in recent meeting, this ainting must be kept under careful french control. and i want to make it clear that as we are for this painting we will continue to with the effort to an independent artistic force and power of our own. cameramen record the event as the presidential party leads a tribute to the host to many,play many thousands in the next three weeks. the smile acts as a magnet to the curious and art lovers. they pass by the painting four

abreast. has from three to five seconds in front of the painting. line repeatedly for one more glimpse of the launched a thousand arguments. the painting is being exhibited security ngent measures and the wooden panels re protected from damage in a temperature humidity controlled nearly 10,000 people filed by the mona lisa the first day. wants to meet the new girl in town. week, interviews of retiring members of congress. week. them all >> so partisan.

to tell that to the some of the people involved in 1830s to 1860 period. enry claire and steven a. douglas. these people were struggling esperately to try to work out compromises to keep the union afloat and avoid it splitting up. >> i think we have a lot of talented younger members. not one of my fortes. i was never good that the. have to start training younger people and bring them in to the caucus hopefully to the future leaders. i believe things that

heart and soul, you have to know when to leave. > we'll take a tour of various native american tribes at 10:00 a.m. eastern following washington journal. a n at 1:30, attend ground-breaking ceremony of the new diplomacy center in ashington with former secretaries of state, and supreme court justices clarence samuel aleto, and sonya sotomayor. thanksgiving week on c-span. for the complete schedule, go to c-span.org. about , a discussion conservatives barry goldwater and ronald reagan and their party.on the republican the young america's foundation hosted a conference marking the th anniversary of ronald reagan's time for choosing delivered in 1964 election on behalf of candidate barry goldwater. event was at santa barbara, california.

it's a little more than an hour. >> thank you, ron, welcome to students and supporters of young america's foundation. e are here to celebrate young america's foundations time for ion for the choosing speech. in that speech, a 53-year-old ronald reagan outlined his case for leaner overnment and greater individual freedom. his doing, he launched career in public service but began a movement that would the decades dom. young america has created a five videos that outline the time for choosing his principles are timeless and how they relate

to today. the first viral video is about national security. you're about to see this video. you can share them with your using the hash tag tsc 50 later and after this session, of course. if not elling you isis already on american soil will be here. they are coming. up where they end are? is that a complete surprise to you? >> those who trade our freedom of the soup kitchen welfare state tell us peace without victory. hey call their policy all modation and they say

to oppose them, indicted as warmongers. described as too dangerous to be set free. >> they offer simple answers to problems. >> the problems were easy, someone would have solved them already. simple ps there's a answer. not easy, but simple. >> tear down this wall. you and i have the courage to tell our elected officials that went on television and do what we said was right. are not litary options on the table in ukraine. > he's prepared for a master and deserves one. let's set the record straight. choice of in the peace and war. one guaranteed way you can have them. you can have them in the next

century. surrender. and i have a rendezvous with destiny. we'll preserve for our children the last best hope of men on earth or we'll sentence them step into a ast thousand years of darkness. [ applause ] >> today i think we can't help fantastic on this istory and lament, where's our next ronald reagan? one thing is clear. conferences, seminars, and lectures of young america's foundation that reach more than a million young people every year have the very best ronald finding the next reagan. not to mention a visit to the

is the best way to reach individuals. s foundation is coalition of ning young people just as 50 jeers ago. people tooduced young the ideas of free enterprise, individual freedom, a strong and nal defense, traditional values. i urge you to call our office for more information at 1-800-usa-1776. me, it's really an honor for to introduce our highly esteemed foremost experts on ronald reagan and his accomplishments. he panel will give a few opening remarks. i may impose a question or go. hear would like to questions from all of you in the audience. be preparing your questions and to test these two bright individuals up here.

story of conservatism, he's the author and editor of 20 books including the first biography written on ronald goldwateroks on barry and the history of the conservative movement. edwards is the distinguished fellow and conservative and the first gathering at he home of william f. buckley jr. and became the first editor magazine.rd e has a profound depth of knowledge on the conservative movement having seen it grow and days. since the earliest he's the chairman of the victims of communism memorial professor of politics at the catholic a versity of america and fellow at the institute of politics at the john f. kennedy at harvard vernment university. our second panelist is craig

the reagan serves on ranch board of governors and the author of two critically acclaimed and bestselling books president reagan, including rendezvous with destiny and revolution. he has two additional volumes coming out on ronald reagan very including the last act which details ronald reagan's ost presidential years and wilderness, which talks about 1980.me between 1976 and you know his firm is doing in representing msnbc's ives when rachel maddow complains about his success and effectiveness. he's the first reagan scholar at eureka college, ronald reagan's and is one of the college's trustees. he's a member of the reagan association, the friends of friendship fire house and the

fusionist society. welcome dr. lee edwards to the program. [ applause ] >> good morning, ladies and gentlemen. it's a beautiful day in santa barbara and a great day to be alive, especially if you're going to be spending the weekend ronald reagan. saying something that might surprise you. if barry goldwater had not been presidential nominee in 1964, we wouldn't be there today. why? anything proved would be a tv

