All Episodes
Previous Next
March 18, 2022 - Doug Collins Podcast
50:37
Warnings from the Past: Taking a look at Presidents Final Addresses to the Nation
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Folks, all of you know that Legacy Precious Metals is a great sponsor of the Doug Collins Podcast, and I can't tell you right now a more important time to know Legacy Precious Metals.
There right now, your investment portfolio, if you look at the stock market right now, you look at the inflation that's going on, you look at the uncertainty out there, I'm going to tell you, the investments that you're making need to have gold and silver to be a part of it.
You need the precious metals.
Navigators are people who have been there, they know what to look out for, and they know how to come back and navigate you through the streams of your financial situation, whether it's for your retirement or whether it's just in your long-term investment strategies.
Legacy Precious Metals folks are people who listen.
They listen to you, they listen to your needs, and they help you navigate this uncertain financial times.
When you're seeing the fluctuations back and forth, people will actually need to find a place where they have a portfolio that is balanced.
Having gold and silver in that portfolio is something that you can have as part of yours.
Just go find them at LegacyPMInvestments.com.
You want to listen to a podcast?
By who?
Georgia GOP Congressman Doug Collins.
How is it?
The greatest thing I have ever heard in my whole life.
I could not believe my ears.
In this house, wherever the rules are disregarded, chaos and mob rule.
It has been said today, where is bravery?
I'll tell you where bravery is found and courage is found.
It's found in this minority who has lived through the last year of nothing but rules being broken, people being put down, questions not being answered, and this majority say, be damned with anything else.
We're going to impeach and do whatever we want to do.
Why?
Because we won an election.
I guarantee you, one day you'll be back in the minority and it ain't gonna be that fun.
Hey everybody.
Today I wanted to do a little bit different.
We've looked back in the past, but one of the things I've always wanted for this podcast is when we talk about current events, and there's plenty to talk about right now.
You've got the Ukraine war going on, the Russia invasion of Ukraine.
You've got the economic crisis that is developing.
Even further in the United States with double-digit inflation, you have a monetary policy that continually is going to the opposite of what really probably needs to happen.
And we find that in inflation when you have a government still spending more money, borrowed money, and putting more money into the system.
And inflation is going higher.
Interest rates from the Fed finally started the uptick.
Most economists will tell you that the quarter point is not enough and that there's going to have to be more, which again leads us to a concerning conversation on where we're headed as a nation economically and basically that is the world.
Can you get inflation under control with measured steps, what's called the soft landing, or are you going to have to take more drastic steps, which may push us into a recession that may last a few months or possibly longer?
The issue at our border, the issue at our border crisis and the integrity of our country, the integrity of our nation.
A nation is only as strong as its borders.
It's only as strong as its defense.
Not only of its physical boundaries, but also its intellectual boundaries, what I'll call it.
It's also its discussion of what do we believe in commonality as Americans.
For most, we believe, you know, they come back and you look at history, and if we take the time to look at history, which a lot of times we don't, is that we're a melting pot.
We have a lot of varying views, things that came to make our country But at the same time, those melting pots implies just what a melting pot does.
In other words, if the melt comes from everyone, we make an assimilation into becoming what we know of as Americans.
And this is something that I think we're struggling with right now.
As we look at this, I wanted to take a time, and it's going to be a two-part, one today and then the next episode as well will come, in which we take a look at two of our former presidents, two of our presidents in our country who led our nations in very different but also very similar times, and then their last address, if you would, to the nation from which they served.
The two that we're going to look at, because I believe they have a lot of similarities and a lot of discussion for where we are today as a country, and that is George Washington, the very first president, and then also Dwight Eisenhower, who came to the presidency in the 50s after leading the United States in World War II. These two gentlemen,
it was interesting enough for me that when I started looking at these two farewell addresses, if you would, Some similarities started to come out, not only in the addresses, which we're going to get to, and I'm going to break those down because especially George Washington and Eisenhower have a lot to say that really, I think, affect where we're at today.
It affects us in the idea of who we are as a country, where we're becoming, and really gave warnings.
One, at the beginning of our nation.
The other one, just a little over 70 years ago, 60 years ago, in which The country is dealing with issues that they warned about that we're now having to face head on.
And I think this is a great time for us.
I'm a big believer that history is there for us to learn from and that you can't overplay history or downplay history without suffering the consequences for it.
You can't make it more than it is and you can't diminish it.
And right now we have a culture that seems to be wanting to hide our history, especially if they don't like to deal with it, instead of examining it, learning from it and growing from it.
The only way you grow forward and the only way a country grows forward is to understand where it came from, how it got there, what it did right, what it did wrong, and then move forward.
