Is Ted Cruz like Goldwater or Reagan?

Ted Cruz is beginning to surge significantly in the polls in Iowa. Surely the evangelicals in Iowa are the key factor.

Already, some of the political pundits are writing him off, likening him to Barry Goldwater, the libertarian-leaning firebrand, who was soundly defeated by Lyndon Johnson in 1964.

Goldwater lost by a landslide. But, by the same token, Ronald Reagan won by landslides in 1980 and in 1984. And Reagan was perhaps more conservative than Goldwater. The question many are asking about Ted Cruz and his conservative values is: Will he be the new Goldwater or the new Reagan?

Reagan got elected in part through the help of the Moral Majority, which was squarely pro-life, as well as being conservative on other social issues. Goldwater showed little inclination towards traditional social values, later going on to crudely remark that he wanted to kick Moral Majority founder Jerry Falwell in the rear end. Also, he asserted a woman's "right to an abortion."

In 1964, LBJ was extraordinarily popular, running against Goldwater as the successor to John F. Kennedy just one year after the charismatic young leader was assassinated in Dallas. Johnson was perceived as the standard-bearer for JFK's policies.

But the election of 2016 may be likened better to the election of 1980, as opposed to that of 1964.

In both cases, 1980 and 2016, there was/is an incumbent president whose policies were unpopular with tens of millions of Americans. That is why this campaign has seen the rise of the anti-establishment candidates. On the right, Trump, Carson, and Cruz. On the left, Bernie Sanders.

A majority of Americans feel the nation is heading in the wrong direction. That was true in 1980. Was it true in 1964?

Meanwhile, a real dividing line today, in what Dr. Richard Land calls the â€œDivided States of America,â€ are the social issues---abortion being chief among them. Voters on either side of the abortion debate will mobilize over the issue.

One pro-life leader is Dr. Alveda King, a spokesperson for Priests for Life. She told me in an interview for Christian television: "Our nation is in a quandary. Our nation no longer fears the Lord….As the niece of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., and my father, his brother, Reverend A.D. King, I came from a foundation with biblical roots and a biblical worldview….Ultrasounds already demonstrate that the babies in the womb are human beings and people.â€

There are many establishment political advisors who recommend that candidates go soft on issues like abortion. But Candidate Reagan was not soft on his pro-life views.

In 1980, he was asked in a debate why he wasn't pro-choice, and he answered, "Well, first of all, I happen to notice that everyone who is pro-choice has already been born."

Gary Bauer, the president of American Values, worked as a domestic policy advisor for President Reagan.

Bauer told me in an interview, "I've heard some of these consultants in the Republican Party suggesting the Party drop the life issue and so forth. I'm going to let people in on a little secret about what we do here in Washington when we hear a political consultant give us advice. The first thing we do is look at that consultant's win/loss record during his political career, and I can tell you the political consultants that are giving this advice have long records of working for losing candidates."

Ironically, the candidates who have done best are not those who jettison the values issues, but the true believers who are able to articulate their values. I think that point is true both on the left and the right. Cruz is a true believer in pro-life values, just as Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are true believers in abortion rights.

Ronald Reagan was wildly successful building a coalition of three prongs: those interested in the social issues (like abortion), those committed to fiscal responsibility, and those committed to defense.

Bauer says, "I would argue that the election results prove that when the Republican Party only runs on economics and says a little bit about foreign policy and completely abandons all the values issues, they're forgetting the lesson that Ronald Reagan taught about the three legs of the stool, and that that is the way to continually lose elections, forever."

The question now is: Can any candidate---for example, Ted Cruz---form such a coalition?

This essay should not be construed as any sort of endorsement for any particular candidate. But when we consider the moral issues before us, including abortion, same-sex marriage (which still divides much of the country), and the lack of "common defense" --- one of the key purposes of the Constitution---it seems to me that we are facing times much more similar to 1980 than to 1964.

Reagan. Reagan was pretty open about his Christiantiy

http://millercenter.org/president/reagan/speeches/speech-3409

â€œEvil Empireâ€ Speech (March 8, 1983)
Ronald Reagan

In this address to the National Association of Evangelicals in Orlando, Florida, President Reagan presents his view of the Soviet Union. The President defends America’s Judeo-Christian traditions against the Soviet Union’s totalitarian leadership and lack of religious faith, expressing his belief that these differences are at the heart of the fight between the two nations.

