Thank you, Ted, for that warm and thoughtful introduction. I'm going to say more about Mr. Sorenson in a moment, but let me first explain that I lost my voice last week. That forced some changes in my schedule, which has me up in New Hampshire today. So I'm very sorry it cannot be in person.

I want to acknowledge the American Prospect magazine and the Century Foundation for their role in this conference and for bringing vigorous and important debate to our foreign policy

But, I especially want to wish the very best to John Podesta and the Center for American Progress as you start your work. Thank you for speaking up for the progressive views that are often distorted and drowned out in today's public debate.

We all recognize that today marks a new beginning for all of us who believe in the ideals and spirit of American democracy. Who seek to reclaim the public dialogue -- away from spiteful epithets and unreasoning anger. Who believe in the power of enlightened reason to find better solutions to pressing problems, and to communicate those solutions with passion, wit and balance so powerful that it will change the political dynamic in America.

John, I am very honored that you asked me to keynote this morning.... And I am even more honored that Ted has introduced me.

Ted Sorenson is one of America's most beloved public servants. Some of the most inspiring words ever spoken on our American democracy came from his mind and his pen. But we also owe Ted a debt as a historian. In his book on President Kennedy, he tells us how - in October 1962, after the President made a crucial decision during the Cuban missile crisis, he stepped out onto the second story back porch of the White House, and talked about life and death. Then the President gave instructions on redrafting his address to the nation, and said: "I hope you realize...that there's not enough room for everybody in the White House bomb shelter."

President Kennedy displayed a complete understanding of the threat - and still he was cool, courageous and in command - inspiring confidence in all around him. That was a time of great danger for America, and it mattered immensely to our security that we had a President who had won over the hearts and minds of millions - and a nation that was admired around the world for its moral authority.

There could be no clearer contrast to America's place in the world today.

The losses we suffered on 9/11 - as tragic as they were - have been magnified by the losses we've suffered since.

• The loss of allied support.
• The loss of moral authority.
• The loss of respect, admiration, and esteem - especially in the Islamic world.

• Our armed forces are fully committed as an array of new threats are emerging, with no reserves, either physical or intellectual.
• The Secretary of Defense had to leak his own memo to explain that we have no strategy to deal with terrorism - something I've been saying for 2 years.
• And, with this Administration, there is no prospect of help from a world that increasingly revels in our failures.

This was the "dream team." Remember, Cheney... Rumsfeld...Powell...No need for the "dream team" to take advice. No need for the "dream team" to learn from the Clinton administrations. The "dream team" always knew better.

What did the "dream team" give us? An election-driven, poll-driven, ideologically-driven foreign policy. An array of strong-willed advisors and lieutenants...too powerful to be ignored...too independent to agree. With a president inexperienced -- and shockingly disinterested.

In fact, what the "dream team" has produced is an almost unbroken string of foreign policy failures.

• Sunshine
• Kyoto
• Balkans - in together, out together, and even now trying to slide out
• ICC
• Bio-weapons
• A relationship with Mexico that has faltered...

And then there is 9/11. There is no way this administration can walk away from its responsibilities. This wasn't something that could be blamed on lower level intelligence officers. Our great Democratic President Harry Truman said, the "buck stops here." And when it comes to our nation's foreign policy, the buck sits on George W. Bush's desk. And we must say it again and again until the American people understand it. National security, next to upholding the Constitution, is the most important duty of any President.

And with respect to the war on terror after 9/11, the record is even worse: We have an administration that led us into Afghanistan - then failed to plan and put the resources in to finish the job...allowing Osama Bin Ladin to survive and challenge us like some antibiotic-resistant bacterium.

• We have an Administration that misled American people and Congress on the challenge of Iraq
• The rhetoric is strong on bin Ladin, but they've pulled a bait and switch - which they planned from the very beginning. And that distracted Tommy Franks at the very moment he should have focused on getting our greatest enemies.

We have lost faith in our president. We have lost faith in his leadership. And the world has lost faith in our authority. The current Administration has taken our country dangerously off-course. And all of this two years after the world stood by our side following the tragedy of September 11th. And almost six months after Mr. Bush stood on the deck of the Abraham Lincoln and declared the end of "major combat operations."

