[Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents Volume 43, Number 35 (Monday, September 3, 2007)]
[Pages 1119-1124]
[Online from the Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

<R04>
Remarks at a Reception for Congressional Candidate David G. Reichert and 
the Washington State Republican Party in Bellevue, Washington

August 27, 2007

    Thank you all. Thanks for coming. I appreciate it. Thanks for 
coming. How's your elbow, Dave? [Laughter] First of all, I thank you all 
for supporting an honest, decent, hard-working, fine American in Dave 
Reichert. You call him ``the sheriff.'' I look at him as a sheriff. He's 
tough when he has to be; he's compassionate when he needs to be; and 
he's an independent thinker. He's the kind of person who has done a 
fabulous job in the United States House of Representatives, and he 
deserves to be reelected. And I thank you for supporting him. I 
particularly want to thank Julie for standing with Dave--and the family.
    I know something about families and politics. Like Dave, I married 
above my head. [Laughter] And Laura sends her very best to the Reichert 
family. She's a--I left her on the ranch this morning. We're working our 
way back to Washington, DC. I'm going to Australia to represent the 
United States of America at what they call APEC. By the way, there's no 
greater honor than to represent the United States of America overseas. 
It is a fantastic experience. We're such a fabulous country of decent, 
honorable people.
    I want to thank my friend, the former Senator of the State, Slade 
Gorton, and Sally, for joining us today. Senator, thank you for being 
here. Luke, I want to thank you for being here. Thanks for being the 
chairman. Use this--[applause]--yes. You need to put this money to good 
use and turn out the vote, get people to the polls.
    We run for reasons. We've got a philosophy that works. We believe in 
strong defense. We need to protect this country. We believe in human 
rights and human dignity, and we believe in keeping your taxes low. 
That's what we believe.
    I want to thank Matt Hasselbeck and Mack Strong. These are champs. 
These men are champs on the field, and they're champs off the field. And 
they set such a fine example for people who look at the Seattle 
Seahawks,

[[Page 1120]]

and they look at these players and say, ``Gosh, I'd like to be like 
them.'' And I thank you for being such good family men, setting such a 
good example for the kids here. And I'm honored to have the jersey.
    I want to talk about a couple of issues with you. We're a nation at 
war. I wish I didn't have to say that. No President should ever want to 
come to any community in our country and say, ``We're at war,'' but we 
are. And the fundamental question facing this Nation is, how do we face 
this conflict? What do we do?
    The most important priority of government--it's one of the reasons 
I'm such a strong believer in Dave--is to protect the homeland. That's 
our most important job. And Dave Reichert understands that. He 
understands that it's possible for government to balance the need to 
understand the enemy and civil liberties. And we're doing just that. He 
knows what I know, that we've got to use all assets at our power to 
protect you.
    You know, I was deeply affected on September the 11th, 2001. I vowed 
that day that I would use all of our assets to keep the enemy from 
harming us again. And I'm proud to have an ally in Dave Reichert, who 
understands that as well. That's why you've got to send him back.
    The stakes are high. There are some--I recognize there are some who 
hear we're at war and dismiss that as empty political talk. That's 
either disingenuous or naive--either case it is dangerous because we 
face an enemy that is ideologically bent, determined to achieve their 
objectives and murder the innocent. They are not religious people. They 
may have hijacked religion, but they're not religious. I don't believe 
you murder innocent people to achieve political objectives and be a 
religious person. I just don't believe that. As a matter of fact, I 
believe that's the definition of evil. And I think the United States 
must do everything we can to prevent them from harming us and others 
again.
    And the stakes are high in this war. Our strategy is to stay on the 
offense. I would rather defeat them overseas than to face them here at 
home. And so every day, you've got really fine, decent people working 
hour after hour to find these killers and to bring them to justice. You 
can't negotiate with these kind of people; you can't talk sense to them. 
The only thing--the way to protect us in the short term is to find them 
before they hurt us again. And that's what's happening every single day.
    Dave Reichert understands it. He is a strong supporter of law 
enforcement, of the intelligence community, and of the United States 
military. And I appreciate that, Dave.
    In the long run, the best way to protect you is to win this 
ideological struggle by defeating what they believe with something that 
has worked throughout history, and that's liberty. I make my decisions 
based on just some fundamental principles--principles, by the way, I'm 
not going to change; principles that--you know, I think the thing that 
matters most in life is when you finish the task at hand, whatever that 
may be, that you can look in the mirror and say you stayed true to your 
principles; you stayed true to that which you believe. I'd rather be 
dealing with people who make decisions based upon what's right, not 
based upon the latest focus group or opinion poll. And that's exactly 
what we need to do to protect this country.
    I believe there's an Almighty, and I believe a great gift of the 
Almighty to each man, woman, and child on the face of the Earth is 
freedom. And I believe it's in the interest of the United States to help 
people be free. Freedom yields the peace we want. Freedom yields the--
lays that foundation for peace so our children can grow up in a peaceful 
world. And that's what you're seeing happening right now.
    Iraq is the central front of this war. This war is being fought on a 
variety of fronts, and Iraq, obviously, is the central front. It's the 
front that's dominating the news. It's the front that appears on your TV 
screens. It's the front in which there's a lot of debate in a free 
society, and there should be debate. I happen to believe it's essential 
that we win this war in Iraq, that we do the job on this front.
    We've done some remarkable things there. First of all, we removed a 
brutal dictator. Getting rid of Saddam Hussein made the world safer. It 
was the right decision. The Iraqis went to the polls and wrote a 
Constitution. I mean, I wasn't surprised they went to the polls. If you 
believe in the universality