This transcript contains the published text of the speech, not the actual words spoken. There may be some differences between the transcript and the audio/video content.
Watch Now
Listen
Word Cloud

This is a chart of the words used most frequently in this speech. The larger the word, the more frequently that it was used.
abortion america american congress evil freedom freeze god good government history human iaposve life made man must now our parents people religious right states today will world years you your
Downloadable Materials
Video

Flash Video
Windows Media Video
Quicktime
RealVideo

Audio

MP3

Transcript

Reverend clergy all, Senator Hawkins, distinguished members of the Florida congressional delegation, and all of you:

I can’t tell you how you have warmed my heart with your welcome. I’m delighted to be here today.

Those of you in the National Association of Evangelicals are known for your spiritual and humanitarian work. And I would be especially remiss if I didn’t discharge right now one personal debt of gratitude. Thank you for your prayers. Nancy and I have felt their presence many times in many ways. And believe me, for us they’ve made all the difference.

The other day in the East Room of the White House at a meeting there, someone asked me whether I was aware of all the people out there who were praying for the President. And I had to say, “Yes, I am. I’ve felt it. I believe in intercessionary prayer.” But I couldn’t help but say to that questioner after he’d asked the question thatâ€”or at least say to them that if sometime when he was praying he got a busy signal, it was just me in there ahead of him. [Laughter] I think I understand how Abraham Lincoln felt when he said, “I have been driven many times to my knees by the overwhelming conviction that I had nowhere else to go.”

From the joy and the good feeling of this conference, I go to a political reception. [Laughter] Now, I don’t know why, but that bit of scheduling reminds me of a storyâ€”[laughter]â€”which I’ll share with you.

An evangelical minister and a politician arrived at Heaven’s gate one day together. And St. Peter, after doing all the necessary formalities, took them in hand to show them where their quarters would be. And he took them to a small, single room with a bed, a chair, and a table and said this was for the clergyman. And the politician was a little worried about what might be in store for him. And he couldn’t believe it then when St. Peter stopped in front of a beautiful mansion with lovely grounds, many servants, and told him that these would be his quarters.

And he couldn’t help but ask, he said, “But wait, howâ€”there’s something wrongâ€”how do I get this mansion while that good and holy man only gets a single room?” And St. Peter said, “You have to understand how things are up here. We’ve got thousands and thousands of clergy. You’re the first politician who ever made it.” [Laughter]

But I don’t want to contribute to a stereotype. [Laughter] So, I tell you there are a great many God-fearing, dedicated, noble men and women in public life, present company included. And, yes, we need your help to keep us ever mindful of the ideas and the principles that brought us into the public arena in the first place. The basis of those ideals and principles is a commitment to freedom and personal liberty that, itself, is grounded in the much deeper realization that freedom prospers only where the blessings of God are avidly sought and humbly accepted.

The American experiment in democracy rests on this insight. Its discovery was the great triumph of our Founding Fathers, voiced by William Penn when he said: “If we will not be governed by God, we must be governed by tyrants.” Explaining the inalienable rights of men, Jefferson said, “The God who gave us life, gave us liberty at the same time.” And it was George Washington who said that “of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports.”

And finally, that shrewdest of all observers of American democracy, Alexis de Tocqueville, put it eloquently after he had gone on a search for the secret of America’s greatness and geniusâ€”and he said: “Not until I went into the churches of America and heard her pulpits aflame with righteousness did I understand the greatness and the genius of America. . . . America is good. And if America ever ceases to be good, America will cease to be great.”

Well, I’m pleased to be here today with you who are keeping America great by keeping her good. Only through your work and prayers and those of millions of others can we hope to survive this perilous century and keep alive this experiment in liberty, this last, best hope of man.

I want you to know that this administration is motivated by a political philosophy that sees the greatness of America in you, her people, and in your families, churches, neighborhoods, communitiesâ€”the institutions that foster and nourish values like concern for others and respect for the rule of law under God.

Now, I don’t have to tell you that this puts us in opposition to, or at least out of step with, a prevailing attitude of many who have turned to a modern-day secularism, discarding the tried and time-tested values upon which our very civilization is based. No matter how well intentioned, their value system is radically different from that of most Americans. And while they proclaim that they’re freeing us from superstitions of the past, they’ve taken upon themselves the job of superintending us by government rule and regulation. Sometimes their voices are louder than ours, but they are not yet a majority.

An example of that vocal superiority is evident in a controversy now going on in Washington. And since I’m involved, I’ve been waiting to hear from the parents of young America. How far are they willing to go in giving to government their prerogatives as parents?

Let me state the case as briefly and simply as I can. An organization of citizens, sincerely motivated and deeply concerned about the increase in illegitimate births and abortions involving girls well below the age of consent, sometime ago established a nationwide network of clinics to offer help to these girls and, hopefully, alleviate this situation. Now, again, let me say, I do not fault their intent. However, in their well-intentioned effort, these clinics have decided to provide advice and birth control drugs and devices to underage girls without the knowledge of their parents.