And these two presidents that we're going to talk about over the next couple of podcasts are two that exemplify really sort of, in many ways, this detachment, one, from government.
But this also perspective of coming at our country from a perspective of fighting for our country.
And this is something that I really want to delve into.
I want you to understand.
That when you look at Washington and Eisenhower, you look at two similar backgrounds in the sense that they were both soldiers when they came to the office of the presidency.
Of course, George Washington led our country and our fledgling colonies at that point in the Revolutionary War against England.
He saw it firsthand even before the Revolutionary War in his military service.
We've talked about Washington here on this podcast before about being an entrepreneur.
He was a little bit of everything and yet also possessed the leadership skills to take those experiences and lead us in a very, I think, probably one of the more difficult eras in our country.
And that is the very founding and the very first eight years of the country's existence dealing with the Constitution.
And dealing with what he had seen us come through as a country.
He speaks a lot about the responsibilities of being an American.
He speaks a lot about the responsibilities of our country.
In fact, if you want to look at it in some ways, his farewell address actually speaks to what is now commonly refrained as America first, if you look at it.
So it's going to be interesting to see how he breaks that down.
But they also, Eisenhower, coming through a time in which, from very humble beginnings, backgrounds, goes to West Point, comes out.
Most people didn't realize, but when the war actually started, then World War II actually started, Dwight Eisenhower was a colonel.
Just made from Lieutenant Colonel Colonel.
And by the end of the war was a five-star general in a matter of about six years.
Went from that rank to a five-star general.
Pretty impressive for someone who at the time was surrounded by what we'll call now, especially in the history books, very well-known generals.
Very huge personality generals.
When you look at Patton, when you look at MacArthur, when you look at You know, Montgomery, even of the British Army.
You look at these players on this field that here was Eisenhower who was behind them in rank actually when this war started, but quickly overtook them and began the leadership of all of the American allied forces in Europe during World War II. They both were not flashy.
I think that's an interestingly important To look at here.
Neither one of these men, if you look at the traditional role of a politician or a person coming to power these days, even if they came from a different background, such as Donald Trump, Joe Biden, Obama, Bush, they all have a little bit bigger personalities.
They all have a style of That is more out front.
Some is just delivered over a longer term of a political career such as Joe Biden.
For Donald Trump, it was delivered over a career in business and being very much a part of the pop culture scene, the news scene in our country for many decades before he ever became president.
You saw that in Clinton, you saw it in Obama, you saw it in George W. Bush going forward.
This sort of a driving personality.
Not what you see in George Washington or in Dwight Eisenhower.
And I think that will come out as we take these speeches, we break them down in understanding.
Again, why...
We do this is to understand our situation today.
We, as I started this podcast off, I said, there's a lot of issues out there.
We talk about those on this podcast each and every week, but sometimes it's good to take a step back, look at some advice from the past, apply it to today, and say, where do we go forward?
The last thing that I want to talk about, about these two gentlemen that we are going to look at on their final speeches, our final thoughts to the nation, was that they were both very pragmatic.
And I think that's important.
That's going to be a term that is not used enough today.
In fact, I think it's actually downplayed in our political society, in our political discourse.
Pragmatism is not something to be valued.
These two who led our country through very troubled times, one started our country, the other one led us through World War II and then became president, ending Korea, spending a time in which the Cold War was kicking off.
Both understood the troubles of their time, but understood that pragmatism or getting something done is actually a virtue and not something to be dismissed.
Too many times today we're seeing in our public discourse, and unfortunately we see it on both sides, Washington spoke a great deal about this when he discussed the concern that he had about partisanship and parties developing, but the concern is Founded is that you'll be more concerned with a belief than in the belief of the country itself.
Now, let me frame that again so that if you're listening here, I want you to understand what I'm saying.
Their concern, first and foremost, was what is best for the country What is best for America in a limited government role, in a freedom of people to respond and be active in that government?
What is that role?
And they believed it to be very pragmatic that if you take care of the union, so to speak, as Washington calls it, or if you take care of the whole, that the individual is taken care of as well.
And this is very different than a...
liberal idea in which government takes care of everything.
Probably, in fact, if you look at Washington's concern on public debt, you look at Eisenhower's concern on influence of the modern defense industrial complex, you see that their concern was One in which a government in which was self-controlled, self-contained, and the people were allowed to flourish in that.
James Baker, there's a quote, former Secretary of State, and I'll say this.
He said, pragmatism without principles is cynicism, but principles without pragmatism are often powerless.
I want you to think about that for just a second.
If I'm going to read it again, if you're listening, whatever you're doing right now, I want you to listen to what he says here.
Because it makes a lot of sense for today.
Pragmatism without principles is cynicism.
But principles without pragmatism is often powerless.
This sums up for me.