ddress like a known conservative like ronald reagan. in political shorthand, we can ay this -- no presidential candidate barry goldwater in '64, no president reagan in '80. which leads us to obvious questions. goldwater.ry why was he called mr. conservative? did his '64 campaign ignite a conservative revolution. a very unlike ly revolutionary. he was the grandson of a jewish peddler, came across some the mountains to arizona and sold his wares there. he was a college dropout whose however, "the conscious of a conservative"

copies.r 3.5 million and it was once required reading history 169 b at harvard. mechanic, ham radio operator whose mars tation patchthrough more than 200,000 calls from u.s. in indo china to their families in the vietnam war. a man who never smoked or ed coffee but kept a old crow in his senate refrigerator for after 5:00 sipping. a gifted photographer. black and white portraits of americans and iconic scenes of arizona hung in galleries around the world. he was an interested pilot. c-54s world war ii flew over the himalaya mountains, the

ost treacherous mountains in asia and later flew more than airplanes, including the u-2 spy plane and the latest jets. a man of contradictions. inspiring and infurp rating. e said of his '64 presidential race, i know i'm going to lose, my way.going lose it he was courageous and cantankerous oh. said, i did not come to washington to pass laws, but to repeal them. profound, a ne and classic axiom of his was, quote, any government big enough to you everything you want is big enough to take away everything you have. delighted in saying the unexpected.

and the acceptance speech at the epublican national convention in '64, he said probably the most famous thing he ever said, quote, extremism and the defense of liberty is no vice. and he was vilified for saying that. for et's just reflect just a second, was patrick was jesus christ and extremist for choosing to die on the cross? to conventional wisdom and just turned it upside down. for example, asking why can we have a voluntary option for our social security system, which is headed for bankruptcy? doing something about the agricultural program, and there

could be no equivocation here, he said. prompt and final termination of the farm subsidy program. he declared that welfare ought to be a private concern. promoted by individuals and families, churches, private hospitals come or religious service organizations, community charities and other institutions, just as we did in this country for the first 150 years of our history. ,he constitution was his guide the declaration of independence his inspiration. charm. man of enormous i had the privilege of working for him and with him in that , and hisin 1964 self-deprecating humor, especially about his so-called ,ld-fashioned conservatism asked how he would respond to a

soviet nuclear attack, he said the first thing would be to circle the wagons. circle the wagons. he once called a press conference to announce that a hollywood movie would be made about his life by 18th century fox. [laughter] in truth, ladies and gentlemen, my friends, he effected american politics more than any other losing candidate in american history. consider -- he raised, for the first time in a national campaign, basic issues such as social security, government subsidies, welfare reform, privatization, and the jury over communism. -- victory over communism. he inspired thousands of young people like you to get into politics and public policy, including people like the head of the heritage foundation, ed

crane of the cato institute, presidential candidate pat buchanan, a direct-mail guru, david keene, who i see out here in the audience, publisher al regnery, randy teague, former congressman phil crane, and many other members of congress. he used to direct-mail and television in national political fundraising for the first time. at the end of the year, one million americans had contributed to his campaign. that had never happened before in american politics. he broke the democrats' iron grip on the solid south, enabling the gop to become a national party. he persuaded 27.5 million americans to vote conservative, despite an unprecedented anti-campaign run by president lyndon baines johnson and the

democrats. and that campaign included, among other things, the fbi bugging the goldwater campaign plane. it included the cia renting a spy in the republican national headquarters. my friends, it did not start with watergate. those 27.5 million voters laid the foundation for reagan's 1980 and 1984 landslide victories.

we are here today, and have to understand and realize tha barry goldwater allowed ronald reagan to give his famous tv address, a time for choosing, and address, by the way, that goldwater's top advisers tried to kill, twice. it was barry goldwater finally listening to this wonderful speech, a time for choosing, who said, "what the hell is wrong with that," and gave his approval for it to be shown. a group of, not republicans led by henry salvatori approached reagan and literally begged him to run for governor of california. barry goldwater set in motion a political revolution, and led a generation of conservatives to understand that there is was a winning cause as well as a just cause. george will once remarked that barry goldwater actually was, in 1964 -- actually won in 1964. it just took 16 years to count the votes. [laughter] thank you very much. [applause]

>> thank you very much. i do not want to make you feel embarrassed about our relative age, but i have been reading these books since i was your age. if you want to know about the history of the american conservative movement, read lee edwards's books. there is some really bad stuff out there now. there are people on the other side who are rewriting, reinventing conservative history, and i think all of us have to guard against that. but as we said, we are in santa barbara. it is wonderful. we are among friends. talking about ronald reagan, it reminds me of what mae west once said.