For some years now, the federal government has helped with funds to subsidize these clinics. In providing for this, the Congress decreed that every effort would be made to maximize parental participation. Nevertheless, the drugs and devices are prescribed without getting parental consent or giving notification after they’ve done so. Girls termed “sexually active”â€”and that has replaced the word “promiscuous”â€”are given this help in order to prevent illegitimate birth or abortion.

Well, we have ordered clinics receiving federal funds to notify the parents such help has been given. One of the nation’s leading newspapers has created the term “squeal rule” in editorializing against us for doing this, and we’re being criticized for violating the privacy of young people. A judge has recently granted an injunction against an enforcement of our rule. I’ve watched TV panel shows discuss this issue, seen columnists pontificating on our error, but no one seems to mention morality as playing a part in the subject of sex.

Is all of Judeo-Christian tradition wrong? Are we to believe that something so sacred can be looked upon as a purely physical thing with no potential for emotional and psychological harm? And isn’t it the parents’ right to give counsel and advice to keep their children from making mistakes that may affect their entire lives?

Many of us in government would like to know what parents think about this intrusion in their family by government. We’re going to fight in the courts. The right of parents and the rights of family take precedence over those of Washington-based bureaucrats and social engineers.

But the fight against parental notification is really only one example of many attempts to water down traditional values and even abrogate the original terms of American democracy. Freedom prospers when religion is vibrant and the rule of law under God is acknowledged. When our Founding Fathers passed the first amendment, they sought to protect churches from government interference. They never intended to construct a wall of hostility between government and the concept of religious belief itself.

The evidence of this permeates our history and our government. The Declaration of Independence mentions the Supreme Being no less than four times. “In God We Trust” is engraved on our coinage. The Supreme Court opens its proceedings with a religious invocation. And the members of Congress open their sessions with a prayer. I just happen to believe the schoolchildren of the United States are entitled to the same privileges as Supreme Court Justices and Congressmen.

Last year, I sent the Congress a constitutional amendment to restore prayer to public schools. Already this session, there’s growing bipartisan support for the amendment, and I am calling on the Congress to act speedily to pass it and to let our children pray.

Perhaps some of you read recently about the Lubbock school case, where a judge actually ruled that it was unconstitutional for a school district to give equal treatment to religious and nonreligious student groups, even when the group meetings were being held during the students’ own time. The first amendment never intended to require government to discriminate against religious speech.

Senators Denton and Hatfield have proposed legislation in the Congress on the whole question of prohibiting discrimination against religious forms of student speech. Such legislation could go far to restore freedom of religious speech for public school students. And I hope the Congress considers these bills quickly. And with your help, I think it’s possible we could also get the constitutional amendment through the Congress this year.

More than a decade ago, a Supreme Court decision literally wiped off the books of 50 states statutes protecting the rights of unborn children. Abortion on demand now takes the lives of up to one and a half million unborn children a year. Human life legislation ending this tragedy will some day pass the Congress, and you and I must never rest until it does. Unless and until it can be proven that the unborn child is not a living entity, then its right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness must be protected.

You may remember that when abortion on demand began, many, and, indeed, I’m sure many of you, warned that the practice would lead to a decline in respect for human life, that the philosophical premises used to justify abortion on demand would ultimately be used to justify other attacks on the sacredness of human lifeâ€”infanticide or mercy killing. Tragically enough, those warnings proved all too true. Only last year a court permitted the death by starvation of a handicapped infant.

I have directed the Health and Human Services Department to make clear to every health care facility in the United States that the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 protects all handicapped persons against discrimination based on handicaps, including infants. And we have taken the further step of requiring that each and every recipient of federal funds who provides health care services to infants must post and keep posted in a conspicuous place a notice stating that “discriminatory failure to feed and care for handicapped infants in this facility is prohibited by federal law.” It also lists a 24-hour, toll-free number so that nurses and others may report violations in time to save the infant’s life.

In addition, recent legislation introduced in the Congress by Representative Henry Hyde of Illinois not only increases restrictions on publicly financed abortions, it also addresses this whole problem of infanticide. I urge the Congress to begin hearings and to adopt legislation that will protect the right of life to all children, including the disabled or handicapped.

Now, I’m sure that you must get discouraged at times, but you’ve done better than you know, perhaps. There’s a great spiritual awakening in America, a renewal of the traditional values that have been the bedrock of America’s goodness and greatness.

