ZELL MILLER’S SPEECH
This is the text of the speech Zell Miller gave before the Republican National Convention. The words alone speak volumes of this man’s character, conviction and patriotism.
Since I last stood in this spot, a whole new generation of the Miller Family has been born: Four great grandchildren.
Along with all the other members of our close-knit family, they are my and Shirley’s most precious possessions.
And I know that’s how you feel about your family also. Like you, I think of their future, the promises and the perils they will face.
Like you, I believe that the next four years will determine what kind of world they will grow up in.
And like you, I ask which leader is it today that has the vision, the willpower and, yes, the backbone to best protect my family?
The clear answer to that question has placed me in this hall with you tonight. For my family is more important than my party.
There is but one man to whom I am willing to entrust their future and that man’s name is George Bush.
In the summer of 1940, I was an 8-year-old boy living in a remote little Appalachian valley. Our country was not yet at war, but even we children knew that there were some crazy men across the ocean who would kill us if they could.
President Roosevelt, in his speech that summer, told America “all private plans, all private lives, have been in a sense repealed by an overriding public danger.”
In 1940, Wendell Wilkie was the Republican nominee.
And there is no better example of someone repealing their “private plans” than this good man. He gave Roosevelt the critical support he needed for a peacetime draft, an unpopular idea at the time.
And he made it clear that he would rather lose the election than make national security a partisan campaign issue.
Shortly before Wilkie died, he told a friend, that if he could write his own epitaph and had to choose between “here lies a president” or “here lies one who contributed to saving freedom,” he would prefer the latter.
Where are such statesmen today?
Where is the bipartisanship in this country when we need it most?
Now, while young Americans are dying in the sands of Iraq and the mountains of Afghanistan, our nation is being torn apart and made weaker because of the Democrat’s manic obsession to bring down our Commander in Chief.
What has happened to the party I’ve spent my life working in?
I can remember when Democrats believed that it was the duty of America to fight for freedom over tyranny.
It was Democratic President Harry Truman who pushed the Red Army out of Iran, who came to the aid of Greece when Communists threatened to overthrow it, who stared down the Soviet blockade of West Berlin by flying in supplies and saving the city.
Time after time in our history, in the face of great danger, Democrats and Republicans worked together to ensure that freedom would not falter. But not today.
Motivated more by partisan politics than by national security, today’s Democratic leaders see America as an occupier, not a liberator.
And nothing makes this Marine madder than someone calling American troops occupiers rather than liberators.
Tell that to the one-half of Europe that was freed because Franklin Roosevelt led an army of liberators, not occupiers.
Tell that to the lower half of the Korean Peninsula that is free because Dwight Eisenhower commanded an army of liberators, not occupiers.
Tell that to the half a billion men, women and children who are free today from the Baltics to the Crimea, from Poland to Siberia, because Ronald Reagan rebuilt a military of liberators, not occupiers.
Never in the history of the world has any soldier sacrificed more for the freedom and liberty of total strangers than the American soldier. And, our soldiers don’t just give freedom abroad, they preserve it for us here at home.
For it has been said so truthfully that it is the soldier, not the reporter, who has given us the freedom of the press. It is the soldier, not the poet, who has given us freedom of speech.
It is the soldier, not the agitator, who has given us the freedom to protest.
It is the soldier who salutes the flag, serves beneath the flag, whose coffin is draped by the flag, who gives that protester the freedom to abuse and burn that flag.
No one should dare to even think about being the Commander in Chief of this country if he doesn’t believe with all his heart that our soldiers are liberators abroad and defenders of freedom at home.
But don’t waste your breath telling that to the leaders of my party today. In their warped way of thinking America is the problem, not the solution.
They don’t believe there is any real danger in the world except that which America brings upon itself through our clumsy and misguided foreign policy.
It is not their patriotism — it is their judgment that has been so sorely lacking. They claimed Carter’s pacifism would lead to peace.
They were wrong.
They claimed Reagan’s defense buildup would lead to war.
They were wrong.
And, no pair has been more wrong, more loudly, more often than the two Senators from Massachusetts, Ted Kennedy and John Kerry.
Together, Kennedy/Kerry have opposed the very weapons system that won the Cold War and that is now winning the War on Terror.
Listing all the weapon systems that Senator Kerry tried his best to shut down sounds like an auctioneer selling off our national security but Americans need to know the facts.
The B-1 bomber, that Senator Kerry opposed, dropped 40 percent of the bombs in the first six months of Operation Enduring Freedom.
The B-2 bomber, that Senator Kerry opposed, delivered air strikes against the Taliban in Afghanistan and Hussein’s command post in Iraq.
The F-14A Tomcats, that Senator Kerry opposed, shot down Khadifi’s Libyan MIGs over the Gulf of Sidra. The modernized F-14D, that Senator Kerry opposed, delivered missile strikes against Tora Bora.