This one quote led in my research as I was dealing with these two speeches as I ran across this quote really drove me to the understanding of where we are in our political discourse today in Washington, D.C. and in many of the state houses.
Look at what he said.
Pragmatism without principles is cynicism.
In other words, you are just cynical.
The pragmatism of getting anything done without principles, you're willing...
It takes it away from being able to find any root or grounding in what you're wanting to do.
It's not really pragmatism.
It's forcing an agenda.
And you're willing to do whatever it takes to get something done.
And that's being very cynical.
That's saying that the world could be bought, the world could be manipulated, the landscape could be turned to whatever you believe.
And if your pragmatism doesn't have principles, in other words, you're getting stuff done no matter the cost without being grounded to something that gives you the reason to Why you do it.
I have seen this happen so many times in Washington.
I've seen it happen in the state level.
We have people who run for office, who want to serve, and at the same point, they're not grounded in a set principle.
In other words, anything that they come up against, they sort of adapt at the moment.
The pragmatist in them says, let's just get something done to make everybody happy without having a set of principles.
That is dangerous in our country.
It's dangerous in our world because if you're willing to do anything just to get an answer, then you have nothing that you're going to stand on when it becomes very real.
The second part of this quote, though, actually, in talking about these two leaders, Washington and Eisenhower, also is very forthright as well.
And he says, principles, though, without pragmatism, Now, this is also something I see these days.
In fact, I see this one probably is more than I'm seeing on the just get stuff done side.
And this is saying, here are my principles and I will never bend, never compromise, never look at ways to work with inside my principles to get anything done.
In other words, everything has to be perfect.
And we've developed into a society today, and there's many on both sides of the aisle in radio and podcast and TV and in the political world that say, if it's not exactly what I want, then it is wrong, or it is evil, or we attach something to it.
That is not...
What true working as a country together actually is and it's something that I think we actually need to discuss when you understand that you have to have principles.
You have to have an understanding of who you are as a conservative.
From our perspective, a conservative or liberal would have their understanding of what their principles are so that they come back to those principles.
They don't negotiate those principles in a sense, but they find ways that a solution can work within the principles or they can turn it down.
Having principles doesn't mean that you don't vote for something.
Having principles doesn't mean that you can't agree to anything if it's not 100% right.
But what it does mean is you're not going to give away what is core and inherent belief into yourself.
And when you look at two presidents such as Eisenhower in Washington, you begin to see this played out in a big way.
The problem today we see, and I think we're going to learn hopefully from these two speeches, Is that there is no longer a willingness to solve big problems.
You just don't do it.
I mean, we're in Washington, D.C. While I was there for over eight years in the state house, you just don't see big problems being solved.
You see smaller issues being done, budgets getting done, smaller issues being taken up.
But when it comes to big issues of the economy, of budgeting, of spending, of criminal justice reform, of trade, all these things, they get left on the sidelines.
Why?
Because there is this problem that I just said of that we have too many who are willing to only have their way and not be willing to find a way to get something done.
So I want to start with that sort of introduction and we're going to spend a few minutes here on Washington's A farewell address from 1796. And there's several things that I think as we look at this that's just going to come out that goes into this idea that I want to see us America getting back to getting things done.
It means not everybody will get everything they want, but you've got to be willing to stand and fight for something to find a medium or a pragmatism, if you would, that gets something done.
The first thing I don't want to look at and...
This farewell address from Washington is if you read over it, and I have a copy of it here and I'm going to be reading some from it, is the first thing that stuck out at me was he uses the first part of his is to basically declare his profound sense of duty to both a public and a private life.
I think this is very important.
Today, one of the varying issues that I have is that many times government is being run by those who only have a public trough perspective.
And what I mean by that is they've only worked for the government.
They've never worked outside of government.
Some, and I've had folks in committees in Washington where they are actually overseeing industries such as banking and have never worked in a bank.
Washington would have never understood that concept.
And I think today there is a change, and I'm not gonna say that 1796 is exactly the same as 2022, but there are some similar principles, this goes back to the principle-based arguments, that I do believe still operate.
Number one, there should be a broad understanding of those working in government, those who are elected in government, to have a good public and private partnership in their own mind because they've practiced in both.
For Washington, he thought of the greatest honor given to be not only leading the troops in the Revolutionary War, but then to be given the honor of being the first president.
He took that as a sense of duty beyond himself.
He looked at it for leaving Mount Vernon and his home and his businesses.
He looked at it as something that he was out of duty to a country that he believed had given him much.
He believed that he owed much.
So, as we look at this though, I want you to say, think about this.
George Washington, who we've talked about on this podcast before, had everything in his power.
He could have come out of the Revolutionary War and into the Constitution.
He could have been king.