One recent survey by a Washington-based research council concluded that Americans were far more religious than the people of other nations; 95 percent of those surveyed expressed a belief in God and a huge majority believed the Ten Commandments had real meaning in their lives. And another study has found that an overwhelming majority of Americans disapprove of adultery, teenage sex, pornography, abortion, and hard drugs. And this same study showed a deep reverence for the importance of family ties and religious belief.

I think the items that we’ve discussed here today must be a key part of the nation’s political agenda. For the first time the Congress is openly and seriously debating and dealing with the prayer and abortion issuesâ€”and that’s enormous progress right there. I repeat: America is in the midst of a spiritual awakening and a moral renewal. And with your biblical keynote, I say today, “Yes, let justice roll on like a river, righteousness like a never-failing stream.”

Now, obviously, much of this new political and social consensus I’ve talked about is based on a positive view of American history, one that takes pride in our country’s accomplishments and record. But we must never forget that no government schemes are going to perfect man. We know that living in this world means dealing with what philosophers would call the phenomenology of evil or, as theologians would put it, the doctrine of sin.

There is sin and evil in the world, and we’re enjoined by Scripture and the Lord Jesus to oppose it with all our might. Our nation, too, has a legacy of evil with which it must deal. The glory of this land has been its capacity for transcending the moral evils of our past. For example, the long struggle of minority citizens for equal rights, once a source of disunity and civil war, is now a point of pride for all Americans. We must never go back. There is no room for racism, anti-Semitism, or other forms of ethnic and racial hatred in this country.

I know that you’ve been horrified, as have I, by the resurgence of some hate groups preaching bigotry and prejudice. Use the mighty voice of your pulpits and the powerful standing of your churches to denounce and isolate these hate groups in our midst. The commandment given us is clear and simple: “Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.”

But whatever sad episodes exist in our past, any objective observer must hold a positive view of American history, a history that has been the story of hopes fulfilled and dreams made into reality. Especially in this century, America has kept alight the torch of freedom, but not just for ourselves but for millions of others around the world.

And this brings me to my final point today. During my first press conference as President, in answer to a direct question, I pointed out that, as good Marxist-Leninists, the Soviet leaders have openly and publicly declared that the only morality they recognize is that which will further their cause, which is world revolution. I think I should point out I was only quoting Lenin, their guiding spirit, who said in 1920 that they repudiate all morality that proceeds from supernatural ideasâ€”that’s their name for religionâ€”or ideas that are outside class conceptions. Morality is entirely subordinate to the interests of class war. And everything is moral that is necessary for the annihilation of the old, exploiting social order and for uniting the proletariat.

Well, I think the refusal of many influential people to accept this elementary fact of Soviet doctrine illustrates an historical reluctance to see totalitarian powers for what they are. We saw this phenomenon in the 1930s. We see it too often today.

This doesn’t mean we should isolate ourselves and refuse to seek an understanding with them. I intend to do everything I can to persuade them of our peaceful intent, to remind them that it was the West that refused to use its nuclear monopoly in the forties and fifties for territorial gain and which now proposes 50-percent cut in strategic ballistic missiles and the elimination of an entire class of land-based, intermediate-range nuclear missiles.

At the same time, however, they must be made to understand we will never compromise our principles and standards. We will never give away our freedom. We will never abandon our belief in God. And we will never stop searching for a genuine peace. But we can assure none of these things America stands for through the so-called nuclear freeze solutions proposed by some.

The truth is that a freeze now would be a very dangerous fraud, for that is merely the illusion of peace. The reality is that we must find peace through strength.

I would agree to a freeze if only we could freeze the Soviets’ global desires. A freeze at current levels of weapons would remove any incentive for the Soviets to negotiate seriously in Geneva and virtually end our chances to achieve the major arms reductions which we have proposed. Instead, they would achieve their objectives through the freeze.

A freeze would reward the Soviet Union for its enormous and unparalleled military buildup. It would prevent the essential and long overdue modernization of United States and allied defenses and would leave our aging forces increasingly vulnerable. And an honest freeze would require extensive prior negotiations on the systems and numbers to be limited and on the measures to ensure effective verification and compliance. And the kind of a freeze that has been suggested would be virtually impossible to verify. Such a major effort would divert us completely from our current negotiations on achieving substantial reductions.

A number of years ago, I heard a young father, a very prominent young man in the entertainment world, addressing a tremendous gathering in California. It was during the time of the cold war, and communism and our own way of life were very much on people’s minds. And he was speaking to that subject. And suddenly, though, I heard him saying, “I love my little girls more than anythingâ€”â€”” And I said to myself, “Oh, no, don’t. You can’tâ€”don’t say that.” But I had underestimated him. He went on: “I would rather see my little girls die now, still believing in God, than have them grow up under communism and one day die no longer believing in God.”