she said, too much of a good thing is wonderful. lee and i write books and articles and manuscripts, and various things like that. we do it for a lot of reasons, but also to make money, for-profit. i am not sure that is always the case, given the time invested and everything else involved. somebody once asked, what is the most profitable writing? i said, ransom notes. but one of the things i love about bookwriting is meeting people, interviewing them, and talking to them. when i was working on a book on the 1980 campaign, i interviewed everybody room jimmy carter to walter mondale, everybody on the carter staff, john anderson. there was one person i could not interview, and that was rock star alice cooper, who was a ronald reagan supporter in 1980. he voted for him. he contributed to him. and he would not do an interview. my research assistant called his assistant and said, we want to do an interview. she said, it would not do any good. it would not help you at all. she confirmed, alice is a reagan supporter. contributes to the campaign. but it would not do any good.

i said, why? she said, alice was drunk. drunk from 1969 to 1983. he would not remember anything. it would not do any good to interview him. most people were sober when i interviewed them. lee touched on it before about the meaning of the goldwater campaign and reagan's speech. a famous swiss philosopher fashioned the theory of synchronicity, in which one seemingly isolated event, like dropping a pebble in a pond of water, concentric circles move out forever. reagan's speech, following

goldwater's approval, is that couple that sends out concentric circles forever. not only would we not be here at today's meeting -- we might be writing in cyrillic and eating borscht. by 1980, we were losing the cold war. it is not too far-fetched of a notion to say it was possible for the soviets to win the cold war. the speech changes everything, including the arc of american history. reagan literally bends light, because he changes the future. we are on a path toward a more collectivist state. he rolled that back. the backdrop to reagan giving the speech -- i want to get into that a little bit. he did not live a serendipitous life, just going from opportunity to opportunity, always winning, hitting singles, doubles, and home runs.

the early 1960's were a pretty bad time for ronald reagan. he had lost his ge career in 1962. he had gone to work in 1953 as the host of ge theater, the top-ranked show for many years on cbs. he occasionally acted in it. he would also go on the lecture circuit. his contract stipulated that one week out of every month, he would go to ge plants. there were hundreds all over the country. those were the days he refused to fly. he had bad experiences flying in the 40's and swore off flying for 20 years. he traveled by car, but mostly by train. reagan, in the 1950's, giving speeches for ge was fine. but eisenhower was president. we were a country at peace.

john kennedy comes in and starts taking the government off in a different direction. reagan's speeches become more wanted and more political. that was the last thing ge wanted. they did not want controversy. their motto was, progress is our middle name. they wanted to be mom and pop and apple pie. they did not want to be associated with controversy. reagan was giving more and more political speeches. ge was also doing millions of dollars of business with the federal government, including the tba, which was a point of criticism for ronald reagan, the tennessee valley authority. he is let go in spring of 1962. his movie career ended about the same time. his last movie is "the killers," which is a remake of hemingway's novel, made as a movie in 1946. he did not even get top ailing. reagan plays a bad guy. the only time in 56 movies that he plays a bad guy. in the movie, he is a mob loss, a crime boss. he is seen finally slapping

angie dickinson, who portrayed his mistress, knocking her to the ground. the movie was poorly reviewed, deemed so violent it was not broadcast on television, but was moved to the big screen instead. that was the end of his movie career. his mother nell dies in 1962. he mourned her very, very deeply. in some ways, reagan was closer to his mother. jack reagan was catholic. now was a member of the assemblies of christ. reagan went in her direction, and neil became a catholic like his father. for a couple years, he is kind of the unofficial mc of southern california, emceeing garden clubs and junior leagues. he is not traveling, because of flying. in each of these speeches, he is working on a variation of what we now call the speech.

it was called a time for choosing, and later "rendezvous with destiny." he talks to supper clubs, but also political clubs. there was one called facts -- finders against communist and totalitarian systems. you had to be around in the 1960's. he is honing his skill. he had already done that on the lecture circuit for general electric. henry salvatori, justin dart, and others, they see reagan's speech. these are wealthy southern california businessman who are frustrated with the direction of the goldwater campaign. they have no input except to write checks. they say, if we rise the money, will you give the speech? it was really independent of the

goldwater campaign, which tried to stop him twice. but they really had no autonomy over the reagan speech. of course, it went ahead. as he said to many people, it is the speech that changed his life. he also joked he got more fan mail from that speech than he ever got as an actor from warner bros.. the movement starts up after the speech. to understand is that when he was giving these speeches to the junior league and the others, he is always actor ronald reagan at noon today at this club or that club. always actor ronald reagan, actor ronald reagan. after the 1961 speech, it is just ronald reagan, or gubernatorial candidate. there is a draft movement. salvatori, what becomes known as the kitchen cabinet. he said no. he did not think politics was in his future. he traded letters. maureen said one time, we ought

