My favorite Christmas' were in what Amy and Brandon refer to as "the country house",
The place Mom and Dad had about 10 miles outside of Eldon, MO.
---
It wasn't, necessarily, the place that was great.
It was the moment.
---
It was late Christmas Day.
Long after the frenzy leading up to the day, the "BIG FAMILY DINNER", AND the opening of the presents.
The toys had been assembled.
The new clothes had been "tried on" to see if they fit right.
---
That was all done.
---
My favorite moment:
Outside, if there is not snow on the ground (most often there wasn't), the temperature was in the 20's or lower. ... and tending the fire is "my job", and kind of a "zen" thing for me, anyway.
The TV is on, and football is playing.
At this point, it doesn't matter whether if it's NFL or college ball.
Dad is in his chair, asleep, on one of the few days of the year he can rest like this, and the "background noise" of the game is comforting to him. ... and it's not very loud, anyway. ... At least, not as loud as his snoring.
Mom is either puttering around in the kitchen, or reading a book, on the sofa.
Craig, by this point, has become bored with his new toys, and is entertaining himself with the boxes that those toys came in. In fact, most often, it seems like the boxes were more fun for him than the toys.
But he is off in the corner, under what we referred to as the "game table", and is fairly quiet.
I'm tending the fire in the fireplace (or later, in the fireplace insert), enjoying the tranquility, and, probably, "plunking" away at my acoustic guitar, quietly.
---
For the first time in weeks, if not months, all four of us are in the same place, at the same time, and there is no "agenda", or "frenzy" driving things.
We can just "be" and while we are separate, we are "being" together.
---
In 1984, Mannheim Steamroller, did their "Mannheim Steamroller Christmas" album/CD. It was one of the first CD's I ever owned, and I still have it.
---
On that album, they did "Silent Night", under the original German title: "Stille Nacht".
---
When I heard their rendition, it took me back to those moments, IMMEDIATELY.
I WAS THERE, in that time and place, even though that was, at least, 3 years in my past.
TO THIS DAY, I hear that piece, and in my mind and heart, I am THERE.
---
This song, and the memories it evokes give me a sense of peace that few other things do.

I am one lucky SOB. (That is no reflection on my mother, by the way. It's a commentary on me.)
---
I, still, even after retirement from the Army, have my DREAM JOB, and it keeps getting better.
Then there is Amy. ... I looked her in the eye, on June 22nd, 1985, and swore "til death do us part". I mean it more now than I did then, because, frankly, I didn't think I would live this long.
---
THEN, even though Amy and I have never "had children", biologically, I ... We have these THREE ... INCREDIBLE, WONDERFUL, AND AMAZING kids, that call me, or think of me as "Dad".
---
I came home, last night, after the culmination of my ROUGHEST time of the year ... and Amy is gone to visit her folks.
I was expecting to come home to a house empty of anything, except for hungry dogs. ... and trying to figure out what in the "Wide, Wide World of Sports" I was going to do to give my kids a "Christmas".
Thanks to everything that had gone on recently, we didn't even have a tree, much less a decorated one.
---
So, last night, I walk in the door, late, like my Dad used to (and you read my expectations above).
And there were my kids. Rainey was sick and laid out on the couch, but that's okay, because, no matter how much I love, adore, and amazed by her skills and talents, cooking is one of the few things that she does not excel at.
But, there was Zeus and Brandon, "my boys", going to town in the kitchen.
Even though they were "set up for failure", because of the state of the kitchen, they put on a good "Robertson Christmas Eve" dinner ... while running me out of the kitchen.
---
I was surprised, and we did our normal "banter" ... even though they wouldn't let me take part/help ... okay, let's face it, If they had let me in the kitchen, I would have taken charge.
---
They didn't let that happen.
They made me do what I should do to relax.
...And so I did.
---
While it wasn't a traditional "sit down at the table" meal, it fit us, and our history. ... and neither Amy or I did ANYTHING to make it happen.
"Our boys" did this for our family.
---
And because they did that, later today, we can all (except for Amy, she is in Tennessee) enjoy my favorite part of Christmas.