There were thousands of young people in that audience. They came to their feet with shouts of joy. They had instantly recognized the profound truth in what he had said, with regard to the physical and the soul and what was truly important.

Yes, let us pray for the salvation of all of those who live in that totalitarian darknessâ€”pray they will discover the joy of knowing God. But until they do, let us be aware that while they preach the supremacy of the state, declare its omnipotence over individual man, and predict its eventual domination of all peoples on the Earth, they are the focus of evil in the modern world.

It was C.S. Lewis who, in his unforgettable “Screwtape Letters,” wrote: “The greatest evil is not done now in those sordid ‘dens of crime’ that Dickens loved to paint. It is not even done in concentration camps and labor camps. In those we see its final result. But it is conceived and ordered (moved, seconded, carried and minuted) in clear, carpeted, warmed, and well-lighted offices, by quiet men with white collars and cut fingernails and smooth-shaven cheeks who do not need to raise their voice.”

Well, because these “quiet men” do not “raise their voices,” because they sometimes speak in soothing tones of brotherhood and peace, because, like other dictators before them, they’re always making “their final territorial demand,” some would have us accept them at their word and accommodate ourselves to their aggressive impulses. But if history teaches anything, it teaches that simple-minded appeasement or wishful thinking about our adversaries is folly. It means the betrayal of our past, the squandering of our freedom.

So, I urge you to speak out against those who would place the United States in a position of military and moral inferiority. You know, I’ve always believed that old Screwtape reserved his best efforts for those of you in the church. So, in your discussions of the nuclear freeze proposals, I urge you to beware the temptation of prideâ€”the temptation of blithely declaring yourselves above it all and label both sides equally at fault, to ignore the facts of history and the aggressive impulses of an evil empire, to simply call the arms race a giant misunderstanding and thereby remove yourself from the struggle between right and wrong and good and evil.

I ask you to resist the attempts of those who would have you withhold your support for our efforts, this administration’s efforts, to keep America strong and free, while we negotiate real and verifiable reductions in the world’s nuclear arsenals and one day, with God’s help, their total elimination.

While America’s military strength is important, let me add here that I’ve always maintained that the struggle now going on for the world will never be decided by bombs or rockets, by armies or military might. The real crisis we face today is a spiritual one; at root, it is a test of moral will and faith.

Whittaker Chambers, the man whose own religious conversion made him a witness to one of the terrible traumas of our time, the Hiss-Chambers case, wrote that the crisis of the Western World exists to the degree in which the West is indifferent to God, the degree to which it collaborates in communism’s attempt to make man stand alone without God. And then he said, for Marxism-Leninism is actually the second oldest faith, first proclaimed in the Garden of Eden with the words of temptation, “Ye shall be as gods.”

The Western World can answer this challenge, he wrote, “but only provided that its faith in God and the freedom He enjoins is as great as communism’s faith in Man.”

I believe we shall rise to the challenge. I believe that communism is another sad, bizarre chapter in human history whose last pages even now are being written. I believe this because the source of our strength in the quest for human freedom is not material, but spiritual. And because it knows no limitation, it must terrify and ultimately triumph over those who would enslave their fellow man. For in the words of Isaiah: “He giveth power to the faint; and to them that have no might He increased strength. . . . But they that wait upon the Lord shall renew their strength; they shall mount up with wings as eagles; they shall run, and not be weary. . . .”

Yes, change your world. One of our Founding Fathers, Thomas Paine, said, “We have it within our power to begin the world over again.” We can do it, doing together what no one church could do by itself.

God bless you, and thank you very much.

Ronald Reaganâ€™s Political Platform for 1980.
Ronald Reagan for President 1980 Campaign Brochure

ËœThe time is now for strong leadership.’
There is a crisis of leadership in America today that only new, strong leadership can correct. A strong leadership tempered with wisdom, decency and compassion. Thatâ€™s Governor Reaganâ€™s vision of leadership. And if he is elected President, here is a glimpse of what Americans can expect.

Strong leadership in foreign affairs means a strong peace.

Only a strong America can enjoy the fruits of a strong peace. And only a strong peace can instill in Americans a sense of security and the feeling of confidence they seek.

Says Reagan: â€œWe know only too well that war comes not when the forces of freedom are strong, but when they are weak. It is then that tyrants are tempted.â€

Under a Reagan Administration, America would move swiftly to:

Provide the leadership and policy direction necessary to promote a healthy, growing economy, enabling the U.S. to show the world it is a nation in control of its destiny again.