to run for office. he said, if i did, i would run for president. he was closer to a father than anything else. a draft movement, and he says no. they said, you have got to think about it. he says, you guys go out. this is after goldwater's lost, late 1964, early 1965. everybody in california think the governor is going to be george christopher, the mayor of san francisco, who is handsome, a moderate republican. can you imagine that? the mayors of new york city, baltimore, maryland, los angeles, and san francisco were all republicans. and a lot of people thought christopher was a very attractive candidate, articulate, and was going to be the nominee. the people invoice -- involved with the draft of reagan were shunted aside by the party establishment. almost immediately after the goldwater speech, there are

movements that spring up on college campuses in california. students who say, sign up for legalize marijuana. sign up to burn your draft card. and right here, sign up for ronald reagan. actually did quite well on the campuses. he beats christopher handily, and the photos the political experts in the primer for governor for the nominee. the photos the experts again by winning almost a million votes for governor over pat brown. in fact, he always knew that one of his greatest assets was he was always underestimated. reagan actually worked at being underestimated. he knew it was an asset, so he always work that it. it is superficial to say from the speech that the rest is history.

we will cover a lot in the q&a. a couple of things i want to leave you with. i think it goes to the younger people here. reagan was always recruiting. i do not think he probably never even heard any of his aides talk about basic elections. if somebody said something to him about the base election, he would have looked at them like they had three heads. two weeks before, he was campaigning in new york city. in 1976 and kansas city, in his farewell address, he said all those democrats and independents looking for a message, he is accepting the nomination in front of 17,000 republican delegates, fans, and supporters, and calls for a community of shared values. he makes an appeal to join this community of shared values. he invokes franklin roosevelt's

name to a bunch of republicans that grew up the spicing franklin roosevelt. reagan was always recruiting. it is false to say that reagan invented the phrase "the 10th." i doubt he ever thought of it. lee atwater coined the phrase "big tent." reagan won the community shared values, people that believed in the same thing, not a lot of different things for political -- political expediency to get ahead. he was always recruiting. as far as his broad-based appeal -- a lot of primaries, one in 1976 and one in 1980. they were because of democratic crossovers. it is ironic now that you have republican parties in the states who are closing their primaries to republicans only, whereas reagan would not have been in the contest in 1976 and made a critical comeback in wisconsin because of democratic crossover voters. when frank was running wisconsin, he did not send reagan to some republican country club.

he went to southern milwaukee, which is 100% democratic territory. he knew reagan could deal with these people that later became known as reagan democrats. that phrase was not coined until after the 1980 campaign. reagan, in terms of his up deal to democrats -- the washington post, right after the wisconsin campaign, did a focus group, and they show this group of voters the commercials for the various republican candidates. george bush's tagline was, a president we won't have to train. everybody laughed at that one. then, they showed the reagan commercials to this group of democrats, republicans, and independents, and discovered, to their astonishment, reagan commercials were more popular with the democrats in the room than they were with the republicans. but it was not about attracting liberal democrats.

it was about attracting culturally and politically conservative democrats to his cause. as far as young voters, the oldest man ever elected president was the most popular man with the youngest voter. he tied jimmy carter in 1980. they both got 43%. which in itself is astonishing. young voters since probably the new deal had been the province of the democratic arty. you cannot imagine that john kennedy pulled less than 60% of under 30 voters in 1960. in 1984, as he is going to a landslide reelection, reagan gets 59% of the overall vote, but voters under 30, he gets 69 point i've percent of the vote. he leaves office with an overall approval rating among all voters of 68%, 69%. among african-americans, it is 40%. there was some polling that had

voters over 30 raking and 85% approval rating, which is astonishing. i will just leave you with three lessons about reagan which i think are instructive. during the 1980 campaign, he was giving a speech to the american legion, and at the time -- you have to remember, vietnam veterans are praised and honored, deservedly so, but it was not that way in 1980. they were spot upon by american civilians. the conventional belief among the elites was that there was moral equivalency between south and north vietnam, the pentagon was evil and corrupt, and it was a mistake to try to stave off the communist expansion in southeast asia.

that was conventional wisdom. if you said anything to the contrary, you were deemed an unsophisticated fool. reagan wanted to tell the american people they were unsophisticated fool's. you have heard a variation about this, the berlin wall. putting it phrase in, having it taken out. he wanted to push buttons. he knew when to push buttons. the speech to the american legion was noble cause. he wanted to give a national speech and say it was a noble cause and was not a mistake. the speechwriters took it out. ronald reagan put it back in. ronald reagan gives a speech, and the establishment am starting with the vapors and get all, he said noble cause. washington post editorialists and people like that -- but the american people loved it. the elites hated it. the american people loved it. that is when we started taking another look at vietnam war

veterans. the second about reagan is, during the course of my book on reagan's post-presidency, i interviewed dr. roger peale, who is the head at saint elizabeth hospital, where john hinckley was institutionalized for many years. one year after hinckley shoots ronald reagan, the doctor gets a phone call from the white house physician. reagan wants to go over and meet with hinckley. the doctor wants to know why. he says, the president wants to tell hinckley that he forgives him. and he wants to pardon him. he could not issue any type of actual pardon, but he wanted to let him know, in his christian faith and his boundless forgiveness, ability to forgive, that he forgave hinckley. it did not happen, because peele huddled with the psychiatrists who were taking care of hinckley. this is after the trial and after the conviction. and he calls the white house back and says, it would not be

