At Sun, 4 Apr 1999 18:22:22 -0700 (PDT), you wrote:
>> It is also reasonable to assume that when one is electing one's leaders,
>> that bad publicity is not necessarily better than none, and pro wrestlers
>> are notorious dissemblers.
>It is not reasonable to assume that, and it's irrelevant here anyway
>because the bad reputation you impute to wrestlers does not exist.
>They are merely entertainers, and everyone knows that, and they have
>no more of a reputation for lying than a fiction author or filmmaker
>would. I am sure Mr. Ventura's grass-roots campaigning and charming
>personaility in the debates put him over the top in this election:
>but he wouldn't have been there at all without the name recognition he
>got from being an entertainer. How many of those voters he swayed
>in the debate would have even watched the show if he had been Harold
>Schwartz, accountant from St. Paul?
If Harold Schwartz, accountant from St. Paul, was sufficiently inspiring in his college speeches to get earnest young university volunteers to work for his election, sufficiently politically adept to get a third party nomination and wangle that status and his grassroots-cultivated support into participation in the debates, and sufficiently articulate and reasonable sounding to win them (many eventual voters watch them regardless of the number of participants), you'd be calling him Gov. Harold Schwartz.
>Lee Daniel Crocker <firstname.lastname@example.org> <http://www.piclab.com/lcrocker.html>
>"All inventions or works of authorship original to me, herein and past,
>are placed irrevocably in the public domain, and may be used or modified
>for any purpose, without permission, attribution, or notification."--LDC
Joe E. Dees
Poet, Pagan, Philosopher