Read Lend Me Your Ears: Great Speeches in History Online
Authors: Unknown
[
BENTSEN
:] Once again, I think what we’re looking at here is someone that can step in at the presidency level at the moment if that tragedy would occur.
And if that’s the case, again, you have to look at maturity of judgment. And you have to look at breadth of experience. You have to see what kind of leadership roles that person has played in his life before that crisis struck him.
And if you do that type of thing, then you’ll arrive at a judgment that I think would be a wise one. And I hope that would mean that you’d say, We’re going to vote for Mike Dukakis and Lloyd Bentsen….
[
QUAYLE
:] Three times that I have had this question, and I’ll try to answer it again for you as clearly as I can, because the question you’re asking is what kind of qualifications does Dan Quayle have to be president. What kind of qualifications do I have, and what would I do in this kind of a situation? And what would I do in this situation?
I would make sure that the people in the cabinet and the people and advisers to the president are called in, and I’ll talk to them and I’ll work with them. And I will know them on a firsthand basis, because as vice-president I’ll sit on the National Security Council. And I’ll know them on a firsthand basis because I’m going to be coordinating the drug effort. I’ll know them on a firsthand basis because Vice-President George Bush is going to re-create the space council, and I’ll be in charge of that, I will have day-to-day activities with all the people in government.
And then, if that unfortunate situation happens, if that situation, which would be very tragic, happens, I will be prepared to carry out the
responsibilities of the presidency of the United States of America. And I will be prepared to do that, I will be prepared not only because of my service in the Congress but because of my ability to communicate and to lead. It is not just age—it’s accomplishments, it’s experience. I have far more experience than many others that sought the office of vice-president of this country. I have as much experience in the Congress as Jack Kennedy did when he sought the presidency. I will be prepared to deal with the people in the Bush administration if that unfortunate event would ever occur.
[
QUAYLE
:] Senator, I served with Jack Kennedy. I knew Jack Kennedy. Jack Kennedy was a friend of mine. Senator, you’re no Jack Kennedy.
What has to be done in a situation like that is to call in the joint—
[
QUAYLE
:] That was really uncalled for, Senator.
[
BENTSEN
:] You’re the one that was making the comparison, Senator. And I’m one who knew him well. And frankly I think you’re so far apart in the objectives you choose for your country that I did not think the comparison was well taken….
[
QUAYLE
:] Tonight has been a very important evening. You have been able to see Dan Quayle as I really am, and how George Bush and I want to lead this country into the future. Thank you, America, for listening, and thank you for your fairness. Now, you will have a choice to make on election day; you will have a choice of whether America is going to choose the road of Michael Dukakis or the road of George Bush, as we march toward the twenty-first century.
The road of Michael Dukakis comes down to this: bigger government, higher taxes. They’ve always believed in higher taxes; they always have and they always will. Cuts in national defense. Back to the old economics of high interest rates, high inflation and the old politics of high unemployment.
Now, the road of George Bush is the road to the future, and it comes down to this: an America second to none, with visions of greatness, economic expansion, tough laws, tough judges, strong values, respect for the flag and our institutions. George Bush will lead us to the twenty-first century, a century that will be of hope and peace. Ronald Reagan and George Bush saved America from decline; we changed America. Michael Dukakis fought us every step of the way.
It’s not that they’re not sympathetic; it’s simply that they will take America backwards. George Bush has the experience, and with me the future. A future committed to our family, a future committed to the freedom.
Thank you. Good night, and God bless you.
[
BENTSEN
:] In just thirty-four days America will elect new leadership for our country. It’s a most important decision, because there is no bigger job than governing this great country of ours and leading it into its future.
Mike Dukakis and Lloyd Bentsen offer you experience, tempered, capable leadership to meet those challenges of the future. Our opposition says lower your sights, rest on your laurels.
Mike Dukakis and Lloyd Bentsen think America can do better; that America can’t just coast into the future, clinging to the past. This race is too close. The competition is too tough, and the stakes are too high.