advisable, because hinckley has no remorse. he is a sociopath. all it would do is empower him and make him feel like what he did was justifiable. it would not be a good idea to do. it was a courageous decision by peele, because and elizabeth was under federal jurisdiction. this thing about the d.c. government -- they were fighting it. but you get a presidential visit, that means a lot in terms of laying the hands-on saint elizabeth, staying as federal property. it would have rained down probably a lot more federal aid to the hospital, and they desperately needed it. the doctor told me that when he spoke to reagan, he had the strange feeling that he was talking to reagan as if reagan, the president, was in the clouds. he later told him that reagan had called him rum air force one. the last is about reagan's humor, which sometimes we over

intellectualize. what is wonderful is, you see an aspect of reagan you do not normally get in the textbooks. but he did have a wonderful sense of humor. he did have a rapier like wit. in 1967, i guess it was, during the height of the vietnam war, he is confronted by a very odorous, dirty, disheveled hippie, carrying a sign that says "make love, not war." he looks at the sign and says, for the looks of him, i do not think he can do either. [laughter] thank you very much. [applause] >> thank you so much for those wonderful remarks. i did just want to add it you things to this panel discussion today, and that is, we are talking a lot about how ronald reagan won a winning coalition,

or assemble this winning coalition. a lot of it goes back to that 1964 speech, whether or not he knew it at the time. ron robinson commented about our book, funding fathers. we talk a lot about the financing of the particular speech. and they do not want to dwell too much on the history of that speech and the financing of it, because i know you all are looking for modern-day examples, but it will translate nicely into an example you all have lived through. let me just say that when that speech was put on national television, it was paid for by three businessmen, as we talked about. and that speech was put on television with the caveat that they would run a trailer across the bottom of the video, asking for funds for the goldwater campaign. remarkably, according to ronald reagan's autobiography, that speech raised about $8 million

from americans. it was a really revolutionary idea that happened at that time, to bring in campaign funds in that way. it is not so much the funds and the total sum that mattered, but the number of people that actually invested in the goldwater campaign. i did just want to say that it is an important concept when you are trying to build a winning coalition to get individuals to invest in a cause. when an individual contributes to an effort, they are much more likely to follow its progress, to advocate on behalf of that recipient, and eventually, and this is a very important part, protect their investment by showing up at the polls. if you want to take a more recent example of this, we can look at 2008. the john mccain campaign decided in that year to accept a federal

subsidy eventually of taxpayer funds of $84 million, to finance the final months of his campaign. the barack obama campaign, of course, did not accept those federal funds, and instead raised cash at record levels, peddling further advantages to causes that already received significant favoritism among the academic establishment, the mainline media, and of course millions of dollars of unregulated union funds. mccain's approach by turning to the federal government instead of individuals for support implied there is something not quite right about asking individuals to invest in a cause. it implies there is something with it -- manipulative about that. in the final weeks of the campaign, barack obama outraised john mccain by a factor of five to one. it goes even further. this is where it relates back to the speech.

in 2008, i am not sure if you remember this, but barack obama purchased 30 minutes of air time on nbc, cbs, and fox, to speak directly to the american people and build grassroots support, taking a page right out of ronald reagan's playbook. today, unfortunately, we are still living with the aftermath of that decision, as barack obama has assembled a huge following, to tap into at critical moments. just one lesson that we can learn from. i am going to close with a few questions here. i hope you all have been thinking of questions as we have discussed some ideas today. there are two microphones, so i urge you to start heading to those microphones as we begin our q and a session today. my first question actually is going to go to dr. edwards. he touched on this a bit, and i would like him to dig a little deeper on this topic. he has often referred to barry

goldwater as the most consequential loser in american politics, and i would like him to talk little bit more about that. >> well, sometimes, you win by losing. sometimes. it depends upon what you are trying to set forth. in 1964, for example, lyndon baines johnson was the democratic candidate, and all the polls show that he was defeating every republican, who ever it was, whether it was nelson rockefeller or george romney, father of mitt romney, or bill scranton, or barry goldwater, or richard nixon. all of them could not receive more than 20 or 25% of the vote. why? because john kennedy had been assassinated the previous november, and the american people wanted his successor, lyndon johnson, to carry out the martyred president's program.

so no one could have one in 1964-- have won in 1964 on the republican side. but barry goldwater decided to go for the nomination for two reasons. number one, because young people like you all had come to him and said, you must run. you must raise the conservative standard. we have worked so hard for you these last couple of years. we want you to run, to be that conservative candidate. so he was responding to the call of young people and young conservatives all over america. there were issues that had to be discussed, that had not been discussed in american politics for 20, or, 40 years, things like limited government, the idea of victory over communism had not been discussed before the 1964 campaign.

very goldwater decided that, as he said, i am going to lose, but i am going to lose it my way. that meant he was going to do it in a way in which he put forth principles, important issues, key issues which had not been discussed for. so whether he won or lost, and he knew he was going to lose, he felt he was going to win by raising those issues for the first time in a national campaign. >> mr. shirley, we always hear that after 1964, media at least at the time, and other pundits, claimed that the conservative movement was dead. we heard that again in 2009, and continue to hear it even today. how would you reflect on those comments, and what would you say in response to the conservative movement in dead then, and dead now perhaps?