I have this love/hate relationship with time of the year.
---
Mostly hate.
---
It goes back to when I was a kid.
My Dad worked in retail.
---
From the day after Thanksgiving, until Christmas Eve night, we didn't see him, unless you went to the store, and even then, it was, at the EARLIEST, 10:30 PM before we say him.
---
Once my little brother quit believing in Santa Claus, we, as a family decided that "Christmas" was going to happen when Dad got home, no matter how late that was.
The "big dinner", opening the presents, etc.
... and we were ALL going to sleep in the next day.
---
So, I decided to do something different. I was going to be a musician.
---
Yeah, that made a big difference.
---
Now, instead of listening to the music that reminded me how my Dad couldn't be there for me, two months out of the year, I had to play it, in that time frame. ...
AND, joy of joys, I had to start rehearsing that music as early as September, to ensure the ensemble had it "down" to the conductor's satisfaction,
---
My worst Christmas EVER was 1991.
The commander/conductor of my Army Band decided that we would start working on Christmas music the first week of September, and he DEMANDED that we rehearse, at a minimum, 3 days a week (out of 5), for 8 hours, each day.
(the concert he is preparing for is mid to late December.)
---
Okay, I can get that, IF you have no idea what you want to program, and you are going to spend most of September, and, possibly, parts of October, "sight reading" things you want to try out.
---
Nope, this jerk had a firm plan on what he wanted to program going in, and by the end of the third rehearsal, he KNEW what we were going to play.
---
So, from the second week in September until the middle of December, we spent 24+ hours a week (out of 40) HAMMERING the same 45-50 minutes of music OVER AND OVER again.
---
Back then, the stores didn't start playing "Christmas music" through the store until "Black Friday", or later.
I remember, that year, going into a GROCERY store, where they were doing "elevator music" versions of Christmas music, and I started having PTSD-esque "flashbacks" (at this point, I would not go into a "combat zone" for another 14 years, or so).
We had to leave the store.
I couldn't take it.
... and before you call me a "Wussy", you didn't know this conductor.
---
THEN, there was ...
I won't go into everything that happened when I went to my parents' home.
Let's leave it at things got worse.

Today is a GREAT DAY for tuba (and euphonium) players, around the world.
On this day, in 1902, the FATHER of modern euphonium and tuba playing was born, William Bell .
---
Mr. Bell was dead by my 6th birthday.
HOWEVER, I was mentored, momentarily, by one of his students, the late, great, Harvey Phillips (another Missouri "boy").
SOMEWHERE, there is a picture of me and Harvey, together, taken by my late mother-in-law. ... AND, Harvey autographed my "TubaChristmas" book.
---
Harvey was one of the founders of what is, now, ITEA, ... the International Tuba-Euphonium Association.
Part of that founding was Harvey creating "Tuba Christmas" celebrations, in homage to his teacher.
---
THAT is why the Bach chorale "Komm Susser Tod" (Come Sweet Death) is played at EVERY "TubaChristmas.
Because Harvey wanted to do an homage to his teacher, on his birthday ... and missed him.
---
And it is half the reason that I keep it in the Legion Band repertoire (the band I conduct).
The other reason is that is one of the pieces that my BEST musical mentors, John Howser, LOVES to conduct.
---
So, to all my tuba and euph playing brethren, "Merry Christmas", because we have DOUBLE reasons to celebrate the day.
---
And, once again, here is Harvey singing: "Santa Wants a Tuba for Christmas".

Okay, I'm a "low brass" music geek.
My primary instrument, euphonium, is a "esoteric" horn ... and the "euph" I own is still considered one of the better "professional"-level horns available.
---
The "euph" is the "tenor voice" of the tuba family.
---
The flugelhorn, that Chuck Mangione made famous in the 1970's (with the tune "Feels So Good" (and the picture for this video, is Chuck hugging his "flugle"), is the "soprano voice" of that family.
---
Thanks to the vagaries of history, there is no "alto voice", in this musical instrument family, anymore. At least not in America.
---
HOWEVER, there are "tenor", "bass", and "contrabass" members of the family still current in America.
---
The "tenor" voice is the euphonium (or as some people call it (and I HATE this term, because it is SO innacurate) the "baritone" horn.)
---
The "normal" tuba is a contrabass tuba.
---
The "bass" tuba is, pretty much, an esoteric instrument. Even more so than the euphonium.
Anymore, in America, the bass tuba is just used for solo works, in small brass chamber ensembles (sometimes), and for certain tuba solos, in the orchestral repertoire.
---
Anymore, for most "tuba work", the bass tuba is considered to be too small, and not powerful enough to do the job that a modern tuba is called upon to do, in a large ensemble.
With that said, a few years back, tuba manufacturer's started building bass tubas that were capable, sometimes, of doing more than what had become their traditional roles ... if they had help from a contrabass tuba, or two.
---
Before I go any further, let me give you a graphical representation of what I am talking about.
In terms of relative size, and EXACT relationship, in regards to key, you can compare the relationship between euphonium/bass tuba/contrabass tuba to soprano sax/alto sax/tenor sax ... just double the length of the saxes to be exact.
---