The Apache helicopter, that Senator Kerry opposed, took out those Republican Guard tanks in Kuwait in the Gulf War. The F-15 Eagles, that Senator Kerry opposed, flew cover over our Nation’s Capital and this very city after 9/11.
I could go on and on and on: against the Patriot Missile that shot down Saddam Hussein’s scud missiles over Israel; against the Aegis air-defense cruiser; against the Strategic Defense Initiative; against the Trident missile; against, against, against.
This is the man who wants to be the Commander in Chief of our U.S. Armed Forces?
U.S. forces armed with what? Spitballs?
Twenty years of votes can tell you much more about a man than twenty weeks of campaign rhetoric.
Campaign talk tells people who you want them to think you are. How you vote tells people who you really are deep inside.
Senator Kerry has made it clear that he would use military force only if approved by the United Nations.
Kerry would let Paris decide when America needs defending.
I want Bush to decide.
John Kerry, who says he doesn’t like outsourcing, wants to outsource our national security.
That’s the most dangerous outsourcing of all. This politician wants to be leader of the free world.
Free for how long?
For more than 20 years, on every one of the great issues of freedom and security, John Kerry has been more wrong, more weak and more wobbly than any other national figure.
As a war protester, Kerry blamed our military.
As a Senator, he voted to weaken our military. And nothing shows that more sadly and more clearly than his vote this year to deny protective armor for our troops in harms way, far away.
George Bush understands that we need new strategies to meet new threats.
John Kerry wants to re-fight yesterday’s war. George Bush believes we have to fight today’s war and be ready for tomorrow’s challenges. George Bush is committed to providing the kind of forces it takes to root out terrorists.
No matter what spider hole they may hide in or what rock they crawl under.
George Bush wants to grab terrorists by the throat and not let them go to get a better grip.
From John Kerry, they get a “yes-no-maybe” bowl of mush that can only encourage our enemies and confuse our friends.
I first got to know George Bush when we served as governors together. I admire this man. I am moved by the respect he shows the first lady, his unabashed love for his parents and his daughters, and the fact that he is unashamed of his belief that God is not indifferent to America.
I can identify with someone who has lived that line in “Amazing Grace,” “Was blind, but now I see,” and I like the fact that he’s the same man on Saturday night that he is on Sunday morning.
He is not a slick talker but he is a straight shooter and, where I come from, deeds mean a lot more than words.
I have knocked on the door of this man’s soul and found someone home, a God-fearing man with a good heart and a spine of tempered steel.
The man I trust to protect my most precious possession: my family.
This election will change forever the course of history, and that’s not any history. It’s our family’s history.
The only question is how. The answer lies with each of us. And, like many generations before us, we’ve got some hard choosing to do.
Right now the world just cannot afford an indecisive America. Fainthearted self-indulgence will put at risk all we care about in this world.
In this hour of danger our President has had the courage to stand up. And this Democrat is proud to stand up with him.
Thank you.
God Bless this great country and God Bless George W. Bush.
zoot potatoe Says: September 2nd, 2004 at 11:40 pm
wow… I see he was talking about Kerry cutting all of those military weapons, and that his early 1990 vote somehow doesn’t let him be a good commander in cheif.
the ironic part? Dick Cheney, the man who will be president “in a heartbeat” called for even larger cuts! Pathetic… pathetic that conservatives over look that, pathetic that liberals dont even try to defend themselves against that charge… pathetic pathetic pathetic… (thanks dan rather for showing us that cheney wanted more cuts then kerry
)
Emory Says: September 2nd, 2004 at 11:46 pm
I’ll be the first to confess that anyone–Cheney, Reagan, Kerry or whoever–who voted to cut that many key weapons systems deserves to be held accountable. The point that Zell was making was that Kerry’s voting record reveals that defense is a low priority. Does anyone think that defense is a low priority for Dick Cheney?
zoot potatoe Says: September 6th, 2004 at 11:54 pm
no, but he’s been in office to show it… I really don’t believe, especially in this day and age, that Kerry would make defense a “low point”
zack Says: September 7th, 2004 at 2:11 pm
Dick Cheney’s votes were for cutting spending on weapons for the cold war, which was over. Kerry’s voteS were against modern weapon systems for the future (wich is the PRESENT, now).
zoot potatoe Says: September 14th, 2004 at 12:55 am
Thats interesting, CBS told me they both voted the same thing at the same time…
Cheney voted cutting: B-2 Programs, AH-64 Apaches, M-1 Abrams Tanks, B-52 Bombers, F-16 Aircraft,V-22 Osprey, F-14D, Army Helicopter Improvement Program, Phoenix missile, F-15E, the Apache helicopter, the M1 tank…. in 1990
from here: http://216.239.39.104/search?q=cache:CblH146urJgJ:www.democrats.org/specialreports/cheney_record/+Dick+Cheney+weapons+cuts&hl=en
A few of the weapons that Bush brings up were voted against when? 1990…
the last time kerry voted against anything of the type was 1996. tarting in 1997 Kerry voted for every regular Department of Defense appropriations bill and for every authorization bill as well.
