shortly after Christmas, the New York Times printed a very one-sided portrayal of the National Guard. In that article, a senior Defense Department official is quoted as saying, ``There's a lot of the Army National Guard that's just irrelevant to our strategy. It's kind of like a welfare program for weekend warriors. * * *'' Aside from being grossly inappropriate, the statement is simply not true. Change is inevitable--not just for the Guard but for this Nation's military structure as a whole. And, while the Guard is prepared to face those new challenges, as we go forward, I'll continue to be guided by my unequivocal support for the Guard and by the knowledge that the Guard is in no way the problem, but rather the key to the solution. I can also assure my colleagues that some nameless, faceless bureaucrat who equates the Guard--with its stellar performances in the Persian Gulf, Somalia, Haiti, the Sinai, and Bosnia--to a handout, will not be determining the Guard's fate. Instead, the Guard, sitting down as equals with the Army, will determine that future.
Editor's note · Context
Defending the National Guard against negative portrayals in the media and affirming its importance to military strategy.
Share
More from Gerald Ford
under the Ney bill, how much money could Ken Lay have contributed, the former chairman of Enron, to the NRC, the DNC, and all the other parties?
this debate has boiled down to simply a difference in priorities. I agree with a lot of my colleagues that a tax cut is probably needed; but we followed the advice of the other side of the aisle 2 years ago, and we have heard my…
So, Mr. Speaker, so if millionaires took a $65,000 tax cut as opposed to a $103,000 tax cut, we could pay for the student loan program.
what is the problem then if my colleagues believe in removing all these taxes, which I think there is a lot of merit to, I am a big tax cutter like the gentleman is? I support those ideas. How is that consistent with the taking 3 million…