[[Page 1121]]

of freedom, it shouldn't surprise you that people, if given a chance, 
will express their desire to be free. I wasn't surprised; I was pleased 
that 12 million people defied the car bombers and killers and murderers 
to vote.
    And then the thinking enemy, recognizing that a free society in the 
Middle East would be a major blow to their ambitions to spread their 
caliphate throughout the Middle East, tried to create sectarian 
violence. They murdered the innocent in order to cause people to doubt 
government and doubt the coalition. These are coldblooded killers. 
These, by the way, have sworn allegiance to--many of them have sworn 
allegiance to Usama bin Laden, the same person that ordered the attacks 
that killed nearly 3,000 of our citizens. They can't stand the thought 
of a free society in their midst. An Iraq that can govern itself and 
sustain itself and be an ally against these radicals and extremists 
would be a major defeat in this ideological struggle.
    And so they struck. And I was confronted with a decision: You either 
leave, pull back, or send more troops in to try to bring enough security 
so that the society can emerge and evolve. And I chose the latter. I 
chose the latter because the consequences of failure in Iraq are 
enormous for the security of the United States of America.
    I gave a speech to the VFW the other day and talked about the 
different theaters of war in the past, whether it be Japan or Korea and 
Vietnam. I reminded the listeners, Vietnam was much different from Iraq 
in that you could leave Vietnam, and yeah, there was a human toll, huge 
human catastrophe as a result of us leaving, but the enemy wasn't going 
to follow us here. In the beginning of the 21st century, failure in Iraq 
would cause the enemy not to retreat, but to follow us to America. The 
stakes of success for your security are enormous. And that is why I 
listened to our commanders and the experts and military folks about how 
to provide enough security for democracy to have a chance to succeed.
    I sent a new commander there on the ground, a fellow named General 
David Petraeus. We've been there for--fully staffed and engaged for 
about 2 months, with a full complement of manpower, and we're making a 
difference. It's changing on the ground. The people are beginning to see 
that grassroots reconciliation is possible. Neighbors--listen, people 
want to live in peace. People don't like violence. They want their 
children to grow up in a peaceful world. If given a chance, I believe 
people will cling to liberty and freedom. And I know it's in our 
interests for us to deny Al Qaida a safe haven or the extremists an 
opportunity to become more emboldened throughout the Middle East. What 
happens in Iraq matters in America.
    And that's why I've asked Congress to wait until these commanders 
come back--the Ambassador and commander come back and tell people 
exactly what's happening. You know, when they open up a new school in 
Iraq, it doesn't make headline news. When Al Qaida kills a bunch of 
people, it does. And these folks are trying to shake our will. I'm 
giving a speech to the American Legion tomorrow, and a line in there is, 
``We will not be intimidated by thugs and murderers. The United States 
of America will stand strong.''
    I'm confident we can succeed. I really am. I could not look at a 
mother whose child was in combat if I didn't believe, one, it was 
necessary, and two, we can succeed. I couldn't do that in good 
conscience. And one of the reasons I'm confident we can succeed is 
because we have done this kind of work before.
    I like to remind people about the story of my dad and my Presidency. 
I find it incredibly ironic that George H.W. Bush went straight out of 
high school, became a Navy fighter pilot, and fought the Japanese, and 
some 60 years later, his son sits down at the table with the Prime 
Minister of Japan, the former enemy, working to keep the peace. Isn't 
that interesting? I think it is. And you know what happens? Liberty has 
got the capacity to change an enemy into an ally. Liberty and freedom 
have--are transformative. They've got the ability to transform an entire 
region, one of hopelessness, where 19 kids are willing to get on an 
airplane to kill, to one of hope, where people realize a better future 
and a peaceful future.
    This is a long ideological struggle we're involved in. And the 
fundamental question is, will the United States of America take the 
lead? Will we be confident in the values that have made us a great 
nation? And I answered that question loud and clear: We're in the