Restore Americaâ€™s military strength, because an America that enjoys a margin of safety in its military preparedness is an America with the greatest chance to keep the peace â€” the strong peace that would always be at the heart of Ronald Reaganâ€™s foreign policy.

Speak out more often and more eloquently â€” in the U.N., through the Voice of America, Radio Free Europe, and in every other proper forum â€” on behalf of peace, freedom, human rights...the principles for which America stands.

Seek greater consultation and cooperation with our European allies â€” fully expecting each one of them to bear a fair share of the common defense effort â€” in order to maintain a strong NATO as a counterweight to the Soviet Unionâ€™s continuing arms build-up.

Re-establish an efficient intelligence operation, for the ability to detect and act upon a brewing problem early and peaceably is essential in conducting an effective foreign policy.

Make it clearly understood that detente is a two-way street and that the Soviet Union cannot expect U.S. silence in the face of aggression, such as the invasion of Afghanistan â€” or refusal to honor the Helsinki Agreements guaranteeing a free interchange of information and the right to emigrate.

All of these points represent but a sampling of the foreign policy direction that a Reagan Administration would take. Such a foreign policy would not stand alone. It would be linked to a domestic policy that reinforced its strength and credibility in the eyes of the world.

Strong leadership in economic policy means lower taxes, more jobs, and less inflation.

Governor Reagan has an economic program for America that will work because itâ€™s a comprehensive program. A program that recognizes the interrelationships and complexity of our economy...one that combines the wisdom of leading American economists with common sense.

Here is the basis of the Economic Plan that can be expected from a Reagan Administration:

The growth of federal spending will be controlled. A freeze on federal hiring will be instituted immediately. And Ronald Reagan will do as President what he did as Governor of California: create a task force composed of the finest minds from industry and labor, to isolate wasteful and fraudulent operations in government, estimated by the Justice Department to amount to as much as $25 billion. No longer will unemployment be used to fight inflation.

An immediate 10% reduction in personal tax rates, along with acceleration of depreciation schedules, will be initiated in order to help generate industrial expansion and the creation of new jobs. Changes will be made in the tax structure, especially aimed at removing those requirements which serve as disincentives in industry. It will be recommended that the tax on savings account interest be further reduced. Upon reducing the tax rates, tax indexing will be proposed to protect taxpayers from automatic tax increases resulting from cost-of-living wage increases.

Action will be taken to review those government regulations which clearly hamper, instead of encourage, economic growth â€” and to then change them in as orderly a fashion as possible. This action will not affect regulations in such sensitive areas as health and job safety which do serve a useful purpose.

A sound monetary policy will be restored â€” one designed to instill confidence in the American dollar abroad, as well as bring down the rate of inflation at home.

The nationâ€™s economic policy, once established, will be adhered to. Abrupt changes in economic policy have, in recent years, aggravated existing problems and created new ones; they have played havoc with the confidence of those in both industry and labor. The right economic policy, held steadily and consistently on course, will do much to establish greater stability in Americaâ€™s economic system.

Beyond these broad economic steps aimed at expanding the economy as a whole, a Reagan Administration would recognize that special problems exist which require special solutions.

A few examples:

For workers who have lost their jobs because they lack certain skills or are victims of a changing

technology, Reagan would act to implement job retraining and job placement programs.

For disadvantaged youths and others unemployed because of the flight of industry from the cities, enterprise zones would be established in depressed urban areas in order to stimulate new businesses and new jobs.

For industries in trouble because of exceptionally aggressive foreign competition â€” such as the auto industry â€” he would initiate steps to permit American industry to be more competitive in the world market. These would include the elimination of unnecessary and costly regulations...and adopting a firmer, common sense view of future trade agreements with other nations, always with jobs for American workers uppermost in mind.

Strong leadership in meeting human needs means common sense, as well as compassion.

Ronald Reagan believes in the need to devise lasting solutions to problems, and in the need to combine a sense of caring with a sense of the cost involved.

As President, he will:

Strengthen the Social Security system in order to insure that older Americans need never worry about the survival of the system. And he will strive to improve quality health care for the aged and poor through medicare and medicaid.

Act to change the tax structure to make treatment of working spouses more equitable, and remove the present tax provision that penalizes married two-worker families.

Work at both the federal level and with state governments to end welfare fraud by removing ineligibles from the rolls, strengthen â€œwork incentiveâ€ programs to help recipients become self-supporting, and at the same time, resolve to never fail to assist those who are truly needy.

Propose a health policy with built-in protections against financial disaster brought on by huge medical expenses.

Sponsor the removal of many of the bureaucratic and costly federal regulations on small businesses, thereby assisting them to be profitable.