Michael Dukakis and Lloyd Bentsen think America must move into that future united in a commitment to make this country of ours the most powerful, the most prosperous nation in the world.
As Americans we honor our past, and we should. But our children are going to live in the future. And Mike Dukakis says the best of America is yet to come. But that won’t happen taking care of our economy, just putting it on automatic pilot. It won’t happen by accident. It’s going to take leadership, and it’s going to take courage and the commitment and a contribution by all of us to do that.
I have worked for the betterment of our country both in war and peace, as a bomber pilot, as one who has been a businessman and a United States senator, working to make this nation the fairest and the strongest and the most powerful in the world.
Help us bring America to a new era of greatness. The debate has been ours, but the decision is yours. God bless you.
“Here I stand; I cannot do otherwise.”
Excommunicated by Pope Leo X but still vocal and determined, Martin Luther was not to be deterred from facing his critics at the Diet of Worms, an imperial deliberative body. He maintained that defiance afterward: “If I had heard that as many devils would set on me in Worms as there are tiles on the roofs, I should nonetheless have ridden there.”
Luther’s 1517 posting of ninety-five theses that questioned church doctrine had angered the Catholic authorities. Unswayed by a condemnation from Rome and driven to burn a papal bull in 1520, the German founder of Protestantism was tried the following year by a secular tribunal at the diet and then condemned for heresy by Emperor Charles V.
At his trial. Luther uses both simile (“as clear as noonday”) and Scripture, quoting from both the Old and the New Testament in refusing to retract his writings that were deemed heretical. By addressing himself specifically to the charges brought against him, Luther reiterates his own positions against popery and provides the emperor with “a simple, clear, and direct answer”—that he cannot “speak against his conscience.”
Added to the first printed copies of the speech was the German statement “Hier steh’ ich, ich kann nicht anders,” a quotation that can be found today on the Worms monument to Luther. This remark, which has been translated as “I stand here and can say no more,” is more forcefully rendered at the end of the translation given below.
***
MOST SERENE EMPEROR
, and you illustrious princes and gracious lords: I this day appear before you in all humility, according to your command, and I implore Your Majesty and your august highnesses, by the mercies of God, to listen with favor to the defense of a cause which I am well assured is just and right. I ask pardon, if by reason of my ignorance, I am wanting in the manners that befit a court; for I have not been brought up in kings’ palaces, but in the seclusion of a cloister.
Two questions were yesterday put to me by His Imperial Majesty; the first, whether I was the author of the books whose titles were read; the second, whether I wished to revoke or defend the doctrine I have taught. I answered the first, and I adhere to that answer.
As to the second, I have composed writings on very different subjects. In some I have discussed faith and good works, in a spirit at once so pure, clear, and Christian that even my adversaries themselves, far from finding anything to censure, confess that these writings are profitable, and deserve to be perused by devout persons. The pope’s bull, violent as it is, acknowledges this. What, then, should I be doing if I were now to retract these writings? Wretched man! I alone, of all men living, should be abandoning truths approved by the unanimous voice of friends and enemies, and opposing doctrines that the whole world glories in confessing!
I have composed, secondly, certain works against popery, wherein I have attacked such as by false doctrines, irregular lives, and scandalous examples afflict the Christian world, and ruin the bodies and souls of men. And is not this confirmed by the grief of all who fear God? Is it not manifest that the laws and human doctrines of the popes entangle, vex, and distress the consciences of the faithful. while the crying and endless extortions of Rome engulf the property and wealth of Christendom, and more particularly of this illustrious nation?
If I were to revoke what I have written on that subject, what should I do… but strengthen this tyranny, and open a wider door to so many and flagrant impieties? Bearing down all resistance with fresh fury, we should behold these proud men swell, foam, and rage more than ever! And not merely would the yoke which now weighs down Christians be made more grinding by my retraction—it would thereby become, so to speak, lawful—for, by my retraction, it would receive confirmation from Your Most Serene Majesty, and all the states of the empire. Great God! I should thus be like to an infamous cloak, used to hide and cover over every kind of malice and tyranny.