[[Page 1122]]

lead; we'll stay in the lead; and we'll work for the peace that we all 
want.
    You know, every time you run, at least every time I've run, the 
economy has always been an issue. And I'm glad it is this time around. 
[Laughter] We have--I can remember campaigning in Washington State and 
campaigning with Dave before and reminding people of another principle 
that I believe in, and that is, you can spend your money better than 
government can. There is a kind of a philosophical divide in Washington. 
There are people that, one, don't--believe we don't have enough money in 
Washington--I happen to believe we do--and secondly, that they would 
rather figure out how to spend your money than you should.
    You know--and so our argument, however, wins when you look at the 
facts. We had to deal with a recession, an attack on the country, 
corporate scandals. This economy was not very good in the beginning of 
my administration. So I went to Congress and said, ``I've got an idea 
for us to get out of this recession. Why don't we let the people have 
more of their own money? Rather than taking money away from the spenders 
and savers and investors, why don't we try something different? Why 
don't we say, `Here, you can have your own money in your own pocket so 
you can spend it yourself '?''
    And it worked. Since August of 2003--by the way, we didn't cut taxes 
on a few people; we cut taxes on everybody that paid taxes. It wasn't 
one of these special deals where you paid some, and you paid some, but 
you get the tax break; you don't. If you have a family with children, 
you got a tax break. I happen to think it was a mistake to penalize 
marriage. We had a marriage penalty in the Tax Code. It seems like to 
me, we ought to be encouraging marriage rather than penalizing marriage.
    We cut taxes on dividends and capital gains to encourage investment. 
We cut taxes on small businesses, and we reduced all the income tax 
rates. And by the way, most small businesses pay tax at the individual 
income tax rate. See, if you're a subchapter S or a limited partnership, 
you pay income tax based upon individual rates. And so when you say 
you're cutting the individual rates, you're actually cutting taxes as 
well on small businesses. Seventy percent of new jobs are created by 
small businesses, and so when a small business has more money in its 
treasury, it tends to expand and invest. When a consumer has more money 
in his or her pocket, they either save or invest or spend.

    And our plan worked. Cutting taxes works. Cutting taxes has created 
a strong economy. We've created 8.3 million new jobs since August of 
2003. Unemployment rates are down. People are working; inflation is low; 
interest rates are low; people are owning homes. This economy is strong. 
And the best way to keep it strong is to put people in Congress that 
won't raise your taxes.

    And make no mistake about it, the Democrats are going to raise your 
taxes, pure and simple. They may say they're not going to in the 
campaign, but they're going to raise your taxes. How do I know? Well, 
they submitted a budget recently. Their budget calls for $205 billion of 
extra discretionary spending over the next 5 years. That's their 
blueprint for what they're going to do with your money--205 billion 
additional dollars. That averages out to $112 million a day, $4.7 
million per hour, $78,000 per minute, $1,300 in higher discretionary 
spending every second of every minute of every hour of every day of 
every year for the next 5 years. And you're going to pay for it. That's 
why we need to reelect Dave Reichert. And that's why they give the 
President the power of veto. I'm going to veto any tax threats.

    What's interesting is that we were able to cut taxes and grow the 
economy and, at the same time, reduce our deficit. That's what we told 
the people we would do. We said, ``Give us a chance. You're going to 
have more money in your own pocket to spend, save, and invest, and we're 
going to manage this fiscal house in such a way that the deficit comes 
down.'' Today, the projected deficit is about 205 billion--that's a nice 
number; that's what the Democrats are going to take out of your pocket; 
that's the size of the deficit, which, by the way, as a percentage of 
GDP is low.

