and rural hospitals were
treated fairly, Senator Grassley led the United States Senate. I know
the people of Iowa are proud to call him Senator. I'm proud to call him
Mr. Chairman.
[[Page 2580]]
I want to thank Congressman Steve King from Iowa for joining us
today. Congressman, you're doing a fine job. I appreciate you being
here.
I want to thank all the grassroots activists who are here. I want to
thank those of you who are putting up the signs. I want to thank those
of you who are making the phone calls. I want to thank you for what
you're going to do, which is turn out a big vote on November the 2d.
I want to thank my friend Michael W. Smith for singing for you this
evening.
I want to thank all of you who are here who wear our Nation's
uniform. Thank you for your service. I want to thank the veterans who
are here for having set such a great example for our military. And I
want to thank our military families for the sacrifices you have made.
In the last week of this campaign, I will continue to talk about my
vision for a more hopeful America. I'm committed to low taxes and
spending discipline. We'll talk about how to make sure the
entrepreneurial spirit is strong in America. I'll talk about how to make
sure our farm economy remains strong in America.
In the next 4 years, we'll stay on the path of reform and results in
our schools, so no child is left behind in America. I'll remind people
we have a plan to make sure health care is more affordable and
accessible and that in all we do to reform health care, we'll make sure
the decisions are made between doctors and patients, not by officials in
Washington, DC. I will remind the people that over the next 4 years,
we'll keep the promise of Social Security for our seniors, and we'll
strengthen the system for our children and our grandchildren.
I will tell the people we'll continue to promote a culture of life
in which every person matters and every being counts. I will remind them
that we'll protect family and marriage, which are the foundations of our
society. And I will tell the people that I'll name Federal judges who
know the difference between personal opinion and the strict
interpretation of the law.
Yet, all progress we hope to make depends on the security of our
Nation. We face enemies who hate our country and would do anything to
harm us. We will fight these enemies with every asset of our national
power. We will do our duty and protect the American people.
And that's what I want to talk to you and the good people of Iowa
and Nebraska about today, our national security. In the last 4 years,
we've been through a lot of history. We saw a ruthless sneak attack on
the United States. We learned of heroism on doomed airplanes. We saw the
bravery of rescuers rushing toward danger. We have seen our military
bring freedom to the oppressed and justice to our enemy. Our Nation has
shown its character to the world. We are proud to be Americans.
We are now nearing the first Presidential election since September
the 11th, 2001. People of the United States will choose the leader of
the free world in the middle of a global war. The choice is not only
between two candidates; it's between two directions in the conduct of
the war on terror. The American voters must answer these questions: Will
America return to the defensive, reactive mindset that sought to manage
the dangers to our country?
Audience members. Boo-o-o!
The President. Or will we fight a real war, with the goal of
victory? In every critical aspect, my opponent and I see the war on
terror differently, and Americans need to consider those differences as
they make a vital choice.
First, I believe that America wins wars by fighting on the
offensive. When I saw all those images of fire and death on September
the 11th, I made a decision: Our country will not sit back and wait for
future attacks; we will prevent those attacks by going after the enemy.
And so since that day, we are waging a global campaign from the
mountains of Central Asia to the deserts of the Middle East, from the
Horn of Africa to the Philippines. And those efforts are succeeding.
Since September the 11th, 2001, more than three-quarters of Al Qaida's
key members and associates have been brought to justice, and the rest of
them know we're on their trail.
After September the 11th, we set a new direction for American policy
and endorsed a doctrine that is clear to all: If you support
[[Page 2581]]
or harbor terrorists, you're equally guilty of terrorist murder.
We destroyed the terror camps that trained thousands of killers in
Afghanistan. We removed the Taliban from power. We persuaded the
Governments in Pakistan and Saudi Arabia to recognize the enemy and to
join the fight. We ended the regime of Saddam Hussein, which sponsored
terror, and we know that America and the world are safer with Saddam
Hussein sitting in a prison cell.