The small horn, in this picture, is about 18" long.
The largest horn, is about 3 feet long.
---
In terms of this discussion, a euph is the smallest horn.
The largest horn in the picture is a "normal" tuba.
MY TUBA is the horn on the left.
The key/pitch relationships between these horns are EXACTLY like the euph/bass tuba/contrabass tuba ... except they are all half the length, internally.
---
Traditional bass tubas, though, are not capable of the "projection", and "size" of sound as a contrabass.
The horn is just too small to pull it off. ... It's physics.
They are not capable of providing enough "foundation" for much more than a VERY small group (17, at most.)
---
I have a bass tuba that is built a bit larger than a traditional one.
---
So, yesterday, my "little tuba" and I had to contend with an ensemble that was, at one point: 5 other brass players, about 12 strings (violin, viola, cello, and string bass), and 5 piece "electric" rock/pop group, using amplification.
---
I SHOULD have been OVERWHELMED by the ensemble, given the relative "weakness" of my horn, and how I was outnumbered.
---
I WASN'T.
Thanks to my "little" tuba.
If anything, I was told to pull back on the volume.
---
While, one day, I want a contrabass tuba (I prefer used (the link is for new), and I don't care if it is BBb or CC (more on "vintage" vs. new later)) SOMEDAY, my "little" tuba and I are "kicking butt, and taking names" ... and getting gigs. ... They aren't often, but when we have them, we make serious bucks.
---
ANYWAY, in the spirit of the season, check out one of my "tuba heroes" SINGING.
Did you know that Santa wants a tuba for Christmas?

I'm kind of pissed.

Okay, I've been off Blogger for a while (2 years), and I am not up to speed with all the changes.

I LOVED my old format.

NOW, they have changed the colors and font within my posts.

Kind of irritated about it.

---

and I need to get into the template, and update things in the right hand column.

I'm happy to say that, as a musician, I am still learning.

In many ways, I am still discovering the profundities that teacher shared with me decades ago.

In the mid 1980's, a teacher, John Daniel, talked to me about how being a musician is 50% craft (or skill), and 50% artist.

I thought I "got" what he said then, but, even today, I am learning from that moment.

No matter your "instrument" (a wind instrument, voice, piano, a "rhythm" instrument", or baton), until you learn the "craft" of your instrument. ... Until you get so familiar with it that it feels like one of your limbs, then you will ALWAYS be hampered from expressing ... anything.

So, you HAVE to go through a rigorous process of getting to know your "axe".

THAT is the "craft" or "skill".

---

There was this one piece I played on euph, as an undergrad.

Every time I had done this piece before, my peers had described it as "nice".

---

Then there is the "art".

I remember sitting in a Master Class with the Empire Brass Quintet, in the early 90's.

I'm pretty sure it was Sam Pilafian that asked an undergraduate player, after listening to his solo: "What story are you telling?"

When the amazed kid had no answer, Sam's answer was: "If you don't know the story you are telling, then you CAN'T play the piece."

About 12 months later, I played a piece written for euphonium, without accompaniment, as a clinician, with a high school band. (same piece as above)

It was "mournful", and I had played it several times before, with success.

This was my best performance of it EVER. ... My "craft" was at it's peak. ... My internal story was of the most painful loss of my life, up to that time.

I asked the kids to tell me "the story" of what I played, after they heard it ... and I gave them NO clue as to what I was going to play.

---

So, there I was.  Just me and my euph ... the sheet of music in front of me, and this story, from my life in my head.

In terms of technical precision, it was probably my worst performance of that piece, ever.

On the other hand, it wasn't just the kids in the classroom, it was the teacher's monitoring the room that were tearing up, if not outright crying.

---

Up to that point, I had been SO focused on technique and precision.