He could have been whatever he wanted to be.
He was looked at as the father of the country.
He was revered.
He had everything and every power that you could want within his grasp, and he willingly turned that over back to the states, the colonies at the time in which Uh, he was leading and said, and basically saying this, this union is bigger than myself.
I'm going to give the picture of what he's saying.
He said, the union of the colonies, the union of these United States is bigger than one and, uh, is not something for me to obtain.
This comes really from, I think a really an interesting part of humility.
and let's start off right here with the first point of Washington's farewell address.
Listen to what he says.
He says,
Not unconscious in the offset of the inferiority of my qualifications, experience in my own eyes, and perhaps still more in the eyes of others, have strengthened the motives to difference of myself, and every day, the increasing weight of years admonishes me more and more that the shade of retirement is as necessary to me as it is welcome.
Now think about that for just a second.
Here was a man who could be anything, do anything that he wanted to do in this country at that time.
And he actually still, even after eight years of presidency, said, I've tried my best in my own strength, in my own fallibility to do what is best for this country.
There's an acknowledgement of humility there.
And so many times today, I see this in our public...
I see it in our media.
I see it in our politicians.
I see it in some of our cultures, is that there's no humility anymore.
And to realize that we may be wrong, that there are certain absences in our life in which we may not have all the answers.
Washington started off his address, number one, by thanking the people for allowing him the honor of being who he was out of a duty to his country.
And then he goes into this humility that says, look, I I'm not sure that I had the right education or the right qualifications, but I did my duty as best I could, understanding the limitations of what I have.
This is good for all of us.
It is understanding that when you take a step out into the public life, or you take a step out from your private life to participate in the public life and the governance of our country, you're not going to have all the answers.
I mean, you may want to think that you do, but if you're not listening and you're not willing to hear and you're not willing to adapt, then you're going to have a lot of problems As it comes, you'll move off of this idea that you can get things done, as Washington, and I think you'll see Eisenhower later in his speech talk about as well, but Washington was very concerned about this idea that the country being first, the country being bigger than ourselves, this is something...
That he focused on and he actually exhibited in this speech when he said, look, he said, I may have failed.
I may not be infallible, but I did the best I could.
And he says, and I love how he says it there at the end.
He says, and the weight of all these responsibilities is now understanding for me that retirement is where I need to be.
So he starts off not only with his understanding of his role as president, he starts off with the humility to realize that he may not have had all the answers, but he did realize that his job was to do the best that he could under those circumstances.
Now, the second part that he goes into in his speech was this concerning, and what I'm going to say was one of the first America first.
I mean, Donald Trump is associated with this America first doctrine.
It goes back to George Washington.
George Washington very much was America first.
I mean, think about it.
He had just fought to gain our independence.
He had just fought to actually make our country a country.
And so he does have this idea in front of him.
And he says, and I want you to listen to what he says here.
he says for this you have been you have every inducement of sympathy and interest citizens by birth or choice of a common country that country has a right to concentrate your affections think about that for a second the name of an american which belongs to you in your national capacity must always exalt the just pride of patriotism more than appellation derived from local discriminations with slight shades of difference
you have the same religion manners habits and political principles you have the common cause fault and triumph together the independence and liberty you possess are the work of joint councils and joint efforts of common dangers suffering and successes folks whether we like it or not whether you like my political persuasion or i like your political persuasion george washington hits it head on
We are Americans first, and it is our job to persevere under this great freedom that our Constitution has given to us and take these unalienable rights given to us, not by man, but by God, and we actually exercise those rights.
I mean, George Washington said it first.
As he was talking there, he said, quit thinking in regional terms, if you would.
Quit thinking in the parochial terms of just your interest.
You're an American.
And I love how he says this.
He says, by birth or by choice.
Okay, by birth or by choice.
Right now what we're saying, I say so many times, is those of us who are born American by birth, having our birthright as citizens of this great country, tend to forget the greatness that we have and it is sometimes good for you to look at those who come here and choose to be American citizens and swear that oath and go through the process legally.
To become Americans and their deep burning desire to participate in this country is real and it is powerful because they understand the nature of America is freedom and they understand that America is an idea that only can be festered and only be fostered when it comes from those of us with the identity of Americans.
Out of many come one.
That is the whole purpose here.
He also goes in to say something that I wanted to focus on because this is an important part.
He not only comes out of having the humility and the concern about factionalism and parties, and he talks a lot about that, and that we're equally dependent upon each other.
Now, this was tested in the Civil War when you had South and North, and this was a struggle.
He was predicting that if you keep the factionalism up, then it will tear at the very nature of our country, but it was an American-first thought process.
Now, one of the thoughts is that he, and I think lays out of this, was the next point, and that is that America was a debated and tested idea.