Demand vigorous enforcement of civil rights laws intended to assure equal treatment in job recruitment, hiring, promotions, pay, credit, mortgage access and housing.

Support equal rights and opportunities for women in such key areas as employment, but oppose taking away the traditional rights women have enjoyed, such as exemption from the military draft.

Support every effort to guarantee quality education for every American...back tax credits for parents bearing the cost of educating their children in non-public schools...and oppose forced busing of children that is often disruptive and does nothing to improve educational quality.

Ronald Reagan believes â€” and is ready to prove â€” that strong leadership can make a difference in meeting the human needs of Americans in a way that combines a sense of caring with a sense of what the cost will be to every American taxpayer.

Strong leadership means strong people working as a team to get the job done.

When Ronald Reagan was Governor of California, he was widely acclaimed by friend and foe alike for selecting the most qualified and capable men and women to serve in state government. He would, as President, put together the finest team to assist in the formulation and implementation of both domestic and foreign policies. Here is just a sampling of the talent he has called on during the campaign:

Gerald R. Ford, former President; Milton Friedman, Nobel Prize-winning economist; Donald H. Rumsfeld, former Secretary of Defense; James Lynn, former head of the Office of Management and Budget; George S. Shultz, former Secretary of Labor and Secretary of the Treasury; Rita Hauser, former U.S. Representative to the U.N. Commission on Human Rights; Dr. Fred Ikle, former Director of the U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency; Arthur Burns, former Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board, Frank Shakespeare, former Director of the U.S. Information Agency; Alexander M Haig, former Supreme Commander of NATO; Carla A. Hills, former Secretary of Housing and Urban Development; William P. Rogers, former Attorney General, Donald E. Santarelli former Associate Deputy Attorney General and Caspar Weinberger, former Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare.

What all of these people have in common is experience and expertise in specific areas of government policy. Together, they would bring to a Reagan Administration a reputation for knowledge, sound judgment, and a keen awareness of the type of strong leadership that America needs.

They would also bring the urgent realization that the time for such strong leadership is now.

The time is now, for Reagan.

Reagan. For President.

Barry Goldwater for President 1964 Campaign Brochure

â€˜BARRY GOLDWATER SPEAKS OUT FOR A STRONGER AMERICAâ€™

Barry Goldwater is troubled by attempts to change our form of government - and is resolved to maintain the historical balance of our Republic.

GOVERNMENT BUREAUCRACY

“Our tendency to concentrate power in the hands of a few men deeply concerns me. We can be conquered by bombs or by subversion; but we can also be conquered by neglect - by ignoring the Constitution and disregarding the principles of limited government.

“I am convinced that most Americans now want to reverse the trend. I think that concern for our vanishing freedoms is genuine. I think that the people”s uneasiness in the stifling omnipresence of government has turned into something approaching alarm. But bemoaning the evil will not drive it back, and accusing fingers will not shrink government.”

STATES RIGHTS

Barry Goldwater knows that government to be responsive must be close to the people.

“There is a reason for (the Constitutionâ€™s) reservation of “States” Rights.

Not only does it prevent the accumulation of power in a central government that is remote from the people and relatively immune from popular restraints; it also recognizes the principle that essentially local problems are best dealt with by the people most directly concerned. Who knows better than New Yorkers how much and what kind of publicly financed slum clearance in New York City is needed and can be afforded? Who knows better than Nebraskans whether that State has an adequate nursing program? Who knows better than Arizonans the kind of school program that is needed to educate their children?

“The people have long since seen through the spurious suggestion that federal aid comes free. They know that the money comes out of their own pockets, and that it is returned to them minus a brokerâ€™s fee taken by the federal bureaucracy. They know, too, that the power to decide how that money shall be spent is withdrawn from them and exercised by some planning board deep in the caverns of one of the federal agencies. They understand this represents a great and perhaps irreparable loss-not only in their wealth, but in their priceless liberty.”

CIVIL RIGHTS

Barry Goldwater wants equal treatment for all Americans, but preferential treatment for none.

“The right to vote, to equal treatment before the law, to hold property, and to the protection of contracts are clearly guaranteed by the 14th and 15th Amendments to the Constitution. These rights should be rigorously enforced. Existing law demands it.

“In the schools, the Attorney General already has the authority through court decrees to effect integration. But if more authority must be granted, we should write a law that is tightly drawn, that can be used like a rifle, not a shotgun.

“As for the proposed public accommodations law, it is unconstitutional and a clear example of a new law which will only hinder, not help the cause of racial tolerance. Such a law could even open the door to a police-state system of enforcement that would eventually threaten the liberty of us all.