Until Sam reminded me what music and performing is about, I had been obsessed with "craft". ... To the point that I was just a "craftsman", in performance, and no longer an artist.

I was an artisan manipulating an instrument, up to that point. ... I wasn't "telling a story" with sound.

---

Sam, and a conductor I worked for, Bob Shoaf, taught me, that as musicians, in private practice, and ensemble rehearsal, we should be precise, if not "anal", craftsmen at our work ...

HOWEVER ...

Once it's time to "play the gig", GO FOR IT!  ... The time to "play it safe", or be careful is OVER.

You have done the necessary preparation.

Ignore that "inner voice" that is critical of everything you do and ....

It was, probably, January of 1994.  (This happened shortly after Mr. Shoaf took command.  It was Chief's first winter at Fort Bliss.)

The band hall, at Fort Bliss, sucked, and EVERY winter I was there the heat went out. 

We attempted to have concert band rehearsal, but the room was too cold.  Intonation on ALL of the instruments was in the toilet, and, literally, you could see your breath as you tried to talk.

Finally, after a while, Chief (yes, you, Bob Shoaf) went on a rant, understandably, about the temperature in the room.

Chief demanded to know who was in charge of "R and U" (repair and upkeep) of the building. 

It was Rob.

Chief went on a "rant", and it was a good one, as rants go. 

It ended with Chief in Rob's face, yelling that Rob would receive a "Relieved For Cause" NCOER, if Rob didn't get the heat fixed in the next 36 hours. (End of Rob's military career.)

(Stick with me, folks, I promise this is a funny story.)

At the end of the rant, Chief ended the rehearsal, and sent everyone home.

I was stuck on "Charge of Quarters" duty.

I had to stay at the building, insure it's security, and answer the phones.  My place of duty was in our orderly room ... not far from Rob's desk.

So, everyone left, except for Rob and I.

He called the "Department of Public Works" (DPW), on base.

The following is what I remember Rob saying to them. ... I didn't have to hear the stuff on the other end.  (Everything in parenthesis is translation for those of you that don't speak "Army".)

---
Here is what I heard:

"Hello, Ma'am, this is Sergeant Lefferts.  I am the R&U (Repair and Upkeep) NCO (Sergeant) for the 62nd Army Band."

...

"Yes, Ma'am. I am calling because our heat is STILL out."

...

"Yes, Ma'am, I have submitted THREE work orders for it to be fixed,"

...

"Yes, Ma'am, I have read the Fort Bliss SOP (Standard Operating Procedure) for filling out a work order, and I am sure I filled out the forms correctly."

....

"Ma'am, when is the soonest you can have someone here to fix our heat?"

....

"MARCH!?!?!?!"

"Mister Shoaf is going to give me a "Relieved for Cause" NCOER, if I don't get someone here in the next ..."

...

"No, ma'am."

....

"No, ma'am, Mr. Paarmann went to Korea about 6 months ago.  Mr. Shoaf is the commander of the 62nd Army Band, now. ... THANK YOU, ma'am."

...

At that point, Rob, hung up the phone, looked at me, with a grin, and told me that the heat should be fixed before 9 AM the next morning.

And it was.

I signed my initial contract to join the Army in Reagan's last few days as President.

I graduated from college with my Music Ed degree, and worked for an instrument repair shop for a few months, until I went to Basic Training.

While I was in Basic Training, the Berlin Wall fell.

While I was in "school" for my job, we invaded Panama.

In PLDC ("WLC" for the youngsters, or "Shake and Bake" for the old farts), we had CNN on 24 hours a day, watching the air war portion of Desert Storm.

I pinned on "hard stripes"(E-5 or SGT (Sergeant)) in March of 1992, and, shortly thereafter, the unit's computer (yes, there was only one) was upgraded from DOS to Windows 3.1.

In 1994, I was promoted to Staff Sergeant (E-6 or SSG), and sent to the Basic NonCommisioned Officer's Course (BNCOC). At this point, I was worried.  The last two times the Army had sent me to "school" a war had broken out.  ... The worst that happened was that President Nixon died, and we got a 4-day weekend.

I've been "Sergeant Robertson" (SGT or SSG) for OVER 20 years, now.

For most of my adult life, "Mister" is either what you call: a) my commanding officer, or b) my Dad.