In the third and last place, I have written some books against private individuals, who had undertaken to defend the tyranny of Rome by destroying faith. I freely confess that I may have attacked such persons with more violence than was consistent with my profession as an ecclesiastic: I do not think of myself as a saint; but neither can I retract these books, because I should, by so doing, sanction the impieties of my opponents, and they would thence take occasion to crush God’s people with still more cruelty.
Yet, as I am a mere man, and not God, I will defend myself after the example of Jesus Christ, who said, “If I have spoken evil, bear witness against me” (John 18:23). How much more should I, who am but dust
and ashes, and so prone to error, desire that every one should bring forward what he can against my doctrine.
Therefore, Most Serene Emperor, and you illustrious princes, and all, whether high or low, who hear me, I implore you by the mercies of God to prove to me by the writings of the prophets and apostles that I am in error. As soon as I shall be convinced, I will instantly retract all my errors, and will myself be the first to seize my writings and commit them to the flames.
What I have just said I think will clearly show that I have well considered and weighed the dangers to which I am exposing myself; but far from being dismayed by them, I rejoice exceedingly to see the Gospel this day, as of old, a cause of disturbance and disagreement. It is the character and destiny of God’s word. “I came not to send peace unto the earth, but a sword,” said Jesus Christ. God is wonderful and awful in his counsels. Let us have a care, lest in our endeavors to arrest discords, we be bound to fight against the holy word of God and bring down upon our heads a frightful deluge of inextricable dangers, present disaster, and everlasting desolations…. Let us have a care lest the reign of the young and noble prince, the emperor Charles, on whom, next to God, we build so many hopes, should not only commence, but continue and terminate its course under the most fatal auspices. I might cite examples drawn from the oracles of God. I might speak of pharaohs, of kings of Babylon, or of Israel, who were never more contributing to their own ruin that when, by measures in appearances most prudent, they thought to establish their authority! “God removeth the mountains and they know not” (Job 9:5).
In speaking thus, I do not suppose that such noble princes have need of my poor judgment; but I wish to acquit myself of a duty that Germany has a right to expect from her children. And so commending myself to Your August Majesty, and your most serene highnesses, I beseech you in all humility, not to permit the hatred of my enemies to rain upon me an indignation I have not deserved.
Since Your Most Serene Majesty and Your High Mightinesses require of me a simple, clear, and direct answer, I will give one, and it is this: I cannot submit my faith either to the pope or to the council, because it is as clear as noonday that they have fallen into error and even into glaring inconsistency with themselves. If, then, I am not convinced by proof from Holy Scripture, or by cogent reasons, if I am not satisfied by the very text I have cited, and if my judgment is not in this way brought into subjection to God’s word, I neither can nor will retract anything; for it cannot be right for a Christian to speak against his conscience. Here I stand; I cannot do otherwise. God help me. Amen.
“If this oath of yours… be true, then pray I that I may never see God in the face….”
Scholar and statesman, author of
Utopia
, and martyr, Sir Thomas More proved himself, as one contemporary called him, “a man for all seasons.” (This famous designation for a man of conscience first appeared in the early sixteenth century, when educator Robert Whittington composed a passage for students to translate from English into Latin.)
One of Henry VIII’s most trusted advisers, Thomas More succeeded Cardinal Wolsey as lord chancellor of England, even though More had disapproved of the dissolution of the king’s first marriage. Less acceptable to Henry, however, was More’s refusal to deny papal supremacy, and the stubborn cleric was committed to the Tower of London. Charges of treason, at first difficult to prove, were justified when Lord Rich, the solicitor general, testified of a private conversation in which More supposedly denied Henry’s right to be called “supreme head” of the Church of England.