home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: alt.fan.dan-quayle
- Path: sparky!uunet!wupost!uwm.edu!caen!batcomputer!reed!henson!news.u.washington.edu!stein.u.washington.edu!sieferme
- From: sieferme@stein.u.washington.edu (Eric Sieferman)
- Subject: Re: The real Dan Quayle
- Message-ID: <1992Nov16.203050.22610@u.washington.edu>
- Sender: news@u.washington.edu (USENET News System)
- Organization: University of Washington, Seattle
- References: <BxtKqt.7wA@acsu.buffalo.edu>
- Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 20:30:50 GMT
- Lines: 66
-
- In article <BxtKqt.7wA@acsu.buffalo.edu> v115r4q5@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (Perry M Jowsey) writes:
- >
- > I recently posted a statement which called for some respect to the Vice Pres-
- >ident Dan Quayle, and it was met with a slew of negative comments. What I ask
- >all those people who are quick to bash Quayle is to take a step back and look
- >at the man with an unbiased attitude.
-
- You seem to assume that an "objective" attitude will arrive at a
- conclusion other than that the Dandroid is an idiot. The "objective"
- evidence, however, leads most of us to the conclusion that the
- soon-to-be-ex VP is at best merely average and at worst a
- pampered goof.
-
- To repeat the challenge the a.f.d-q loyalists have repeatedly
- made to the Qualy apologists: if your compendium of evidence
- supporting the belief that DQ is not a blithering fool is as large
- as our evidence that he is, please post it.
-
- >I reaffirm my belief that Quayle was
- >victorious in his debate with Al Gore, and not only do I believe he won but I
- >believe he did so convincingly.
-
- Nearly everyone else is not convinced. However, if you define "winning"
- a debate as being the one who is more manic and rabid than
- the opponent, then DQ did "win" the debate.
-
- >Thus far, I have received only negative re-
- >sponses, but I am sure the vast majority of the population will agree with me.
-
- The vast majority of REPUBLICANS at the RepubliCon Convention
- wanted the Bushman to dump Our Boy in favor of a real candidate.
- To George's loss (and the nation's gain), he kept Dannikins.
-
- >Quayle has embraced the conservative philosophy that will surface in the 1996
- >Presidential election, and this coupled with his ability to overcome the nega-
- >tive press he endured in his four years as VP should put him in a commanding
- >position in the 1996 campaign.
-
- Dan Quayl's single noticeable ability is that of a capable politician.
- His electoral record in Indiana contained several landslides; in fact,
- his loss two weeks ago was his first election defeat. To his (small)
- credit, DQ has shown that he can hold a belief longer than GHWB.
-
- My belief (shamelessly named "Eric's Hypothesis") is that Our Boy
- is a Reagan-In-Training. DQ is photogenic, vacuous, and
- usually appears innocent and non-threatening. He is improving
- his acting skills, and is getting better at delivering
- bland platitudes as if they are profound nuggets of wisdom.
- Most importantly, he has shown that is willing to be molded
- by powerful interests both inside and outside the RepubliCon Party,
- just like Ronnie Reagan. Whether this will be sufficient to
- gain the nomination in 1996 remains to be seen.
-
- >As for the current state of our country, I feel
- >Bill Clinton should paraphrase what George Bush has said many times "God Bless
- >America" to "God Help America" because with a man of his ilk,
- >we will certainly
- >need it.
-
- If this country can survive twelve years of Reagan/Bush/Quayl/Baker,
- it can survive anything.
-
- --
- | Eric Sieferman | sieferme@u.washington.edu |
- | U. of W., M.C.I.S. | (206) 685-3104 |
-
-