Today, President Bush backtracked on his May 1 political photo op on the U.S.S. Abraham Lincoln by blaming the troops on the aircraft carrier for the declaration of 'mission accomplished' in Iraq. This is wrong, this is irresponsible, and this is not leadership. Politicizing the mission of those troops in the first place was bad theater, and diminished the office of Commander in Chief -- but to now turn his comments on those very troops is outrageous. Instead of trying to blame the sailors and soldiers, the President owes our troops in harm's way and the American people a plan to bring peace to Iraq and stability to the region.

This is not 1962. But in many ways this enemy is far more pernicious. This enemy is not bounded by a state's borders...their ideology is one of destruction...they seem to not even feel a bond of common humanity.

They recognize no boundaries. Everyone to them is a target if it serves their symbolic needs. Look at the latest: targeting our nation's Deputy Secretary of Defense then the next day the Red Cross - the world's symbol of peace and good -- and today a police station in Fallujah. Nothing is safe from their reach.

Despite the bravery and competence of our Armed Forces, we are still struggling to turn yesterday's military success into today's strategic victory, with painful consequences day in and day out for American men and women serving in Iraq and for Iraqi civilians caught in the crossfire.

The war is a disastrous turn of events. Not only because this President still has not come forward with a strategy for how we're going to succeed on the ground. But also because many governments now believe we tried to deceive them, and this Administration doesn't have the credibility to rebut them and be believed. One of the greatest national security assets we have is our ability to persuade, an ability that rests on trust. America needs a leader the world can trust. We don't have one now.

This lack of trust exacts a great cost - especially when dealing with the other very serious threats we face. We still must dismantle al Qaeda and the world-wide terrorist networks plotting to attack us. We face intractable conflicts in the Middle East and South Asia and ongoing nuclear dangers in Iran and North Korea. And this Administration's reckless actions have depleted us of the national security asset we now need most: The moral authority we have enjoyed for almost all of our history.

Our fractured alliances are a natural consequence of the contempt this Administration has shown our friends and partners. With the Kyoto Protocol, the Biological Weapons Convention, the International Criminal Court, the war in Iraq and in so many ways large and small, we sent the message: "your security is your own concern, and your concerns are of no concern to us."

This is no accident. It is a function of the backward way this Administration does business. Traditionally and ideally, we Americans meet our challenges by starting with the facts, analyzing the problem, and reasoning toward a solution with our citizens and our allies. This Administration does things in reverse. As we've seen in Iraq, they don't start with the facts and shape a policy; they start with a policy and shape the facts.

So what do we do about it? We get at the root of the problem. And the root of the problem lives at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

When I am elected, America will once again be a reliable international partner. We will be open in our debates, and steadfast in our commitments. We will honor the values we expect from others, and exhibit - in the words of our Declaration of Independence: "a decent respect to the opinions of mankind."

But we'll need a strategy to fill the void that emerged at the end of the Cold War. This isn't some wooly-headed idealism. There's an opportunity today with the challenges we face to bridge the gap between left and right in America. To reach a new bipartisan consensus. Again, it will be up to this party. Its heritage of internationalism and military power. After all, it's the party of Roosevelt and Truman. It gave us the United Nations, NATO the Truman Doctrine, deterrence, containment, and the Marshall Plan.

Going forward, we'll need new labels and new ideas. Many of them will be created right here at the Center for American progress. Maybe we'll see it today. Maybe it will spring forth in a flash of inspiration - maybe John Podesta can put it on a bumper sticker. Or maybe it will come from long discussions and synthesis and hours of quiet and patient work.

I look forward to drawing on the ideas and work done here, and I want to help advance the dialogue. For if we're going to create a new strategy - however we label it - it has to reflect the principles that Americans believe in, represent and will sustain.

First, America needs to be guided again by our founding ideal of inclusiveness - the core ingredient of any democracy. We are a nation of immigrants, a missionary for ideas and ideals. We have achieved national greatness because we have systematically broken down barriers that exclude people from an equal role in society.

Even after the fall of the Berlin Wall, there are still great barriers dividing the world. Some people have the freedom to choose their leaders, speak their minds, and improve their lives. Other people have governments who deny them the same freedoms. Because historically we've been aligned with some of these governments, some of their people see us an accomplice in their oppression. This barrier between free nations and autocratic nations will not stand. Either this side of freedom will take it down, or the forces of pent-up frustration, anger and humiliation will blow it up - and our relationships and remaining sense of security with it.