TOMORROW, I will go to work as "SSG Robertson", and come home as "Mister Kevin Robertson".

I'm not sure how to deal with that.

Recent events reminded me of a story, or parable, I read when I was young. It goes something like this:

A swallow is flying through a wintery day, until, finally, it is frozen. It can fly no more, and drops to the ground in a cow pasture. A cow walks by and craps. The steaming turd, coating the swallow. The swallow, rejuvenated by the heat of the manure, sticks it's head out of the pile, and begins to sing. The barnyard cat, upon hearing the bird's song, pounces on the pile; uncovers the bird; and eats it.

There are THREE morals to this story:

1) The person who drops a steaming pile of crap on your head is not, necessarily, your enemy.
2) The person who digs you out of a steaming pile of crap is not, necessarily, your friend.
3) When you are warm, and happy, in a steaming pile of crap, FOR GOD'S SAKE, DO NOT OPEN YOUR MOUTH!

Brandon and I were discussing things for his AP Government class tonight. In our ramblings (talking and looking for resources on the Internet), we found this speech.

We found it quite interesting.

(I am going to blur the obivous references to date and time.)

Brandon and I were curious about something.

Read the speech and guess:

a) the political party affiliation of the person giving the speech;
b) the person giving the speech
c) (bonus) decade the speech was given
(I will re-post the question at the end.)

Here is the speech:

I feel somewhat like I felt when I addressed in XXXX the Houston Ministerial Conference on separation of church and state. But I'm glad to have a chance to talk to you about the advantages of the free enterprise system.

This nation possesses both the will and the weapons to meet any threat. The gains we have made will not be given up, and the course we have pursued will not be abandoned. But in the long run, that security will not be determined by military or diplomatic moves alone. It will be affected by the deployment of fiscal and monetary weapons as well as by military weapons, and above all by the strength of this nation's economy, as well as by the strength of our defenses.

You recall that "Y" said he believed that the hinge of world history would begin to move when the Soviet Union out produced the United States.

America's rise to world leadership in the century since the Civil War has reflected more than anything else our unprecedented economic growth. Interrupted during the decade of the thirties, the vigorous expansion of our economy was resumed in XXXX. It demonstrated for all to see the power of freedom and the efficiency of free institutions.

The economic health of this nation has been and is now fundamentally sound. On our strength and growth depends the strength of others, the spread of free world trade and unity, and continued confidence in our leadership and our currency. The underdeveloped countries are dependent upon us for the sale of their primary commodities and for aid to their struggling economies. A growing and prosperous America is important not only to Americans - it is of vital importance to the whole Western world.

This economy is capable of producing without strain billions more than we are producing today. Business earnings could be billions higher than they are today. Utilization of existing plant and equipment could be much higher and, if it were, development would rise. We need not accept this unemployment rate. There is no need for us to be satisfied with a rate of growth that keeps good men out of work and good capacity out of use.

New York is of course familiar with problems. For in this state the rate of insured unemployment has been persistently higher than the national average, and the increases in personal income and employment have been slower here than the nation as a whole.

You have seen the tragedy of chronically depressed areas, unemployed young people. I think this might be one of our most serious national problems: Unemployed young people, particularly those of the minority groups, roaming the streets of other great cities, and others on relief at an early age. The prospect is that in this decade we will have millions of dropouts coming into the labor market at a time when the need for unskilled labor is steadily diminishing. So you share my conviction that, proud as we are of its progress, this nation's economy can and must do even better.

Our choice boils down to one of doing nothing and thereby risking a widening gap between our actual and potential growth in output, profits, and employment - or taking action at the federal level to raise our entire economy to a new and higher level of business activity.

There are a number of ways by which the federal government can meet it's responsibilities to aid economic growth. We can and must improve education and technical training.

One of the great bottlenecks for this country's economic growth in this decade will be the undersupply of highly trained manpower. We can and must step up the development of our natural resources: But the most direct and significant kind of federal action aiding economic growth is to make possible an increase in private consumption and investment demand to cut the fetters which hold back private spending.

In the past this could be done in part by the increased use of credit and monetary tools, but our balance of payments situation today places limits on our use of those tools for expansion. It could also be done by increasing federal expenditures more rapidly than necessary, but such a course would soon demoralize both the government and our economy. If government is to retain the confidence of the people, it must not spend more than can be justified on grounds of national need or spent with maximum efficiency.

