2154 Oct. 27 / Administration o f George Bush, 1992

Let me tell you something. I have learned 

this as President. You can’t please everybody 

on everything. It’s like any normal human 

being; you make a mistake; you look the 

American people in the eye and say, “I did 

it,” then you go on and lead. But you cannot 

be all things to all people.

My argument with Governor Clinton is, he 

tries to be on all sides of all questions. On 

right to work, he’s for it in the South, against 

it when he talks to the labor unions. On free 

trade, he’s for it, and you heard this in the 

debate, “I’m for it, but.” You can’t have any 

“buts” in the White House.

On term limits, he sees the merits of it, 

but he’s opposed to it. And on the Gulf war, 

how do you like this for leadership from the 

Commander in Chief. When the going got 

tough, here’s what he said, “I agree witn the 

arguments of the minority”— that’s who 

wanted to stand pat— “I agree with the arguments of the minority, but I guess I would 

have voted with the majority.” You cannot 

waffle when you’re Commander in Chief of 

the Armed Forces.

Audience members. Boo-o-o!

The President. There is a pattern of deception. And we simply cannot------

Audience members. Give ’em hell, 

George.

The President. I’m trying to. We cannot 

have— you know, the guy’s got a good point. 

Do you remember when Harry Truman was 

campaigning and a guy yells, “Give ’em hell, 

Harry.” “I don’t give ’em hell. I just tell the 

truth, and they think it’s hell.”

But seriously, you’ve got to call them as 

you see them, as the umpires do. You can’t 

just be out there and lead by misleading, and 

you cannot turn the White House into the 

waffle house. You’ve got to stand for something.

No, we now see, America sees clearly that 

we are not in the recession, as told by the 

Clinton-Gore ticket and repeated endlessly 

on that television. We have some difficult 

problems. But I have the best programs to 

solve these problems.

Let me tell you this. Here’s the end of 

it, and here is the bottom line as you go to 

the polls on Tuesday. Barbara— and I think 

we’ve got a first-class First Lady, I might add. 

She and I— I told you I think character and

trust matter because people all around the 

world look to the White House, look to the 

Oval Office, at least for integrity and honor. 

I served my country in war, hopefully with 

duty, honor, and country in the foremost. I 

had to make very difficult decisions as Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces. And 

believe me, it is tough when you have to send 

someone else’s son, someone else’s daughter 

into harm’s way. But we did it, and the sons 

and daughters of Ohio kicked the aggressor 

out of Kuwait and restored the leadership 

of the United States to the entire world.

So I ask you to meditate and think on what 

Mac said. When that Oval Office phone rings 

or at night the phone at White House rings, 

my question to the American people is, who 

do you trust? Who do you trust for the security— [applause]— far more important than 

partisan politics is the honor of the United 

States of America.

I have tried to uphold the public trust. I 

believe we have the programs. I am absolutely convinced that Clinton-Gore are 

wrong when they say we’re a nation in decline. Good heavens, we are the leading nation in the entire world. We are not in decline.

Now I ask, on Tuesday, I ask you to go 

to the polls and get your friends to the polls. 

I ask for your support. I ask for your vote 

to let me finish the job of lifting up the young 

lives here and giving America a prosperous 

4 more years.

May God bless the United States. Thank 

you all very much.

Note: The President spoke at 6:10 p.m. at

the Frazee Pavilion. In his remarks, he referred to actor Gerald McRaney. A tape was

not available fo r verification o f the content

o f these remarks.

Memorandum of Disapproval for

Legislation To Include Revere

Beach, Massachusetts, in the

National Park System

October 27,1992

I am withholding my approval of H.R. 

2109, which would require the Secretary of
2155

the Interior to conduct a study of Revere 

Beach, Massachusetts, and provide alternatives on the appropriate Federal role in 

preserving and interpreting this site.

The National Park Service (NPS) studies 

many sites to determine if they are nationally 

significant and therefore suitable for inclusion in the National Park System. A site is 

nationally significant if it is an outstanding 

example of a unique natural, historic, or cultural resource with demonstrated importance 

to the entire Nation.

In many instances, the Congress has used 

the findings of a congressionally mandated 

NPS study, regardless of the study's conclusion, to justify authorization of a new unit 

of the National Park System. To restore 

credibility and a national focus to its study 

process, the NPS reestablished in 1991 a program to evaluate sites and prioritize candidates for future study. The most promising 

candidates identified by the NPS experts 

would be proposed for formal study.

For my fiscal year 1993 Budget request, 

NPS professionals rated and ranked 41 candidates from criteria established by the D epartment of the Interior. The fiscal year 1993 

Budget proposed $1.2 million to study the 

seven highest-rated candidates from the list 

of 41 originally reviewed. The Congress appropriated $848,000 to conduct four of the 

studies proposed by the NPS.

The NPS experts have not identified the 

Revere Beach study as a high priority. The 

effect of this legislation would be to place 

completion of this study before the completion of other studies that the experts agree 

are much more important to the Nation.

H.R. 2109 would ignore professional analysis and budget constraints. It would also undermine the critical objective of identifying 

and evaluating the Nation's most promising 

natural, historic, and cultural assets for protection as units of the National Park System.

I am therefore withholding my approval of 

H.R. 2109.

George Bush

The White House,

October 27,1992.

Administration o f George Bush, 1992 / Oct. 27

Note: This memorandum follows the text as

released hy the Office o f the Press Secretary

at the White House on October 27.

Statement on Signing the Battered

Women’s Testimony Act of 1992

October 27,1992

Today I am signing into law H.R. 1252, 

the “Battered Women's Testimony Act of 

1992."

Each year, more than 3 million women are 

the victims of domestic violence. Of these, 

between 3,000 and 4,000 are murdered by 

a spouse or domestic partner. Many of these 

attacks are witnessed by children.

Some victims of domestic violence are 

driven to retaliate and even kill their abusive 

spouses. In some cases these victims may 

raise as a legal defense “battered woman's 

syndrome." This syndrome, which some experts believe is brought on by repeated physical, mental, or sexual attacks by a spouse 

or partner, may help to explain or extenuate 

these retaliatory attacks. Expert testimony regarding the nature and effect of “battered 

woman's syndrome" is not universally accepted by all the States.

H.R. 1252 addresses the problems associated with the defense of “battered woman’s 

syndrome" in two ways. First, it authorizes 

a study on the admissibility of expert testimony on the experiences of battered women 

in the defense of criminal cases under State 

law. Second, the bill directs the development 

and dissemination of training materials to assist battered women and their attorneys and 

advocates in using expert testimony in appropriate cases.

I am pleased to approve this legislation and 

to commend its sponsor and cosponsors for 

taking this important step in combatting violence against women.

George Bush

The White House,

October 27,1992.

Note: This statement follows the text as released by the Office o f the Press Secretary

at the White House on October 27.