>> that are different aspects to american culture and different things that -- we are different. liberals look at the world differently than conservatives do. that means they are drawn to different jobs, different -- we have always known that in the communications industry and an education and other aspects, liberals tends to be drawn to those. they have traditionally been drawn to those endeavors or places of work, college campuses and wherever. it has just been a fact of life. i think as you go deeper, it goes to an ideology. liberalism is based in collectivism and based in the acquisition of power. places to acquire power or places like hollywood or places like communications, or places like the academy. innately, whether or not

liberals are part of the overall broader viewpoint instinctually, there is still an attraction to the power of the institution, whereas conservatives tend to be attracted to the power of the individual. >> how is it that the conservative movement cap rising after defeat after defeat, like the phoenix coming out of the ashes of defeat? that was certainly the case after 1964. we were dismissed. conservatism was dead. it was the case after 1976, when ronald reagan did not win the nomination. people said, it is not only the end of ronald reagan, but the end of conservatism. jumping ahead to the 1980's, bill clinton had won. that meant the end of conservatism. yet along came the contract with america. that had some bumps after a couple of years, and people said, that is the end of that. barack obama comes and is elected, and that is going to be the end of conservatism.

what was it about the conservative movement that enabled it to keep coming back, and coming back, and rising, and rising, and rising? i think the answer is very simple. we have the right ideas. the right ideas based upon what the founding fathers laid down in the constitution and the federalist tippers. -- papers. the right ideas, such as limited government, individual freedom and responsibility, the free enterprise, traditional american values, and strong national defense. those five ideas have enabled us to overcome temporary defeats that keep roaring back. and i think we are going to be coming back in about a week. i think there is going to be happy news for conservatives. i cannot wait for 2016 to come along and the great debate we

are going to engage in sisi who is going to be that nominee for the conservative cause in 2016. [applause] >> i would also add something important that we have seen at young americans foundation. that is that sometimes in the face of defeats and disaster for our cause, rise up in generation of young old who happened to be in battle during those times, and their courage is strengthened, and their principles are strengthened, and we find some of our best activist during those times. so even in the face of defeat, i think there are some really positive things to look forward to. i know young americans foundation has found some really incredibly talented young leaders who are now rising up through the ranks and i envisioned being in these

leadership positions in the years to come. >> my name is nick james. i am with young americans for freedom. the question is for either panelist. how do you think reagan would respond to some of the infighting we see today? mainly, you have the tea party faction, and you have some of the more libertarian groups. then you have the more true, traditional conservatives, the more traditional values. i personally think we need a more united front to win this election than occurred recently. how do you respond to what is going on today and trying to make a united front happened? >> reagan was the source of a lot of fighting inside the party, because he had a sense of ideas. there is a new book out by brown university of the history of the

republican party. it said reagan was a reactionary. nothing further from the truth. going back to eureka, he gives a speech denouncing the administration because they want to fire professors. he is challenging the established order. everything about reagan is challenging the established order. he does in 76 i taking out gerald ford. the republican national committee, the state parties, all the elected officials are behind gerald ford, with the exception of jesse helms and a handful of others. reagan is challenging the established order in a political sense. but then you get into a policy framework, especially between 1976 and 1980. the conventional wisdom from the communiqué up to the 70's was containment, but the soviet union is a thing of armaments.

they will always be there. ronald reagan comes up with what became known as the reagan doctrine. he discussed it with his national policy advisor, the defeat of soviet communism. the idea of tax cuts. the republican party, up until 1978, when he first starts endorsing them vocally -- he really embraces them in 1978. tax cuts were a democratic initiative. it was the balanced budget, eat your spinach, green eyeshade party. what he would think today -- i despise it when people say, this is what ronald reagan would have done. no one knows what ronald reagan would have done. all we can do is go off of his actions and writings and what happened to him in similar situations. he was a revolutionary and always challenge conventional thinking.

that is why the elites of washington always despised him, because he was always challenging them or going over the heads of the american people, going through them. you read his speeches, it sounds to me like your tea party. >> it seems to me that ronald reagan and any winning politician understands that politics is based upon addition and not subtraction. it is based upon multiplication and not division. when you are looking at candidates who might be -- i hope i am not getting too political here. is it all right? as you are working with people in your own district or your own state, look for the candidate who is reaching out to different groups and trying to bring people together. that is the mark of leadership,

to build coalitions to create majorities. that is something ronald reagan was very good at, based upon ideas. he did not compromise. but based upon certain ideas, he would reach out, whether they were a reagan democrat, so-called, or a taft republican. >> thank you very much. >> thank you both for speaking today. both of you talked about the role we played with goldwater, reagan, and the coalitions between youth. in madison square garden, goldwater spoke to thousands of youth. and the progression that occurred -- lee edwards was there and shared it. i wonder what role that played in getting both of these people to the national stage.