Audience members. U.S.A.! U.S.A.! U.S.A.!
The President. We sent a message to Libya--we sent a clear message
to Libya, which has now given up its weapons of mass destruction
programs. We have acted through diplomacy and force to shrink the area
where the terrorists can freely operate. And our strategy has the
terrorists on the run.
My opponent has a different point of view.
Audience members. Boo-o-o!
The President. He says that by fighting terrorists in the Middle
East, America has, quote, ``created terrorists where they did not
exist.''
Audience members. Boo-o-o!
The President. This is his argument, that terrorists are somehow
less dangerous or fewer in number if America avoids provoking them.
Audience members. Boo-o-o!
The President. But this represents a fundamental misunderstanding of
the enemy. We're dealing with killers who have made the death of
Americans the calling of their lives. If America were not fighting these
killers west of Baghdad and in the mountains of Afghanistan and
elsewhere, what does Senator Kerry think they would do? Would they begin
leading productive lives of service and charity?
Audience members. No-o-o!
The President. Would the terrorists who behead innocent people on
camera just be quiet and peaceful citizens if we had not liberated Iraq?
Audience members. No-o-o!
The President. We are fighting the terrorists with our military in
Afghanistan and Iraq and beyond so we do not have to face them in the
streets of our cities.
Audience members. Four more years! Four more years! Four more years!
The President. America is not to blame for terrorist hatred, and no
retreat by America would appease them. We don't create terrorists by
fighting them; we defeat the terrorists by fighting them.
Our second difference concerns Iraq. I believe victory in Iraq is
essential to victory in the war on terror. And we have had a strategy to
achieve that victory. The stakes in that country are high. If a terror
regime were allowed to reemerge in Iraq, terrorists would again find a
home, a source of funding, and vital support. They would correctly
conclude that free nations do not have the will to defend themselves. As
Iraq succeeds as a free society at the heart of the Middle East, an ally
in the war on terror, and a model for hopeful reform in a troubled
region, the terrorists will suffer a crushing defeat and every free
nation will be more secure.
We are still confronting serious violence from determined enemies.
Yet, the Iraqi Interim Government, with American and coalition support,
is making progress, week by week. Along with Iraqi forces, we're on the
offensive in Fallujah and north Babil. We've restored Government control
in Samarra and Tall `Afar and Najaf. More than 100,000 Iraqi soldiers,
police, and border guards are already trained and equipped and bravely
serving their country. And more than 200,000 will be in place at the end
of next year. An Iraqi independent electoral commission is up and
running. Political parties are planning campaigns, and free and fair
Iraqi elections will be held on schedule this coming January.
The despicable executions of unarmed Iraqi security forces show the
evil nature of the terrorists we fight and prove those terrorists are
enemies of the Iraqi people and the American people and the civilized
world. The terrorists and insurgents hate our progress and fight our
progress, but they will not stop our progress.
We will stay on the offense, and we will prevail. We will help
Iraqis get on the path to stability and democracy as quickly as
possible, and then our troops will return home with the honor they have
earned.
My opponent has a different view.
Audience members. Boo-o-o!
[[Page 2582]]
The President. The Senator calls America's mission in Iraq a
``mistake,'' a ``diversion,'' a ``colossal error.''
Audience members. Boo-o-o!
The President. And then says he's the right man to win the war.
Audience members. Boo-o-o!
The President. You cannot win a war you do not believe in fighting.
On Iraq, my opponent has a strategy of pessimism and retreat. He has
talked about artificial timetables to pull our troops out. He has sent
the signal that America's overriding goal in Iraq would be to leave,
even if the job is not done.
Audience members. Boo-o-o!
The President. That sends the wrong message. It sends the wrong
message to Iraqis, who need to know that America will never cut and run.
That sends the wrong message to our troops and the troops of our
coalition, who need to know that we will honor their sacrifice by
completing the mission. My opponent has the wrong strategy for the wrong
country at the wrong time. On this vital front of the war on terror,
protest is not a policy, retreat is not a strategy, and failure is not
an option. As long as I am the Commander in Chief, America will never
retreat in the face of terrorism.