It was not something we fell into.
It was not something we copied.
It was not something we necessarily took from somebody else and said, you know, We're going to take whatever's working for them and make it work for us.
No, it was a taking of a lot of things from different places and coming forth with a union that was better than the confederation we had.
It was a union of states that had a federal government with limited reach and scope and states that had their own scope, much broader in many ways, that came together to say we're better together than we are anywhere else.
And coming out of a war that they just had, Washington was able to talk about this.
Now, the understanding here also is that the number four is a warning that people will be manipulated And try to manipulate others based on these freedoms.
Now this is something we have to understand.
Washington understood this.
But he also understood that government was an indispensable function.
Listen to what he said.
He said,"...to the efficacy and permanency of your union, a government for the whole is indispensable.
No alliance, however strict, between the parts can be an adequate substitute.
They must inevitably experience the infractions and interruptions of which alliances in all times have experienced." Sensible of this momentous truth, you have improved upon your first essay by the adoption of the constitution of a government better calculated than your former for an intimate union and for the efficacy management of your common concerns.
The government, notice what he says here, the offspring of our own choice.
Uninfluenced, unawed, adopted, full investigation, mature deliberation, completely free in its principles and a distribution of its power, uniting security with energy and containing within itself a provision for its own amendment, has just claimed for your confidence and support.
Now, we still had problems inside that, the recognition of a female's right to vote, the treatment of African Americans in our country.
These were all problems that were still This is a very powerful statement from Washington here to say, look, we came together, we debated this, we rationalized it out, we thought about it out, we emotionally played it out, and we have chosen as a country to accept a constitution that binds us together.
I want us to remember that because I hear now, sometimes I hear these folks who actually say, Well, if I just don't like the United States, we just need to take our country, our state, out of the Union.
No, you're missing the entire point that Washington would say, is that this Union was fought for, this Union was chosen, this Union was not one that was thrust upon anyone, but it actually came from a willingness and a governance of the people.
Thus, the statement, we the people, a government by, for, of the people.
That is what we have to look at as we look going forward here.
So as we deal with this, number one, America was a thought-out idea, something that we actually had worked on as a people with representation of all the areas in the early colonies.
But it is also the very thing that our freedoms come from, and we have to keep that going.
Now, he moves into something after that, the understanding of...
I need to tie this with you, otherwise you may miss what happened.
He talked about meeting America first.
He talked about the country itself being owed our duty and allegiance as citizens, and that we chose this process.
This was not something that was handed to us or forced upon us.
It was a governing system in which we chose it.
He then goes on to say, however, That their parties, and he's talking about political parties here, factionalism, state interest over national interest.
He begins to warn us that this is something that will be problematic, and he then hits on something that we don't like to talk about, but we see it as it happens.
And that is, when he talks about this, and that is revenge.
In fact, he says this in the speech.
He says the alternate domination of one faction over another sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, with which is different.
Ages countries have perpetuated the most horrendous enormities in and of itself, frightful despotism.
What are you saying there?
And let me break this down for you.
What he's saying is that revenge, which comes from sticking the party line or the ideology before the country as a whole, leads to revenge.
In other words, if one party does something to another party, the next party comes in and says, I'm going to seek revenge for what just happened to me.
This is becoming more and more the norm in our government.
If you don't believe it, all you gotta do is look at 2019. Now it actually started in 2016 and that was the night in November that Hillary Clinton lost to Donald Trump for presidency of the United States.
Many Democrats, many liberals could not accept that.
They did not want Donald Trump to be president.
There was a tragedy in Brooklyn that night, and they set out bound and determined that they were not going to make this an easy road for Donald Trump.
In fact, if they could get rid of him, they would.
I wrote about this in my book, The Clock in the Calendar.
You can go read about it.
But this then came into a festering that when we started in 2017 and went through the next two years to the election cycle of 2018, Democrats were furious.
They, the party line, the liberal agenda that they just did not like Donald Trump, did not like anything he stood for, did not, was not giving him a chance from moment one, didn't recognize the, you know, and some even going to the floor of the House, not wanting to recognize the electoral count.
Yeah, it was Democrats who did that in 2017. So again, they didn't want it at all.
And they made everything difficult as they possibly could for those first two years.
And then in 2018, they won back the House.
Here's where I believe George Washington was echoing this, that when you have factional interest or party interest that lay ahead of everything else, then you end up in a revenge mode saying, I've got to redeem what was done to me.
In other words, more than just winning, I've got to show the other side that I was right and they were wrong.
And when that happened in 2019, The Democrats come in in 2019. In January 2019, I was a ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee and I watched it head-on for over the next two years in which Democrats could do nothing but attack Donald Trump.
They went after him with revenge.