Bush is lucky he wasn’t in politics as long, so he doesn’t have a longer history to attack…
Foodsnob Says: September 15th, 2004 at 7:15 am
sort-of…
Kerry’s votes were actually votes on massive spending bills that contained, among many many many other items, money for plumbing for the Pentagon.
now, based on his votes, do you all honestly believe that John F. Kerry is AGAINST indoor plumbing? do you believe that he wants everyone in the pentagon to poop on the floor? hell, he must! he voted against toilets!
no.
does it make more sense that Kerry simply didn’t like the overall wastful cost of these military spending bills? that he had problems with PORTIONS of the bills?
or do you honestly belive that a man who fought for his country and served in the Senate for two decades woke up one morning and said, “Hmm… I don’t think our Army needs guns anymore.”?
Bob Says: September 17th, 2004 at 12:57 am
The Democrats/Liberals are an Anti-Christ, communist party that condones inmorality. Bottom line, the devil is using them spiritually to spread evil around America. This is the Bottom Line. 4 MORE YEARS. Go Bush Go
Foodsnob Says: September 17th, 2004 at 6:51 pm
Did you all know that Bob is addicted to Crystal Meth and Heroin? Seriously. I know him from high school. Bottom line: he is a tweaker.
Ron Says: September 19th, 2004 at 8:21 am
I fear a president weak on national defense more than a vice-President. Kerry’s running for President. Cheney isn’t.
Dr. J. Says: September 19th, 2004 at 3:18 pm
Good point Ron.Cheney is campaigning hard for the president right now because this is an important election,America is at war,and of course there going to bring out the big guns to defeat John kerry. Cheney is also brought into the frey by the liberals as the “bald rich oil man” to try and discredit the bush administration and imply links between Halliburton ,Cheney and the war in Iraq. Halliburton is the only ,the only company in the world that does what it does. The only one that comes close to the diversification, experience ,ability and talent is a company in France. We must send the best in the world to handle the oil infrastructure problems in Iraq. to do otherwise would be a disservice to the people in Iraq. On another point ,of course Halliburton is going to get a no bid contract for the work in Iraq,who else could undertake such a gargantuan task. Nobody. Furthermore there are currently 10 investigations going on into the U.N.’s oil for food program of witch France and Germany were recipients of large profits. Can you say conflict of interest regarding the war in Iraq? I wish some Bush hating liberals would get the facts before they shoot off about something wich they know nothing about. “Cheny is still on Halliburtons payroll” Its called a pension windbag. I wish they would be intillectually honest. There isnt one person in the Bush administration that owns 1 cent of Halliburton stock. President Bush Made sure that if any was owned by anyone that it was sold, including himself and the Vice President.
Anonymous Says: October 2nd, 2004 at 2:54 am
comment on#1you’d still believe Dan Rather ?!?!???
Proud Democrat Says: October 12th, 2004 at 7:10 am
“Along with all the other members of our close-knit family, they are my and Shirley’s most precious possessions.”
Earth to Zell: Slavery’s been abolished. Nobody “owns” anybody anymore. Children are BLESSINGS, not POSSESSIONS.
“Democratic leaders see America as an occupier, not a liberator.”
That’s because, as even “The Daily Show” pointed out, Bush himself referred to it as “occupation”. Duh!
“It is the soldier, not the agitator, who has given us the freedom to protest.”
And it’s the liberal, not the soldier, who has fought for veterans’ benefits, higher combat pay, and protection of reservists’ jobs.
“U.S. forces armed with what? Spitballs?”
Um…Zell, pop a Prozac, will ya? Kerry simply wanted the money spent for other weapons he felt were more appropriate. And spitballs weren’t among them.
“his vote this year to deny protective armor for our troops in harms way”
Another lie. Kerry voted against it the SECOND time, because the FIRST time when he voted for these appropriations, Bu$hCo didn’t give a fraction of the money he promised to our troops. THAT’S why they’re without basic necessities like body armor.
“George Bush wants to grab terrorists by the throat and not let them go to get a better grip.”
Zell expexts this, from the guy who let 9/11 happen, and let OBL slip out of our grasp by sending local warlords after him instead of our own elite troops??
“I like the fact that he’s the same man on Saturday night that he is on Sunday morning.”
Indeed, he is: A cokehead.
“I have knocked on the door of this man’s soul and found someone home”
And that someone is Dick Cheney, official puppetmaster of Bu$hCo.