Third, I believe that American leadership is indispensable to
winning the war on terror. Ever since September the 11th, 2001, America
has sounded a certain trumpet. We have stated clearly the challenge to
civilization, and we have rallied many nations to oppose it. More than
90 nations are actively engaged in the war on terror. All 26 NATO
nations have personnel in either Iraq, Afghanistan, or both. NATO has
taken leadership of an international force in Afghanistan, the first
out-of-area deployment in the history of our Alliance. Japan has
deployed forces to Iraq, the first overseas mission in the history of
their democracy. Forces from South Korea are in Iraq as well. America
has led. Many have joined. And America and the world are safer.
My opponent takes a different approach. He believes that instead of
leading with confidence, America must submit to what he calls a ``global
test.''
Audience members. Boo-o-o!
The President. I'm not making that up. [Laughter] He was standing
right about just there when I heard him say it. As far as I can tell,
that means our country must get permission from foreign capitals before
we act in our own self-defense.
Audience members. Boo-o-o!
The President. As President, I will always work with other countries
and seek their advice. But there is a world of difference between
working with good allies and giving a few reluctant nations veto power
over our role in the world. I will never submit our national security
decisions to the veto of a foreign government.
In addition to a ``global test,'' my opponent promises what he calls
a ``golden age'' of diplomacy to charm critical governments all over the
world.
Audience members. Boo-o-o!
The President. I don't see much diplomatic skill in Senator Kerry's
habit of insulting America's closest friends. He has called the
countries serving alongside us in Iraq, quote, ``a trumped-up coalition
of the bribed, the coerced, the bought, and the extorted.''
Audience members. Boo-o-o!
The President. Even last week, my opponent said that we have, quote,
``hardly anyone with us in Iraq.''
Audience members. Boo-o-o!
The President. That is a deeply offensive way to treat some 30
nations that are in Iraq, especially the 14 nations that have lost
forces in our cause. How can Senator Kerry denigrate the contributions
of countries led by the likes of Tony Blair of Great Britain, John
Howard of Australia, or Silvio Berlusconi of Italy or Aleksander
Kwasniewski of Poland and then expect other leaders to stand with
America in the future? You cannot expand an alliance by showing contempt
for those already in it. In this time of challenge to civilization,
America has found strong and responsible allies. They deserve the
respect of all Americans, not the scorn of a politician.
Fourth, I believe that America will gain long-term security by
promoting freedom and hope and democracy in the broader Middle East. The
job of a leader is to look ahead, and our country must look ahead. In 20
years from now, if the Middle East is dominated by dictators and mullahs
who build weapons
[[Page 2583]]
of mass destruction and harbor terrorists, our children and
grandchildren will live in a nightmare world of danger. That does not
have to happen. By taking the side of reformers and democrats in the
Middle East, we will gain allies in the war on terror; we'll isolate the
ideology of murder; and we will help defeat the despair and hopelessness
that feeds terror. By spreading freedom and liberty, the world will
become a much safer place for future generations.
Progress in the broader Middle East toward freedom will not come
easily. Yet, that progress is coming faster than many would have said
possible. Across a troubled region, we're seeing a movement toward
elections and greater rights for women and open discussions for peaceful
reform. The election in Afghanistan this month and the election in Iraq
next January will be counted as landmark events in the history of
liberty.
My opponent looks at things differently. He is not only skeptical
of--about democracy in Iraq; he's not made democracy a priority of his
foreign policy. But what is his long-term answer to the threat of
terror? Is he content to watch and wait as anger and resentment grow for
more decades in the Middle East, feeding more terrorism until radicals
without conscience gain the weapons to kill without limit? Ignoring the
root causes of terror, turning a blind eye to the oppression and despair
of millions may be easier in the short run. But we learned on September
the 11th that if violence and fanaticism are not opposed at their
source, they will find us where we live.