They went after him with everything they had.
They went from the Mueller report to immigration to investigation of cabinet members to then finally a sham impeachment that ended after coming off of a phone call with what is now known as the Ukrainian leader Zelensky.
It should be noted though for all the Democrats out there who are vetting and giving props to President Zelensky during his time of war with Russia were also the very ones that were tearing him down during the impeachment process actually saying, and I can't make this up, comparing him to an abused spouse.
This is what revenge will do to you.
This is what the getting back at the other party will do to you that Washington was warning us about.
And you don't have to take my word for it.
Go read the speech.
He's concerned about it.
He goes on to say that...
In that spirit of revenge, he said, it serves always to distract the public councils and enfeeble the public administration.
It agitates the community with ill-founded jealousies, false alarms, kindles the animosity of one part of another against another and ferments occasionally riot and insurrection.
It opens the door to foreign influence, corruption, which finds its facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions.
Have we not been viewing that over the last few years?
I think this is the interesting part of it.
And again, this was 1796, folks.
This was a long way away from what we're experiencing today, but George Washington knew, I mean, here was the father of our country, he knew that these party entanglements outside of the passionate pragmatism of getting things done and looking after the country first would lead to these kind of things, and we've already seen it.
If you have limited vision, you know, Only what you want, only your party's ideas, only your party's activities, then you will miss the bigger vision.
This, I think, was the concern that Washington had, was that when we became involved in parochial interests, we became involved or dedicated ourselves simply to ideological interests based on those that we agree with, then we lose sight of his biggest vision, and that is the union in which he fought for and actually won from England,
and that was the right to be a republic with a constitution that gives we the people the power to elect our officials to be part of our government and he said once you move away from that he said you're gonna have problems and he already saw it early in his administration in that first real election for the next president this rise of party-ism as he would call it coming out Again, now, does that mean that I don't think that there should be parties?
I think Washington would be very upset if he looked at the way the situation has developed now into two dominant parties and other parties that have come along in which the party interests seem to be the dominant interest of those elected officials.
But I think he also understood, whether he liked it or not, he had a position that was contrary to others in the government.
And so you have factions, whether you want to call it party structure or non-party structure, you always have factions in government.
But one thing that he would, I think, actually advocate was, is you advocate for getting things done.
And he was the first to admit he didn't always do that right.
But yet was willing to find the things that kept the Union strong as opposed to the factions strong.
The next thing in the Washington Farewell Address that is interesting and is controversial today, in fact, some would want to cancel me out or not listen to me because he was very much of an understanding that religion and morality were at the center point or the basis of our government.
He says,"...of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports." He understood and goes on to say that when he said, In other words, he tied morality to religion.
And the interesting thing here is he didn't tie it to the singularity of religion.
He tied it to the fact of a belief in a God, bigger than ourselves, who then provided the moral or principle framework that we've been talking about for those in America.
This today, can you imagine if this discussion in the public marketplace now, the very principles our country was founded on morality and religious and these religious beliefs are being the things very torn out of our society today by many who want to keep these separate, not a part of government.
Washington, our founding father, would have never seen a government detached from morality.
In fact, he saw that when a government became detached from morality and that religious basis in which that Typically springs from.
He saw the government becoming inwardly focused.
He saw it becoming inefficient.
He saw the very union that he fought for being tied or torn apart.
And that was something that he chose to warn about.
Isn't it interesting to you and to me as you look back at a declaration from 1796 on a farewell speech in which that was an interesting point that he made.
He said you cannot divorce the morality or religion of the country from the governance of the country itself.
And if you were to say that today, You would have people who are saying, oh, you know, separation of church and faith, and they try to bring up everything that they could.
And that's not what he's saying here.
He said the very essence of our governing documents come on the belief that we are God-given, have God-given rights, God-given abilities that are beyond the scope of a country.
But when you take the country as its whole, the morality is based on religious principles.
And that was Washington's comment here.
We...
We are who we are based on those moral foundational principles and that's how you get things done because if you have a moral principle that says that this country is bigger than anything that I would want on my own and I'm willing to look for the good of the country, the good of the whole that also still represents my values and my principles as well, that's a thought that I believe Washington would agree with.
He then moves into something else.
And again, you see how he flows here.
He flows from the country.
He flows from humility.
He flows from being careful on who you're entangling yourselves with in party fashions.
And then he moves into something today that I think would probably be the most disrupting thing in his whole life or whole mindset if he was able to come back today and look at our country.
And that he talks about the public debt.
In other words, not being in debt.
I think this comes from his background in business.
He understood that if you had too much debt, that you were too leveraged, that you would be...
You know, too influenced or too controlled by outside entities and not have your own destiny.
He understood this as a country.