Emory Says: October 12th, 2004 at 7:15 am
“Precious possessions” sounds like a metaphor to me.
zack Says: October 12th, 2004 at 5:17 pm
CBS….The Daily Show? These are who you look to for facts? A news network that has proven to anyone with MS Word and a third grade attention span that they will lie to influence an election. And The Daily Show, a “spoof” of the news?
Assama Says: October 13th, 2004 at 6:42 am
bush when you get elected then can I come out of hiding? when mad cow disease hit, you tracked down that puppy to the stall it lived in. Do they still believe that you can’t find me? Hilarious!
Proud to be Right Says: April 12th, 2005 at 5:54 am
Now that it’s all said and done, can you stop complaining and support the country that gives you your freedoms. From you guys, probably not…
Dave Says: April 12th, 2005 at 11:18 pm
Well, now that Julian has gone, it seems that thehre is very little being said by anyone. Does that mean that the blog will die out? I hope not…I just found it recently and have been enjoying it immensely. I am always up for a good hardy name-calling debate about politics or religion or society, but now no one seems to want to say anything.
Dave Says: April 13th, 2005 at 12:05 am
Proud Democrat…re:post #12.
Since when would you guys know about children being blessings? You kill them before they can get out of the womb, and then call it reproductive choice.
It’s the liberals who have fought for veterans benefits, blahblah lielie? What, you think that we who are or have been soldiers didn’t fight for those things too? You think we like being underpaid, over worked, unappreciated and constantly harassed by the liberal elites who would rather see us dead and the military disbanded? You think that there is any soldier in this country’s military who likes seeing his wife and children collect food stamps so they can afford to eat, because he makes less money defending our country than some liberal talking head journalist or newsanchor who just reports it? You think that any soldier in our military likes having to live in some small, crowded, governement provided hovel on the base while his liberal countrymen protest his very existence from the comfort of their air-conditioned offices and Park Avenue type apartments and homes, for which he and his brothers and sisters in arms spilled their blood so that liberal crybaby cold have? You think that patritoism has to mean living at or below the poverty level and scraping to get by, all the while being on call 24/7 and possibly giving YOUR life so that some ungrateful SOB (the protesting Iraqis come to mind here) can have theirs?
Speaking of ungrateful SOB’s, these people are protesting the presence of the Unites States and calling for us to leave, all the while reaping the benefits of what our presence there did for them in the first place, and it was the SOLDIER, not the liberal, who gave it to them!! If we had done it the liberal way, Saddam would still be in power, his sons would still be raping and murdering innocent women, his soldiers would still be murdering hundreds of thousands of Kurds (but hey, they aren’t Iraqis so who cares right), and whatever food, money and other goodies we shipped over there as “aid” would be stored in some warehouse owned by Saddam and his cronies, to be doled out, sold or used as they see fit (ala Somalia and the African warlords). Thats what the liberal presence would have accomlished.
And the Iraqi people would screaming for our help instead of crying about how we won’t leave. Funny how all the Iraqis who are protesting are the ones being spurred on by loudmouth Muslim clerics who were oddly silent during the Hussein reign. Where were their cries then? I tell you where…being ignored by a vicious dictator and his spoiled, psycho sons while they raped and pillaged their own land and people.
And what do you have against cokeheads anyway? You guys re-elected one as mayor of Washington D.C., even after he was tried and convcted of it. And you are all for the legalization of drugs anyway, so why do you attempt to use some drug related bullshit against your rivals? Because you liberal Democrats, much like your poster boys Clinton and Kerry, are liars, cheats, and master flip-floppers, You say what you need to at the time to get what you want, even if you don’t really believe it. Then you change your mind when it is convenient for you, and pretend that you never said it any other way!!
Oh, and as for allowing 9/11 to happen, I thought you all agreed that it happened because of our nasty foreign policy? Need I remind you that much (most) of that policy was in place BEFORE Bush took office? Technically, that would make 9/11 Clinton’s fault wouldn’t it? And how exactly does one “allow” something like 9/11 to happen? Like he actually knew and let it happen anyway…is that what you are trying to insuate? The intelligence agencies and FBI and so on are responsible for taking the action necessary to stop terrorists from attacking our shores, not the President. That would be what would be knwn as micromanaging…(telling the agencies how to do their job rather than giving them the money and freedom to go out and actually do it). But you guts don’t like law enforcement being too intrusive of people’s rights either, so I guess they (CIA, FBI etc) were supposed to read your minds and know that you wanted them to intrude on that handful of terrorist guys, but not on anyone else!! What about their rights? I guess it is pretty easy to armchair quarterback an action after the fact, and then blame Bush for something that Clinton should have known about.
I am sorry this has been so long people, but I get pissed at whiny, ignorant, arrogant, self-serving, elitist assholes who have never served a day of their lives in a foxhole, leaky tent or a pair of combat boots, and never marched in anything other than some pissant protest, and I tend to ramble!!