Instead of offering his own agenda for freedom, my opponent
complains that we're trying to, quote, ``impose democracy on people in
the broader Middle East.'' Is that what he sees in Afghanistan,
unwilling people having democracy forced upon them? We did remove the
Taliban by force, but democracy is rising in that country because the
Afghan people, like people everywhere, want to live in freedom.
No one forced them to register by the millions or to stand in long
lines to vote. For many people, that historic election was a day they
will never forget. One man in western Kabul arrived to vote at 7 a.m. He
said, ``I didn't sleep all night. I wanted to be the first in my polling
station.'' My fellow citizens, freedom is on the march, and it's
changing the world.
We are witnessing big and hopeful events. I believe that people
across the world, people in the Middle East want to live in freedom. I
believe this because freedom is not America's gift to the world; freedom
is the Almighty God's gift to each man and woman in this world.
Our fifth great difference concerns the role of the Presidency. A
President has to lead with consistency and strength. In a war, sometimes
your tactics have to change but not your principles. Americans have seen
how I do my job. Even when you might not agree with me, you know what I
believe and where I stand and what I intend to do.
Audience members. Four more years! Four more years! Four more years!
The President. Thank you all. On good days and on bad days, whether
the polls are up or the polls are down, I am determined to win the war
on terror, and I will always support the men and women who do the
fighting.
My opponent has taken a different approach.
Audience members. Boo-o-o!
The President. It's fair to say that consistency has not been his
strong point.
Audience members. Flip-flop! Flip-flop! Flip-flop!
The President. Senator Kerry says that we're better off with Saddam
Hussein out of power, except when he declares that removing Saddam made
us less safe. He stated in our second debate that he always believed
that Saddam was a threat, except, a few questions later, when he said
Saddam Hussein was not a threat.
Audience members. Flip-flop! Flip-flop! Flip-flop!
The President. He says he was right when he voted to authorize the
use of force against Saddam Hussein but that I was wrong to use force
against Saddam Hussein. [Laughter] Now my opponent is throwing out the
wild claim that he knows where bin Laden was in the fall of 2001 and
that our military passed up the chance to get him in Tora Bora. This is
an unjustified criticism of our military commanders in the field. This
is the
[[Page 2584]]
worst kind of Monday morning quarterbacking. And that's what we've come
to expect from Senator Kerry.
In fact, our commander in Afghanistan, General Tommy Franks recently
wrote this about Tora Bora: ``The Senator's understanding of events does
not square with reality.'' The General said that American Special Forces
were actively involved in the search for terrorists in Tora Bora and
that intelligence reports at the time placed bin Laden in any of several
countries.
Before Senator Kerry got into political difficulty and revised his
views, he saw our actions in Tora Bora differently. In the fall of 2001,
on national TV, Senator Kerry said this, ``I think we have been doing
this pretty effectively, and we should continue to do it that way.'' At
the time, the Senator said about Tora Bora, ``I think we've been smart.
I think the administration leadership has done it well, and we are on
the right track.'' Well, all I can tell you is that I am George W. Bush,
and I approve of that message.
Yet, Senator Kerry's record on national security has a far deeper
problem than election-year flip-flopping. On the largest national
security issues of our time, he has been consistently and dangerously
wrong. When Ronald Reagan was confronting the Soviet Union at the height
of the cold war, Senator Kerry said that President Reagan's policy of
peace through strength was making America less safe.
Audience members. Boo-o-o!
The President. He voted against many of the weapons systems critical
to our defense buildup.
Audience members. Boo-o-o!
The President. History has shown that Senator Kerry was wrong and
President Reagan was right.
When former President Bush led a coalition against Saddam Hussein in
1991, Senator Kerry voted against the use of force to liberate Kuwait.
Audience members. Boo-o-o!
The President. If his view had prevailed, Saddam Hussein today would
dominate the Middle East and possess the world's most dangerous weapons.
History has shown that Senator Kerry was wrong and former President Bush
was right.