We don't understand it anymore.
We're $30 trillion in debt.
We show no signs of trying to attach the real cause and drivers of our debt, which is not the $1.5 trillion that was just recently passed.
That's discretionary spending.
You could take out all that discretionary spending for the most part, which by the way includes your Defense Department spending, and you still have roughly about the same amount of money or less than you're taking in.
So it doesn't solve it.
You're going to have to get at the real drivers of debt, which is the Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, the debt entitlements, those things that are actually what we call non-discretionary items.
In other words, Congress doesn't even vote on those issues.
They just build until you actually change the programs themselves.
We're not going to get a handle on debt here unless we do.
Now, what did he say about this?
Washington said a very important source of strength and security, cherish public credit.
One method of preserving it is to use it sparingly as possible, avoid occasions of expense by cultivating peace, but remembering also that timely disbursements to prepare for danger frequently prevents much greater disbursements to repel it.
Avoiding likewise the accumulation of debt, not only by shunning occasions of expense, but by vigorous exertion in times of peace to discharge the debts which unavoidable wars may have occasion, not ungenerously slowing upon posterity the burden which we ourselves ought to bear.
Now some of you out there are saying, you can't do that anymore.
It's too expensive.
We ain't even trying.
And I've been a part of it.
Others are a part of it.
But we've got to get this under control because at a certain point in time, Washington is right.
You cannot continue the debt cycle.
You need to cherish your credit.
You need to spend wisely.
If you incur debt, and I like how he said here, unavoidable wars.
In other words, he does believe they're unavoidable wars.
Unavoidable wars.
You will accumulate debt.
You pay them off as quickly as possible in peace.
He understood that you had to have a budget.
You had to have a plan.
You had to work that plan.
Washington, D.C., this is probably one of the most broken and least reported aspects in Washington, D.C., except the overlying budget that were overspent, that were overburdened and overtaxed.
And that is that for the last 50 plus years, there's been a plan in place to actually move 12 appropriations bills through the United States House, through the United States Senate, and onto the President's desk for either veto or signing.
We've not done it, but I think approximately three times in a little over 50 years.
We cannot even do the basics.
Number one, we're tied to debt.
Number two, we're not having the political will of pragmatism because of our background in parties and factionalism and our ideological bent that we can't come together with our principles to get anything done.
Remember, you can have all the principles in the world, but if you're not getting anything done to make your world a better place, Then you're often powerless.
And I see so many in Congress on the far left and the far right who are utterly powerless except to give a speech on what they believe their principles are but no way to come together to actually get anything done.
Folks, this is just wrong as we look at this as we go forward.
You've got to be able to do what you believe is right and do so in a way to actually get something done.
Debt was something that George Washington was very concerned about.
He wanted to keep the public credit.
He wanted that trust that was given to the government to be rightfully used.
When debt needed to be incurred, it was something to be paid off quickly.
The final thing that he dealt with, and this is something that we could go on a lot about, and that's foreign entanglements.
This one is a little bit different in the sense that Back then, America was isolated across the seas from the developed world.
We were developing on our own.
We weren't immediately torn into the Constant upheaval in Europe.
And he basically said, let's just stay by ourselves.
Let's just, you know, France, Britain, Spain, all of them, they'll continue in their squabbles back and forth, but we're gonna stay out of it because we don't want to be entangled.
He also said this, he said, so likewise, a passionate attachment of one nation For another produces a variety of evil sympathies for the favorite nations facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest in cases where there are no common interests exist and infusing into one the enmities of another betrays the former into a participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter without adequate inducement or justification.
This one will be the one that I would love to hear what he would say now with the smallness of the world, and especially with the idea of terrorism, being on a plane, being as connected as we were.
I think the biggest issue here is probably just the practical application of what we have seen is the principles, is that our country is first, that our country puts its interests first, and that if those interests are damaged, then we act in protection of those interests.
So really a 200 plus year old idea is not really that new.
It's putting America first.
It's entangling ourselves only in areas in which we have a national security interest or national economic interest and then working with others to work out their own problems and us not being the global police force that some want us to be.
If when you entangle yourselves, and this is the problem we have with Ukraine right now, everybody's talking about Ukraine and Russia, and the real problem is if they go just a few more miles over the border, then you're going to be into a treaty ratified by the United States called NATO. Article 5 will be employed, and the NATO countries and Russia will be at war.
And that needs to be avoided at all costs.
Real leadership, I think, from President Washington would have said now is find ways to be peaceful.
Remember, he said it during the previous paragraph when he talked about being in debt.
He said basically strive for peace because then peace brings prosperity.
He also said that the way you overcome or the way that you look at this peace and not become entangled is through economic trade, economic growth with these other countries in which you're dealing in economics.