    And I've submitted a budget that will actually balance the budget by 
2012, so long as

[[Page 1123]]

we have fiscally responsible people in Washington. And that means we 
need to elect people who understand what it means to set priorities. And 
the number-one priority, as far as I'm concerned, is to protecting the 
American people. The number-one priority is to make sure our troops have 
the support they need and to make sure our veterans get the care they 
need.
    And Dave is right there. You can count on him. You can count on him 
to be a watchdog for your money in Washington, DC.
    I want to talk about one other issue, and that is--it's a national 
security issue; it's an economic security issue; and it is an 
environmental issue--and that is our dependency on oil. Now, that 
probably comes as a shock to you to hear a Texan say that, but I 
understand what it means to be dependent on a product from parts of the 
world where some of the people don't like us. I know what that means for 
our national security.
    I also understand, in this world we live in, when demand for crude 
oil goes up in a developing country like China and the corresponding 
supply doesn't keep up with the demand, the price of gasoline goes up at 
the pump here in Seattle, Washington. So it's an economic security issue 
as well. If the terrorists and these radicals that would like to create 
economic havoc on the United States were ever to able to significantly 
disrupt the oil supply, you'd feel it. So it's an economic security 
issue. And obviously, burning fossil fuels creates an environmental 
issue.
    And so I look forward to working with Dave to come up with a 
practical plan that enables us, one, to grow the economy and, at the 
same time, to become less dependent on oil and better stewards of the 
environment. And our strategy makes sense. It's a commonsense strategy.
    First, I believe that we can grow enough fuel to become less 
dependent on oil. I'd rather our farmers be producing fuel than buying 
fuel from overseas. I think that's a practical application of 
technology. We're selling a little--we're using a little more than 7 
billion gallons of ethanol now, made mainly from Midwestern corn. In 
other words, there's a whole industry growing. And we're encouraging it. 
As a matter of fact, we believe that technology is going to advance to 
the point where we can reduce our gasoline usage by 20 percent over the 
next 10 years and replace it with alternative fuels. I believe that.
    Your government is spending a fair amount of your money--if billions 
is fair--[laughter]--a lot of your money on technologies because the 
truth of the matter is, the only way to be able to grow our economy and, 
at the same time, be better stewards of the environment is to come up 
with new technologies. It's conceivable that relatively quickly, there 
are going to be automobiles where you can drive your first 40 miles on a 
battery and the thing you're in doesn't look like a golf cart. It will 
actually be a car, something that you'd like to be in. [Laughter]
    I'm a big believer in clean coal technologies. We're spending up to 
about $2 billion to be able to use this plentiful supply of energy in an 
environmentally friendly way. And I think there's going to be some 
breakthroughs coming down the road.
    I believe in nuclear power. I believe if you're really, truly 
interested in greenhouse gases, then you ought to be supporting nuclear 
power. If you're really that concerned about the environment, you ought 
to be saying, this great economy of ours can grow and, at the same time, 
not pollute. Nuclear power doesn't put one emission into the atmosphere.
    And so we're spending money to come up with technologies that will 
enable us to be less dependent on oil. And I think it makes sense. And 
I'm proud to have Dave's support. He's an environmentally conscious guy. 
He cares about the environment, like a lot of people around the country 
do. But I want to tell you something that's interesting and something 
you probably haven't spent much time reading about. Do you realize that 
the United States is the only major industrialized nation that cut 
greenhouse gases last year? We grew our economy by 3.4 percent in the 
second quarter, and we cut greenhouse gases.
    Our strategy is working. Our philosophy makes sense. It is a 
commonsense philosophy that's making a difference in the lives of the 
average citizens. David Reichert understands that, and that's why you 
need to send him

[[Page 1124]]

back to the United States Congress. And I'm proud to be here for him.
    Thanks for coming. God bless.

Note: The President spoke at 4:28 p.m. at the Hyatt Regency. In his 
remarks, he referred to Luke Esser, chairman, Washington State 
Republican Party; Matt Hasselbeck, quarterback, and Mack Strong, 
fullback, Seattle Seahawks; Usama bin Laden, leader of the Al Qaida 
terrorist organization; Gen. David H. Petraeus, USA, commanding general, 
Multi-National Force--Iraq; and Prime Minister Shinzo Abe of Japan.