The final and best means of strengthening demand among consumers and business is to reduce the burden on private income and the deterrence to private initiative which are imposed by our present tax system: And this administration pledged itself last summer to an across the board top to bottom cut in personal and corporate income taxes to be enacted and become effective in XXXX.

I'm not talking about a quickie or a temporary tax cut, which would be more appropriate if a recession were imminent; nor am I talking about giving the economy a mere shot in the arm to ease some temporary complaint. I am talking about the accumulated evidence of the last five years that our present tax system, developed as it was in good part during "Q" to restrain growth, exerts too heavy a drag on growth in peace time: That it siphons out of the private economy too large a share of personal and business purchasing power: That it reduces the financial incentives for personal effort, investment, and risk-taking.

In short to increase demand and lift the economy, the federal government's most useful role is not to rush into a program of excessive increases in public expenditures, but to expand the incentives and opportunities for private expenditures. Under these circumstances, any new tax legislation enacted next year should meet the three following tests: First, it should reduce the net taxes by a sufficiently early date and a sufficiently large amount to do the job required.

Early action could give us extra leverage, added results, and important insurance against recession. Too large a tax cut, of course, could result in inflation and insufficient future revenues - but the greater danger is a tax cut too little or too late to be effective. Second, the new tax bill must increase private consumption as well as investment. After-tax income could and should be greater, providing stronger markets for the products of American industry.

When consumers purchase more goods, plants use more of their capacity, men are hired instead of laid off, investment increases and profits are high. Corporate tax rates must also be cut to increase incentives and the availability of investment capital. The government has already taken major steps this year to reduce business tax liability and to stimulate the modernization, replacement, and expansion of our productive plant and equipment.

We have done this through the investment tax credit and through the liberalization of depreciation allowances - two essential parts of our first step in tax revision which amounted to a ten percent reduction in corporate income taxes. Now we need to increase consumer demand to make these measures fully effective - demand which will make more use of existing capacity and thus increase both profits and the incentive to invest. In fact, profits after taxes would be at least fifteen percent higher today if we were operating at full employment.

Next year's tax bill must reduce personal as well as corporate income taxes - for those in the lower brackets, who are certain to spend their additional take-home pay: And for those in the middle and upper brackets, who can thereby be encouraged to undertake additional efforts and enabled to invest more capital. Third, the new tax bill should improve both the equity and the simplicity of our tax system.

This means the enactment of long-needed tax reforms, a broadening of the tax base and the elimination or modification of many special tax privileges. These steps are not only needed to recover lost revenue and thus make possible a larger cut in present rates.

They are also tied directly to our goal of greater growth. For the present patchwork of special provisions and preferences - light was the tax loads of some only at the cost of placing a heavier burden on others. It distorts economic judgments and channels undue amounts of energy into efforts to avoid tax liability. It makes certain types of less productive activity more profitable than other more valuable undertakings.

All this inhibits our growth and efficiency as well as considerably complicating the work of both the taxpayer and the Internal Revenue Service. These various exclusions and concessions have been justified in the past as a means of overcoming the oppressively high rates in the upper brackets-and a sharp reduction in those rates, accompanied by base-broadening, loophole-closing measures, would properly make the new rates not only lower but also more widely applicable. Those are the three tests that the right kind of bill must meet.

And I am confident that the enactment of the right bill next year will in due course increase our Gross National Product by several times the amount of taxes actually cut. Profit margins will be improved and both the incentive to invest and the supply of internal funds for investment will be increased. There will be new interest in taking risks, in increasing productivity, in creating new jobs and new products for long-term economic growth. Other national problems, moreover, will be aided by full employment.

It will encourage the location of new plants in areas of labor surplus, provide new jobs, and reduce a number of government expenditures. It will not, I am confident, revive an inflationary spiral or adversely affect our balance of payments.

If the economy today were operating close to capacity levels with little unemployment, or if a sudden change in our military requirements should cause a scramble for men and resources, then I would oppose tax reductions as irresponsible and inflationary and I would not hesitate to recommend a tax increase - if that were necessary. Our resources and manpower are not being fully utilized; the general level of prices has been remarkably stable; and increased competition, both at home and abroad, along with increased productivity will help keep both prices and wages within appropriate limits.