In 1994, just one year after the first bombing of the World Trade
Center, Senator Kerry proposed massive cuts in America's intelligence
budget, so massive that even his Massachusetts colleague, Ted Kennedy,
opposed them.
Audience members. Boo-o-o!
The President. History has shown that Senator Kerry was wrong and--
we've got to be fair--Senator Kennedy was right.
Just last year, American troops in Iraq and Afghanistan needed $87
billion for body armor and hazard pay, vehicles, weapons, and bullets.
First, Senator Kerry said, ``It would be irresponsible to vote against
the troops.'' Then he voted against the troops.
Audience members. Boo-o-o!
The President. You might remember perhaps the most famous quote of
the 2004 campaign when he said, ``I actually did vote for the $87
billion, before I voted against it.'' History has shown that Senator
Kerry was right, then wrong--[laughter]--then briefly right, and wrong
again. Since then, on the 87 billion, my opponent has said, ``The whole
thing is a complicated matter.'' There's nothing complicated about
supporting our troops in combat.
During the last 20 years, in key moments of challenge and decision
for America, Senator Kerry has chosen the position of weakness and
inaction. With that record, he stands in opposition not just to me but
to the great tradition of the Democratic Party. The party of Franklin
Roosevelt and Harry Truman and John Kennedy is rightly remembered for
confidence and resolve in times of war and hours of crisis. Senator
Kerry has turned his back on ``pay any price'' and ``bear any burden.''
He's replaced those commitments with ``wait and see'' and ``cut and
run.''
Audience members. Boo-o-o!
The President. Many Democrats in this country do not recognize their
party anymore. Today I want to speak to every one of them. If you
believe that America should lead with strength and purpose and
confidence in our ideals, I would be honored to have your support, and
I'm asking for your vote.
All the differences I outlined today add up to one big difference,
and it's important
[[Page 2585]]
for our fellow citizens to understand that difference. Senator Kerry
says that September the 11th did not change him much at all.
Audience members. Boo-o-o!
The President. His policies make that clear. He says the war on
terror is primarily a law enforcement and intelligence gathering
operation.
Audience members. Boo-o-o!
The President. His top foreign policy adviser says, ``The war is
just like a metaphor, like the war on poverty.'' The Senator's goal is
to go back to the mindset of the 1990s, when terrorism was seen as a
nuisance and was fought with subpoenas and a few cruise missiles.
Audience members. Boo-o-o!
The President. There's a major problem with that. The calm--the era
of calm he longs for was only a shallow illusion of peace. We now know
that throughout the 1990s, the terrorists were training and plotting
against us. They saw our complacency as weakness. And so their plans
became more ambitious and their attacks became more deadly until,
finally, the Twin Towers became Ground Zero and the Pentagon was in
flames.
My outlook was changed on September the 11th. A few days after the
attacks, I stood with Rudy where buildings fell. I will never forget the
evil of our enemy and the suffering of our people. I know we are
fighting a war. And I remember the workers in the hardhats there at
Ground Zero, yelling at me at the top of their lungs, ``Whatever it
takes.'' A fellow grabbed me by the arm, and he looked me in the eye,
and he said, ``Do not let me down.'' From that day forward, I've gotten
up every morning thinking about how to better protect our country. I
will never relent in defending America, whatever it takes.
In a new term, we will finish the work we have started. We will
stand against terror and stand for freedom and peace we all want. And on
November the 2d, my fellow Americans, I ask you to stand with me.
God bless. On to victory. Thank you all.
Note: The President spoke at 2:51 p.m. at the Mid-America Center. In his
remarks, he referred to former Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani of New York
City, and his wife, Judith; entertainer Michael W. Smith; Prime Minister
Tony Blair of the United Kingdom; Prime Minister John Howard of
Australia; Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi of Italy; President
Aleksander Kwasniewski of Poland; Usama bin Laden, leader of the Al
Qaida terrorist network; and Gen. Tommy R. Franks, USA, (Ret.), former
combatant commander, U.S. Central Command.