at more of a modern thing, how do modern conservative leaders embody some similar strengths that old water and reagan used to bring youth along with them? >> it was my older brother who was there in connecticut in 1960. young people -- and i was like you all of those years ago. we truly felt that we could change the world. we truly did. we needed some help to do that. we need leaders like barry goldwater and ronald reagan. and we needed the right ideas. also, we had to be willing to

take chances. they should be calculated chances and catalytic risks. but we formed yaf in september of 1960, and the first thing we did was say we are going to have a rally. and then and the center in new york city, which seats 3500 people -- there were about 90 of us there to share that. is it possible to get 3500 people to turn out for a rally of an unknown organization of a bunch of young people nobody ever heard of, talking about conservatives in new york city, the citadel of liberalism? impossible. but we did it. i will say it helped we had very goldwater as our major speaker. we filled manhattan center. what did we do? we said, let's go for a rally in madison square garden. got to be crazy.

how many seats in madison -- well, 18,000. we just filled 3500. that took a gamble. we are now saying eight team -- it's go for it. let's try it. we filled madison square garden in march of 1962. again, i have to say, in all honesty, one reason was that very goldwater was our major speaker. he had never spoken in madison square garden in his life. that did help. but we had imagination. we had higher. we had passion. we had believe in ourselves and uncertain ideas. first manhattan center, then madison square garden, 1963, what was the obvious place to have our next rally? anybody here from new york city? it would have to be yankee stadium, right?

that would be a step too far, so maybe there was a certain amount of prudence which did enter that particular time in our decision-making. you had the rugged idea you could accomplish miracles. >> as far as after that, reagan and young people -- i think it holds true for all of you. young people tend to be, in their own way, revolutionaries. you like to challenge her parents, challenge teachers. your parents say, be in at 9:00. you say, 9:30. you challenge the existing order. he was a revolutionary. is that what he was talking about in the 1970's? it was in some ways radical thinking. even down to the draft -- i think this was part of a libertarian part of him, but he

was against a peacetime draft. that challenge conventional thinking, because everybody believed, both democrats and republicans, in a military draft. i think part of reagan's attraction -- he was always talking about freedom and the future. for somebody playing the back nine like me, when you talk about the future, i am thinking about 20 years in the future, so it is not as important to me, whereas for you, it is 60 or 80 years in the future. that meant a lot to young people, especially in the 1970's, when you had such malaise. here is finally somebody who is talking to young americans about their opportunity, their chances in the future. >> just to build a little bit on that, ronald reagan went directly to young audiences, as you mentioned.

similar to what president obama has done. he has been on a college campus one out of every nine days throughout most of his presidency. that is directly going to the american people to convey your ideas, and he knows if he can speak directly to american people, he will have them on his side for generations to come. i would say to you, look for leaders who may happen to admire. i look for the conservative leaders who are willing to go to college campuses, willing to speak to young people today directly, because i think that is a sign and a hallmark of a key leader who understands that this battle is not just about months from now, weeks from now, or even years from now. this is a battle for the generations to come. >> reagan's most important policy speeches were done on college campuses at notre dame, eureka. there were a lot of important policy initiatives he did before

a college audience. >> thank you. >> go ahead. >> my name is stefan pants, from mississippi college. i question is to you, lee edwards. you were there when this was founded, and you have been a silicate or of the conservative movement's growth since it basically started. do you see -- i guess my question would actually be, what similarities do you see in the movement now than when it started? and will we need another goldwater to lose an election to provide the same type of atmosphere that reagan was able to experience? >> there has always been a debate within the conservative movement between traditional conservatives and libertarians, always. it has always been there from the very, very beginning, going

back to the 19 is, talking about the modern conservative american movement. with the libertarians being all out for liberty and the traditional conservatives like myself being more concerned with order. but someone like barry goldwater, in his book "the conscience of a conservative, and in his campaign in 1964, and subsequently ronald reagan -- what was their genius? what was their contribution? it was to be able to appeal to both sides, and to come up with the idea of ordered liberty. the right balance between liberty and order -- the right balance between freedom and security. that is not easy? you have to look at it from issue to issue. the patriot act was necessary

after 9/11. were there certain parts of it which perhaps went a little too far? there is a very honest debate about that. but when you can get a leader, like a goldwater, like a reagan -- i think we are going to be seeing more and more discussion of this very fact in the next couple of years, who can say, here is my prescription for a blend of the two ideas, coming up with ordered liberty, and bringing together the libertarians and the traditionalist conservatives, i think you will find that is going to be a winning candidate and a winning leader. >> i could not agree more. there is always that creative tension, not only in a political party, but also in american politics and culture. madison wrote in federalist 51, we must set ambition against ambition. the framers were aware that anything, whether it is

