From: de5@ORNL.GOV (Dave Sill)
Subject: Why Marrou can't fill Perot's shoes (was Re: LP Press Release: Perot decision)
Organization: Oak Ridge National Laboratory
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 12:30:04 GMT

In article <1992Jul23.025945.24438@bradley.bradley.edu>, dave@bradley.bradley.edu (David Vessell) writes:
>
>I don't understand.  The reason we reelect our congressmen is so they can
>bring home the federal bacon, right?  If we don't get our pork, we don't
>reelect our reps.  I find this supremely frustrating.  Why have we not
>'thrown the bums out' already?  

You answered it yourself: everyone wants everyone *else* to throw their bums
out, but thinks their own bums are great.

>Me:
>>>But ask yourself this....could anyone but Perot, with his fame and his
>>>billions, have done what he did?
>>>The fact that no one else could is a really sad commentary on this country.
>
>You:
>>Sure.  People are *eager* for someone to carry the torch.  Perot's fame
>>helped, but it wasn't necessary.
>>
>>The fact that no one else has is pretty sad.  Now that Perot's shown how it's
>>done, maybe someone else will give it a shot.  It won't be Marrou, though.
>
>Okay, forget for a moment that I have a Lib slogan in my .sig, and pretend
>like I'm a regular ordinary Democrat or Republican or whatnot.  First you
>say that anyone could have done what Perot did, that people are eager for
>someone to carry the torch, then you turn right around and say "It won't be
>Marrou, though."

Well, I didn't say *anyone* could do it, just that Perot wasn't the only one.

>Why do you feel that way,

Number 1: he's a politician.  Even if he meant everything he ever said and could
keep every promise he ever made, he's still tainted.  Granted, he's not a
Republican or Democrat...but he's still a politician.

Number 2: he's a Libertarian.  Most people simply don't agree with the
Libertarian philosophy.  Others who sympathize with the Libertarians think
they're too radical, too extreme.  People want change, but they don't want too
much change or too fast change, and catapulting a Libertarian into the highest
office in the country is a scary thought.  Also, the Libs were highly critical
of Perot and the movement all along, alienating many of those they'd like to
join them now.

Number 3: he's not inspiring.  You can blame the media for not giving him his
due, but if he moved people the way Perot did, word would have spread.  If
people were interested in him, the media would cover his campaign.  I saw him on
C-SPAN, a national treasure if you ask me (which, ironically, wouldn't exist if
the Libertarians had their way), and thought he was plausible, but not exciting
or dynamic.

>and if Marrou is somehow the exception to your assertion, what would someone
>need to attract attention?

Charisma, the ability to inspire, no clear political ties, a background free of
major dirt, success in previous endeavors...

-- 
Dave Sill (de5@ornl.gov)	   For every Bill Joy there is a Kirk McKusick.
Martin Marietta Energy Systems     For every Bill Gates there is a Richard
Workstation Support                Stallman.                     --Paul Graham
Xref: sparky alt.politics.marrou:281 alt.politics.elections:9329