 boys from Wisconsin and North Dakota and, you know, the old states there, and he honestly believes it in this country. And I don't discount it, because I honestly believe it could be too, with Bill Fulbright talking and acting like he does and with the rest of them. So I want to at least make an effort to present convincing substantive material in this respect. We have taken the Gavin theory and gone to the bottom of it because Gavin has been a special favor to this administration, a special favor to the McNamirs and the rest of them. We hauled him in here, and a plane brought him in, and we've had it looked up and down. But what it all gets back to, Gene, in the last word, is the Walter Lippman Fulbright argument, is we ought to be there and we ought to get out. Well, I guess that's about it. I say that Bobby really doesn't discourage me very much. These other things are just offshoots. What they really think is, we ought to be there and we ought to get out. Well, I know we ought to be there, but I can't get out. I just can't be the architect of surrender. And don't see it. I'm trying everywhere in the world I can to find a way to think. But they don't have the pressure to bring them to the table as of yet. We don't know whether they ever will. I'm willing to do damn near anything. If I told you what I was willing to do, I wouldn't have any program. Dirkson wouldn't give me a dollar to operate the war. I just can't operate in the glass bowl with all these things. But I'm willing to do nearly anything the human can do, if I can do it with any honor at all. But they started with me on Jim, you remember. He was corrupt and he ought to be killed. So we killed him. We all got together and got a damn bunch of thugs and we went in assassinating him. We really had no political stability since then. And we had our problem. This guy's doing the best job that any of the rest have been done. He's been more stable and he has more social consciousness. And he has more programs of this nature that we think ultimate will do it. And we think that maybe in due time that if they would be willing to United Nations election, and we think that people are supporting him, we've had our best pollsters, we've had the gallops and the harrasses and the quails all out there, they've gone into the Viet Cong areas and the other areas and they've taken the Vietnamese and used them very carefully. And it shows that about 80% of them are anti-communist, the Buddhists and the Catholics and the rest of them. They're not Viet Cong. We think that if we can ever just have enough pressure on them through attrition and otherwise, say that this can't go on a long time, that they might be willing to take their four points and stay pretty close to them, with the exception of running us out. We just say, well, we'll stay here until you have a United Nations election or we'll have United Nations troops until you have an election. And that's what I'm trying to work up to. But they don't feel that way now, because they think they got it. And the thing that, the most helpful thing that they think they've got is that I've got more problems on my hand than Ho's got on his, and I have with The New York Times. It's all for God damn hard to have foreign policy, they don't approve of it. Well, I think that's right there. Oh, well, you don't know, my friend. You don't see, you don't have any idea what one little column picture a fellow can do in that New York Times with the two column biographical background and Scotty saying, you're a real wise, and Ken, where they're saying, you know, the editors think that except for you, this country would lose its freedom, and they drop those things around and then they hit about four dirty cracks at me, and then they've got it made. I don't read the title though, we about one day a week. I do, and I do, and I see it's a fact. And it has a hell of an effect, it does in the government, it does in the State Department. I have no control over my State Department. Hell, I got about as much control of my State Department as you've got of the Democrats in Texas. The intelligence man calls in them and tells them what he thinks I read yesterday where it's going to be a seven-year war, and we're going to get involved with China and the best estimates are seven years, so I went to the bottom of it, and I said that's what the President's been informed, and he's been told, and so forth, and I couldn't find it anywhere. And I finally found out one intelligence fellow had sat out over there and told Mike Frankl and his man, and he's a very junior man, you know, but I have to take it in, and it was my aid, my authoritative presidential spokesman. Is that right? Yes, that happens every day. That happens every day. So if you will, I want Taylor to sit down and reason with you, and I'd like for it to be quiet and off the record, and I don't want to send her saying that I'm trying to sell him a damn thing. I've read about three times where Senator McCarthy says that he wants the country to do what it needs to do, but he has never had a case for rebombing. And I want to give you whatever case we have, and you may say, well, I'm more convinced than ever we don't have a case, but I want you to be exposed to it because I have enough confidence in your fairness to believe that if you see it as I see it, that it will at least be helpful to the National pulling us together. OK, I'll have him called you during the day. Thank you. Waiting, waiting.