“No matter how we try, we cannot pass a law that will make you like me or me like you. The key to racial and religious tolerance lies not in laws alone but, ultimately, in the hearts of men.”

He is a staunch defender of personal freedom and the rights of every individual.

“Unenforceable government edicts benefit no one. Continued public attention and moral persuasion, I believe, will do more, in the long run to create the good will necessary to the acceptance of decent racial relations in all segments of our society.

“Our people must not be herded into the streets for the redress of their grievances. We have better ways, more lasting and more honest ways.”

LABOR

Barry Goldwater is not afraid to challenge vested interests, either in management or labor. He has challenged “bossism” everywhere.

“The labor movement was born out of the threat of the loss of freedom through excesses of overbearing business monopolies. It has served well to bring the pendulum back from the extreme. I believe that unionism, in its proper sphere, accomplishes a positive good for the country.

“But the pendulum has now swung too far in the opposite direction and we we faced, as a people, with the stern obligation to halt a menacing misappropriation of power before it completely engulfs the liberties of labor, management and the general public.”

SOCIAL SECURITY

Barry Goldwater wants to safeguard the “security” in Social Security.

I favor a sound Social Security system and I want to see it strengthened. I want to see every participant receive all the benefits this system provides. And I want to see these benefits paid in dollars with real purchasing power.

“Social Security is a system of basic protection for the aged. In addition, most Americans now participate in private pension plans while many have their own savings and investments Social Security was never intended to replace these voluntary programs. Its prime purpose was and is to supplement them, to provide a basic floor. I am convinced it can do this job, the job for which it was created.

“Essentially, protection against need in America depends upon a free economy which produces an ever-growing abundance and an ever-greater opportunity for all. In this framework, I believe Social Security has a vital and legitimate supporting role.”

FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY

Barry Goldwater believes that the first fiscal responsibility of the Federal Government is to preserve the value of the dollar.

“Government must do everything within its power to guarantee a sound dollar. It can do this by reasonable budgets, by living within the means of the people who pay the bills, and by encouraging the individual enterprise from which the real value of money is formed.

“We need clearly stated and clearly understood priorities for national programs. We cannot do everything at once and there are many things the Federal Government should not try to do. Local governments must take on more and not, less responsibility in meeting needs when those needs are fully established.”

He will trim unnecessary and unwarranted Federal spending.

“Let us, by all means, remember the nation’s interest in reducing taxes and spending. The need for economic growth that we hear so much about these days will be achieved, not by the government harnessing the nation”s economic forces but by emancipating them. By reducing taxes and spending we will not only return to the individual the means with which he can assert his freedom and dignity, but also guarantee to the nation the economic strength that will always be its ultimate defense against foreign foes.”

THE WELFARE STATE

Barry Goldwater has issued a clear call to halt the relentless drift toward the welfare state.

“We, the people, can change all of this. We can unite. We can reject appeasement. We can deny self-indulgence. We can restrain our pressure groups from seeking special privilege favors at the expense of the general public taxpayer.

“We can meet our obligations and not postpone the debt payment and place that burden on the next generation. We can do all of these things, for the people of America are strong, capable and courageous.

“To do these things, to restore the flaming beacon of freedom and opportunity which for so many generations enjoyed the admiration and affection of all the peoples of this earth, we must make our voices heard in the election of those who are to represent us in the governing bodies of this republic.

“We must elect uncommon men to do an uncommon job for an uncommon country.”

LEADERSHIP AND THE AMERICAN DREAM

Goldwater has asked all of us to dedicate ourselves to the American dream.

“I understand what the people of America are saying in this decade. Their message has been heard and understood. The people are now eager for a leader who will restore, the Constitutional limitations of government, who will mobilize moral force of 180 million people to reduce and to limit the inequitable, concentration of power in any government, organization or economic combine.”

With these challenging words, Senator Barry Goldwater of Arizona launched his campaign for the Presidency of the United States. Their force and clarity reflect the man and explain the ever-increasing enthusiasm of millions of Americans for him. They are the words of a businessman and soldier turned statesman who will accept no substitutes for fundamental American principles. They are the words of a dedicated public servant seeking our Nation’s highest office; not to satisfy personal ambition, but to lead a crusade which will restore pride and self reliance at home and respect abroad.

Throughout his public career, Barry Goldwater has never made special appeals to special interest groups. He never will. He is an American who will work for America; not for one particular section, class, group or party, but for all of America. He is one man in public life today who can transform principles into programs to produce a stronger America and a stronger Free World.

Go Goldwater â€œA Choice Not an Echoâ€

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.