government or parties -- it could tilt one way with king george iii, the power tilted too far one way. reagan said, maximum freedom consistent with law and order. that is ambition against ambition. it is ambition or the need for a certain amount of security by the state. that has been the endless struggle in this country since 1776. right now, we are tilted toward too much power to the state, and it has been going that way from the time of the new deal until 1980. reagan tilted it back, but in

the last 40 years, you have tilted back toward too much state authority, in my opinion. >> thank you. >> go ahead. >> my name is will gates. i am from florida. tank you all for going here. you talk about reagan's success, and how the conservative movement has been able to come back in the face of opposition. do you think that is related to a modern continuation of the idea of manifest destiny? >> i am going to interrupt myself a little bit. i tend to believe very much in federalism and local control. but i always liked, from the time i was a child i guess we all did -- the space program and nasa. i was very disappointed when obama canceled the shuttle program, because i thought that was a part of manifest destiny.

when we grew up, we were going to go to the stars and conquer the planet's, and all those things. i do think there is something about a national spirit that is important to hold a country together. i do not believe in national greatness and nationbuilding and all those things, but there are things, you know, that bring a culture and the people together. and i think those things are lacking right now. certainly, the cold war brought people together. it is not going to far that -- we are traditionally divided as a country. the revolutionary war did not do polling at the time, but there is a lot of believe. benjamin franklin's own son was a spy. a lot of people favored the british system and did not support the revolution. the war of 1812 was in opposition there.

the civil war was about the divisions in this country. we were united december 7, 1941. that is the only time. manifest destiny is important. so is diversity and individuality. there are times the country needs to work together. >> it is ok, i think, for you and i to say that we are an exceptional nation. we are. i have lived and worked all over this globe, in europe and asia, latin america. and we are exceptional. by reason of what we stand for,

by reason of our founding documents, like the declaration of the constitution, by reason of what we have done to hurt other nations after wars, as we did with the marshall plan, as we continue to do today. -- to help other nations. if we were not exerting leadership, for example, right now in the ebola crisis, lord knows what would be happening with it. secondly, we go back to ronald reagan. he said we have a rendezvous with destiny. what did he mean by that? i think what he meant by that was that our destiny was based upon certain ideas, certain principles, certain beliefs. and among them was our judeo-christian inheritance. and i think that is part of what makes us exceptional.

there is reliance on our part, and believe on the part of mojo -- most of us in some kind of transcendent being, and that doctrine which is so important to how we make our decisions, and which make us an exceptional nation. >> i would add one more point. when president obama began his first term in office, you may run for his grand apology tour he took across the globe, apologizing for being american. i would just say all of you can do your part to counteract those sentiments on a college campus by proclaiming how terrific america is, what a great leader we have been on the world stage, why we have freedom here, and why more people want to come to this country than any other country in the world. i would encourage you, on your college campuses, to be a leader in providing that voice.

i think we have time for one more question, so we will turn this direction. >> i am from michigan. reagan had a brilliant foreign-policy and was truly a humanitarian president. as an actor, a very learned act or, what do you think was his primary influence that guided him with his foreign-policy? >> tony dolan, who was president reagan's major speech writer for many years, throughout the eight years he was in the white house, in his first meeting with the president, getting to know him, so he would be able to do a better job of writing for him -- they were talking about this,

that, and the other thing. tony said, mr. president, are you familiar with whittaker chambers's book "witness"? the president smiled and said, well, and began reciting from memory the first paragraph, then the first page, then the first couple of pages of the beginning of that book, "letter to my children." intellectually, ronald reagan always understood with the -- what the dangers of communism were. dangers of carmina somewhere. and personally, he knew about communism, because he had been accosted by it and confronted by it when he was a hollywood actor in the 1940's, and the communists were trying to take over the trade unions there in hollywood. by personal experience, by reflection, and by reading, he understood the importance of standing up to what he saw as evil. >> nuclear war -- i do not think

ronald reagan was terrified. but nuclear war concern him deeply. in kansas city in 1976, it was not a farewell address. the speech laid the foundation for the campaign. he talks about -- the centrality of the speech was about nuclear war. this is a moment that destroyed forever the civilized world. he was held back on eliminating nuclear weapons. we were dealing from a position of weakness. he knew that in order to negotiate, we need strength. we built up the military. we understood that as far as manifest destiny and american exceptionalism, reagan believed america operated on a higher moral plane.

we did have a belief system which was about extending -- you talk about a revolution without orders, extending personal freedom, rights, and dignity. it was about not only winning the cold war, but about millions of people. from his readings and understandings and his pronouncements, and everything he learned from soviet dissidents -- one of his favorite philosophers was alexander solzenytzen. a lot of historians say that reagan ended the cold war, which was nonsense. we were losing in 1980. soviets in southeast asia --