Quayle Bentsen debate

2/7/24: Update to post of 6/7/15:

This bit of history came up again yesterday as I scoured the web. Yep, you'll search and search and search for answers, but the answer has always been inside of you from the beginning. The meaning is this: Quayle simply did not have the presense of mind to adequately respond to Bentsen's challenge.

It pretty much ended Quayle's career. But it might have made him. To be fair to him, he just wasn't prepared for what was about to hit him. But what does that have to do with what we face today? I think EVERYTHING. Bentsen went rogue, and Quayle couldn't deal with it. The Democrats have sensed weakness, and have been going at us this same way for the last 30 plus years. Democrats have gone rogue. Basically, the only response from the conservatives at this junction is the same weak response that came from Quayle --- "that was uncalled for, Senator". Sorry, but if this is all we've got, then we must turn to someone and something else.

Trump ain't no gentleman, but Quayle was. We tossed Quayle aside, and now we've got thugs running the show. The proper response has already gone down the road, friends. We have a population that is not impressed with the niceties of civilized behavior. Acting civilized in the fact of a boorish thug is only going to get your teeth kicked in.

Nikki Haley is absolutely not the ticket. Even Trump may not be adequate for what we face. The Democrats keep invoking the specter of Hitler. Maybe Hitler is what they are creating by their own swinish behavior. We might need a Hitler to go back at them the way they are going at US. If the conservatives won't defend us, we'll have to go somewhere else. It's that, or have them continually rubbing our noses in the dirt.

Let's put it another way. The Democrats claim to hate Hitler, but they really admire him. If they are going to go down that road, we must have a response to it. Again, to put it another way. The Democrats are creating another Hitler. They must have loved the guy after all. If Trump can't cut it, we may need a far worse corrective. The Democrats are really asking for it, so they cannot complain when it comes.



end update, the original post is directly below:

It's been reviewed before countless times, no doubt.  Even on this here blog.

What could have Quayle done to redress the harm done to him by Bentsen?  Anybody ever thought about that?

The verbal attack on Quayle was a hit below the belt.  When you do that while challenging the man personally, it can be potentially dangerous.  It wasn't in this case, but there has been at least two cases in history in which a pair of political figures crossed lances.

One resulted in a death of Alexander Hamilton in a duel with Aaron Burr, then Vice President of the United States.  The other involved a member of the House and a Senator.  I'd have to look it up, but I think it was Preston Brooks who attacked Charles Sumner in Congress.  Physically attacked him in so brutal a fashion as to put him out of commission for awhile.

Too many people don't realize what they are doing sometimes.  Hopefully, I won't make that mistake, but it is always possible to make mistakes.

I'm not the only one who is capable of making mistakes.  Anyone is.  Therefore, instead of criticizing Quayle, he should be commended on his self control.  Bentsen should have been censured for his rudeness.  But that's not the way the public saw it.  That's what I  mean.  You don't know what you are doing sometimes, and it can be a big mistake.  You may see a situation spiral out of control.  It behooves us to show a little prudence in the way in which we conduct ourselves.

But that may be asking too much.  Perhaps Quayle's response really was evidence of a lack of ability.