You're not dealing in hostilities of war.
Wow.
All of this is in a speech given by George Washington when he was getting ready to leave office and he wanted to, in his mind, give a lasting discussion to the people in a new country give a lasting discussion to the people in a new country and a new thought in a new way on how they need to look at what lies First and foremost was his humility to service.
First and foremost was his desire to have our country stay the union that he fought for.
And the way he laid that out was his staying away from entanglements, staying away from party factions, holding to your beliefs.
I don't think he would have ever said, don't hold on to your principles or your beliefs, but what I believe he would have said was just take those beliefs and find ways to find agreement with others.
If anybody believes that this country was put together easily, have never read anything about the constitutional conventions in which he presided over.
He understood That strong men of principle came together, they found ways to get around the disagreements of their day, to start a country in which we the people are first and foremost, the government itself exists for the people, not the other way around, and he did not ever want to see that go away in our world.
A man who was born of war, a man who was born of a business background, someone who understood bigger principles.
Washington wanted us to understand that as well.
And this is where the similarity with Eisenhower grows.
And in the next episode, we're going to talk about Eisenhower's final address, and then I'm going to blend the two to show you the lessons that I see that we can talk about, that we've talked a little bit about today.
How do we take these two men's wise counsel and we move forward in a world in which things are not going well in many ways?
The answers and the ideas are going to have to come from men and women of passion, of personal integrity, and also personal beliefs And the understanding that principles matter, but principles are useless if you can't use them to get anything done.
Our country can no longer stand still.
We have to take the big issues on of our economy, our place in national security, not only here, but in the world.
And we have to be willing to tackle those issues and come together to find answers that actually make sense for our country.
So in looking at the past, We can see the future and plan for even more if we are willing to take the advice of those who at different times in our country's history had to address issues, had to address problems, but always looked ahead to say what was better.
Washington was no different.
He wanted this country to succeed.
He wanted the union to last.
And these were his ideas for moving forward.
We'll take up part two next time on the Doug Collins Podcast.
Hey everybody, it's Doug Collins.
I can't wait to tell you about a new partner here on the Doug Collins Podcast, Healthy Cell.
HealthyCell.com, you can go to their website.
They are reimagining the way that we take vitamins.
I mean, look, you don't still listen.
For the most part, record players are for the vintage side.
You look at it for old time, you don't listen for the crispest, clearest.
There's things out there that you get right now that have updated in the future.
and we're still taking vitamins like we did back in the 1930s.
This new technology, this new product from Healthy Cell is a micro gel that takes your vitamins, puts them in a gel form.
You can take it straight out of the pack.
You can mix it in water or your favorite food, but it gets into your system so much quicker.
165% better absorption through this micro gel technology.
And believe me, the more you get in the nutrients into your body, the better you're going to be.
They have a full product line.
I take these Medigel packets.
They are amazing.
We have been on them now for a little over a month and I can tell the biggest difference.
I've taken vitamins most of my adult life and the way these work is just something that I don't think that you can find anywhere else.
Again, it's HealthyCell.com.
You can go forward slash Collins or use Collins in the promo code to get a 20% discount.
You don't want to miss this.
Please go check out their website, HealthyCell.com.
Microgel for these vitamins that are the best thing out there right now to keep you healthy and listening to the Doug Collins Podcast.
Folks, I don't know about you, but I cannot stand a towel that simply moves water around me after my shower.
I like a towel that grabs you, takes the water, gets it off of you, and does what a towel is supposed to do, dry you off.
I've had so many towels I bought over time.
Some were expensive, some were cheap, but again, when they just sort of moved the water around, I could have just stayed in the shower and stayed wet.
I need a towel that gets me dry.
That's where our friends at MyPillow come in.
They have towels, and you're not going to believe the bargain that they have right now.
Mike and the folks at MyPillow have offered a six-piece towel set.
That's two bath towels, two hand towels, and two washcloths Regularly at $109.99 for $39.99.
All you gotta do is have code word Collins.
You can go to MyPillow.com or you can call them at 1-800-986-3994.
If you want towels that actually do what they're supposed to do, dry you off.
That's what we do here on the Doug Collins Podcast.
We talk about real answers and real solutions for a complicated world.
Well, sometimes you may not think that getting water off of you is a complicated process, but undoubtedly it is for some tile companies.
It's not for the folks at MyPillow who actually have a tile.
The MyTileLage is a great investment for you, and right now you can get it on sale regularly $109.99 for only $39.99.
And that is with code word Collins.
Also, anything else that you want to go on there, you've still got the slippers, you've still got the MyPillars, you've still got everything that is on that wonderful website.
You want to go check it out.
Use code name Collins and get your discounts.
▲
Export Selection