The same is true of our balance of payments. While rising demand will expand imports, new investment in more efficient, productive facilities will aid exports and a new economic climate will both draw capital from abroad and keep capital at home. Most importantly, confidence in the dollar in the long run rests on confidence in America, in our ability to meet our economic commitments and reach our economic goals.

In a worldwide conviction that we are not drifting from recession to recession with no answer, the substantial improvement in our balance of payments position makes it clear that nothing could be more foolish than to restrict our growth merely to minimize that particular problem because a slowdown in our economy will feed that problem rather than diminish it. European governmental and financial authorities have urged us to cut taxes in order to expand our economy, attract more capital and increase confidence.

What concerns most Americans about a tax cut, I know, is not the deficit in our balance of payments but the deficit in our federal budget. When I announced that this kind of comprehensive tax reform would follow the bill enacted this year, I had hoped to present it in an atmosphere of a balanced budget.

But it has been necessary to augment sharply our nuclear and conventional forces, to step up our efforts in space, to meet the increased cost of servicing the national debt and meeting our obligations, established by law , to veterans. We shall neither postpone our tax cut plans nor cut into essential national security programs. This administration is determined to protect America's security and survival; we are also determined to step up its growth. We must do both.

Our true choice is not between tax reduction, on the one hand, and the avoidance of large federal deficits on the other. It is increasingly clear that no matter what party is in power, so long as our national security needs keep rising, an economy hampered by restrictive tax rates will never produce enough revenues to balance our budget just as it will never produce enough jobs or enough profits.

Surely the lesson of the last decade is that budget deficits are not caused by wild-eyed spenders but by slow economic growth and periodic recessions, and any new recession would break all deficit records.

It is a paradoxical truth that tax rates are too high today and tax revenues are too low and the soundest way to raise revenues in the long run is to cut rates now. The experience of a number of European countries has borne this out. This country's own experience with tax reduction has borne this out. The reason is that only full employment can balance the budget and tax reduction can pave the way to full employment. The purpose of cutting taxes is not to incur a budget deficit, but to achieve the more prosperous, expanding economy which will bring a budget surplus.

I repeat: Our practical choice is not between a tax-cut deficit and a budgetary surplus. It is between two kinds of deficits; a chronic deficit of inertia, as the unwanted result of inadequate revenues and a restricted economy, or a temporary deficit of transition, resulting from a tax cut designed to boost the economy, increase tax revenue and achieve - and I believe this can be done - a future budget surplus.

The first type of deficit is a sign of waste and weakness; the second reflects an investment in the future. As the chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee pointed out, the size of the deficit is to be regarded with concern and tax reduction must be accompanied, by "increased control of the rises in expenditures." That is precisely the course we intend to follow.

At the same time as our tax program is presented to the Congress, the federal budget will also be presented. Defense and space expenditures will necessarily rise in order to carry out programs which are demanded and are necessary for our own security. But I can tell you now that the total of all other expenditures combined will be held approximately at its current level.

This is not an easy task. During the past nine years, domestic civilian expenditures in the national government have risen at an average rate of more than seven and one half percent. State and local government expenditures have risen at an annual rate of nine percent.

Expenditures by the New York State government have risen in recent years at the rate of roughly ten percent a year. At a time when government pay scales have necessarily risen, when the demand for services is thus increasing, next year's federal budget, which will hold domestic outlays at their present level, will represent a genuine effort in expenditure control. The federal debt, as a proportion of our GNP, has been steadily reduced since this administration took office.

Last year the total increase in the federal debt was only two percent-compared to an eight percent increase in the gross debt of state and local governments. This setting makes federal tax reduction both possible and appropriate next year. I do not underestimate the obstacles which the Congress will face in enacting such legislation.

A high order of statesmanship and determination will be required if the possible is not to wait on the perfect. But a nation capable of marshalling these capabilities to meet a sudden and dramatic threat to its security is surely equally capable of meeting a creeping and complex threat to our economic vitality.

This nation can afford to reduce taxes - we can afford a temporary deficit - but we cannot afford to do nothing. For on the strength of our free economy rests the hope of all free men. We shall not fail their faith - and God willing, free men and free nations shall prosper and prevail.

I know it was a long read.

So, can you guess the following?

a) the political party affiliation of the person giving the speech;
b) the person giving the speech
c) (bonus) decade the speech was given