From: patton@vax.muskingum.edu (Eric Patton)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Perot speaks
Date: 17 Apr 92 14:20:14 -0600
Organization: Muskingum College

In article <1992Apr15.214204.28464@anasaz>, john@anasaz (John Moore) writes:
> Keywords: 
> 
> In article <1992Apr13.124458.5570@hemlock.cray.com> rja@redwood26.cray.com (Russ Anderson) writes:
> ]impression is misleading.  I have the benefit of having followed Perot's
> ]actions long before he started talking about being president.  I think
> ]he is a man of solid values.  I know from experience he does not call
> ]for "action for the sake of action".  He does follow the engineering 
> ]process of trying altherative and showing demonstratable results before
> ]implementing a plan.
> 
> I also have the benefit of having followed Perot for a long time, and of
> having worked for him in the past. I have a lot of respect for him, but I
> think he would be a lousy president. His basic platform is "elect me and
> I'll run things competently." Reminds me of Jimmy Carter! Ross has a lot

Perhaps you should consider FTPing to cobalt.caltech.edu, and downloading
Pressclub.speech to see what Perot's platform _really_ is.  Or find a 
transcript of his appearance last night on Larry King Live to read.

> of experience running businesses, but when he didn't control everything,
> he failed in his reforms (wall street in the 70's, GM). Ross would have
> to change his whole style of operating to deal with the Imperial Congress.

Huh?  Are you suggesting that Congress wouldn't work with Perot because
he's an independent?  I don't know how to break this to you, but there's
not a lot getting done now, and we currently have a non-independent in
the White House.

> By the way, people I know who knew Ross better than I did are even more
> skeptical.

Who?  What do they say?  If you don't like Perot, fine.  But give us more
specific reasons as to why you don't think he'd make a good president.
 
> Furthermore, he HAS publicly shown a tendency to "do whatever it takes to
> get it to work" - including violating civil rights. And, some of us

Again, be specific.  When?  I've heard nothing of this.

> remember the dress codes, and the interviews of spouses of potential
> employees to make sure they were "okay."

I used to be a carryout in a grocery store, and I had to wear a white shirt,
tie, and dress shoes.  Does that mean my employer was a dictator, or that he
wanted to present a clean image to the public?  And as far as spousal inter-
views, assuming that's true (which I don't know for sure, but for the sake
of argument, I'll assume it is), are you aware that if you tried to get a
job at the FBI or CIA, they'd do more checking on you than just interviewing
your spouse.

Ah, but you say, "EDS was not the FBI."  True enough.  But think about it.
Which employees are likely to be the most productive?  Probably the ones
who don't worry about going home to potential fights with spouses while 
still on the clock.
 
> ]I think Perot is suggesting a process for dealing with this countries problems.
> ](I don't think that implies that the only solution to those problems are 
> ]the tyrranical application of government.)  I think it shows that Perot is 
> ]used to having to persuade people, as opposed to dictating solutions.  Perot
> ]could not, and did not, run EDS as a dictatorship.  I know that he realizes
> ]that the country cannot be run as a dictatorship.
> 
> Perot did indeed run EDS as a dictatorship. Yes, he listened to people, and
> was accessible to his people, but he always had the last word. He ran it
> like a benevolent dictatorship.

Again, assuming you're right, what do you see happening in Washington now?
Bush think Congress works for him, and tries to run government on his terms.
Besides, if you listen to Perot, he doesn't plan on trying to run the federal
government like a dictatorship.  He sounds very sincere in his intentions
to work _with_ Congress, not against them.
 
> ]Use the engineering process to find a solution.
> 
> As an engineer, I like the sound of that. However, I also know that social
> problems in a political context are not that simple. Jimmy Peanut was
> also an engineer, you know.
> 
> ]He'd use the engineering process to find a solution.
> 
> This is getting repetitive. I look at it as "Trust me. Elect me and I'll use
> the engineering process to find a solution." Right!

So what's _your_ solution?  What do _you_ recommend?  If his engineering
process isn't the right way, what is?  He's got logical reasons as to why
it would work.  What are your logical reasons as to why it won't?  And if
you don't think we should elect Perot, for whom should we vote?

> -- 
> John Moore NJ7E, 7525 Clearwater Pkwy, Scottsdale, AZ 85253  (602-951-9326)
> john@anasazi.com ncar!noao!asuvax!anasaz!john anasaz!john@asuvax.eas.asu.edu
> "Modern liberals are the termites in the structure of our society."
>   John Moore

I'm guessing from your .sig you're a Bush supporter.  If that's true, I
can't wait to see how you justify the last 12 years of Republican ruination
of this once great country.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.news-media