Second, we should be working to strengthen and use international institutions, beginning with the United Nations and NATO. After September 11, we should have immediately gone to the United Nations, developed a legal definition of terrorism - and brought the charges legally against Bin Ladin. The UN was our organization - we helped conceive it, shape its values, and launch it. We're its major contributor. We have to strengthen it and use it.

Action at the UN could have been enforced by NATO. After September 11, NATO for the first time in its history invoked Article V from its charter, signifying that because one nation was attacked, all had been attacked. The US ignored that unprecedented offer of help. One Pentagon official told me: "We read your book on Kosovo. We're not going to let anyone tell us where to bomb." They had learned entirely the wrong lesson. During the Kosovo campaign, Tony Blair paid me an unannounced visit at NATO headquarters. He said: "I just want to ask one single question: Are we going to win?" I assured him we would win. He answered: "Good. Because every government in Western Europe depends on the successful outcome of this operation."

If we had used NATO to launch the war on terrorism, we would have had the military, moral, political, and financial commitment of 19 nations - including Turkey - determined to make a success of the mission, and determined to defend our actions to their people and the world. This was offered to us, and the Bush Administration refused. Now we turn to NATO anyway, buts it's too little and too late - at least for this team

The third principle is to ensure our armed forces retain the edge over any potential adversary. And they must continue to be modernized to deal with foreseeable contingencies, including the possible need to pre-empt any threat to the United States.

At its peak, the force in Iraq was more than half the deployable strength of the army. Today, the Administration is asking our military men and women to occupy the breadth of the country, impose security, build democracy, prevent looting, help search for weapons of mass destruction, conduct sweeps for terrorists and guerrillas, and protect themselves from attack. It's a daunting task - and the Administration's desire to retain control closed the door on significant foreign troop contributions just when we needed them most.

It's obvious to me the limits of achieving our world-wide aims by relying exclusively on the military. Our military should be used to back international law and diplomacy - not replace them.

Operating on these three principles - promoting democracy, using our international institutions, using force only as a last resort - helps us pursue a more enlightened American interest. A decade ago, we called it engagement and enlargement. Perhaps we need a new label. But I think the direction is clear. We need to repair our trans-Atlantic relationships. We can work together to resolve our security challenges - the North Korean nuclear program and the nuclear program in Iran. We should turn our combined force toward resolving intractable conflicts in South Asia and the Middle East. We should be offering support development in Africa and enhance the battle against disease, finding a new synthesis between free markets and state intervention in Latin America

And we must turn the full force of this united power against the terrorists themselves. Winning military victories is only one part of the war on terror. We have to use our diplomatic leverage to set a legal definition of terrorism, harmonize our laws governing terrorist acts, and agree on standards of proof and admissibility of evidence.

We also have to confront the hatred spewing out of extremist religious schools in Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. We have a right and a duty to challenge an extremist curriculum that would make those goals impossible. It cannot be dealt with militarily. It has to be done with diplomacy, and it ought to be backed by every nation in the world.

We are in a difficult time in our country and the world. A lot has been lost. A lot more has been put at risk. I know many Americans feel bitter disappointment and even anger toward this Administration. But I am not angry. I am determined. And I am encouraged. As I travel back and forth across the country, I see a new American patriotism beginning to flourish. It is a patriotism that goes beyond any President -- that goes beyond party politics. We can use it - we can reestablish credibility for our leaders and for intelligence services. We can build a new system. We need an agency like the Department of International Assistance to help the United Nations cope with the problems of failed states. To help deal with other global problems: problems of AIDS, diseases, ecological catastrophes, and human miseries.

And we can take this nation forward: with a people that have been awakened again to the challenges beyond our borders. And we'll face those with innate optimism of Americans. We're at our best under challenge. We don't buckle. We don't weaken. We don't waver.

Whatever the current Administration might do, we as Americans are not a nation that manipulates facts, ignores debate, and stifles dissent. We are not a nation that retaliates against people who criticize the government. We are not a nation that disdains our allies or starts wars without just cause. That is not who we are. America was born to end all that - and we won't tolerate an administration that doesn't represent us.

This is why I'm running for President - to bring back the core ideals of our democracy - to use them to guide our foreign policy. And that's why I am so hopeful for this new Center for American Progress, and the thoughtful balance it can restore to our national dialogues. These ideals have made us great. They can make us greater. They can make us safer and more prosperous. In the end, they will ensure that America is admired for her moral authority -- not just feared for her military might. In this era, we cannot be safe without both. Thank you.