|Source:Vanity Fair- "American industrialist Ross Perot in 1996." Not sure if 1996 is accurate about this photo.|
Read more from T.A. Frank at Vanity Fair
|Source:POLITICO: 'Watch Ross Perot's most memorable moments'- A lot to remember|
On a more lighter note, first: when I think of Ross Perot, I think of a man who was brilliant at using political satire to make important points about politics and government, not different from let's say a George Carlin, Robert Klein, Bill Maher, and other great political comedians.
And I have a great example of that: I was only a teenager still in high school in 1992 when Mr. Perot ran for President the first time in 1992 and it was at I believe the Townhall debate in Richmond, Virginia which is a 100 miles or so south of Washington and I think it was ABC News anchor Carole Simpson who asked Perot about his lack of political and government experience and is he ready to be President. Perot answered by saying that he doesn't have any experience running 200 hundred-billion-dollar deficits and trillions of dollars in national debt. He said he doesn't have and political spin doctors and he's sure that shows up when he's speaking. And doesn't have any interns that prepares the charts that he uses when he goes on TV, that he makes them himself, etc.
Perot's basic point that the question shouldn't be how long someone has served in government, but what have they done with that government experience and how they have contributed to society in or out of government, that should determine whether someone is ready to be President or not. And that he didn't have any experience screwing up government, unlike his opponents. Which was a very straight-forward and to the point answer to a serious and important question.
Perot, answering any question is very unlike to what you get from typical Washington politicians or politicians out of Washington, who might give you three different answers to the same question at the same moment in time and then amend what they said the next day about what they said the night before, because their handlers didn't like what they had to say and believed it could hurt them politically, if they didn't amend what they already said.
As far as Ross Perot's legacy: if you think the two-party system was screwed up then and just not working for America back in 1992, because government including Congress struggles to pass even the most basic and essentials bills that they're required to pass by law, because the two parties not just hate each other so much, but don't even trust each other, look at it now where Democrats and Republicans don't even talk to each other, even in private because they're worried about being primaried by their Far-Left or Far-Right.
How often to you think do you think House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, even speaks to Speaker Nancy Pelosi or Majority Leader Steny Hoyer about anything and vice-versa. Mitch McConnell and Chuck Schumer, ( the two leaders in the Senate ) have to speak to each other just do be able to do the basics so their members can get floor time, but that night be the only time they speak. How often to you think Speaker Pelosi, Leader McConnell talk to each other about anything?
If you think the two-party system sucks now and I'm one of those 6-10 or more Americans who do, it looks like a self-check out line at a supermarket where you just get your groceries and then check yourself out, compared with the two-party system today. Perot, wasn't ahead of his time back in 92, because he represented at least 20% of the country who just didn't want a change, but they wanted something different from what either the Republicans and Democrats had to offer. And because he was a billionaire, he had the ability to offer that real change to the 20 million or so Americans that voted for him.