The “I’ve always loved California; I practically grew in Phoenix” quote gets unfairly taken out of context. Residents of Phoenix often make day- or weekend trips to California (the border’s about 150 miles west) and Quayle apparently spent many of his summers there in his youth. He’d’ve had ample opportunity to visit southern California.
Regarding the misprinted spelling-bee flashcard; as I understand it, Quayle looked at it, thought “Hmm, that’s funny”, showed it to a teacher who said “Hmm, that’s funny.”
I can’t help him on the “losing your minds” bit, though.
It’s often forgotten now, but the original explosion over Dan Quayle had nothing to do with his intelligence, but with his avoidance of service in Vietnam by clouting his way into the National Guard. In this regard Quayle was something of a pioneer as both subsequent presidents had related “issues”.
As for why Bush picked Quayle, he needed both a Northerner and a bridge to social conservatives, and candidates who combined those attributes were a little scarce.
Anyone you’ve heard use it in such a way was competeing with Quayle in the upperclass twit of the year conest. If he did say such a line when fed to him, it would have just let everyone know his foolishness sooner.
You don’t remember it? I don’t recall any sort of flashcard. As I recall it, the kid wrote it on the board, and Quayle says something about his missing something. The kid looks at it and is confused. Quayle says that there’s an e on the end. I recall the kid saying that there wasn’, and Quayle insisting, but I could be wrong about that part. I do recall the kid looking very dubious and reluctant as he adds the e on the end.
I’m sure the video of it must still be around.
The man was an absolute moron. Wasn’ there something about some letterhead with a spelling error in it too?
For whatever his shortcomings as a public speaker, Dan Quayle was an incredibly gifted fundraiser. That alone made him a handy guy to have around.
“Y’all” means roughly the same thing in the South that “vous” means in France and “usted” means in Spanish. One can apply it to an individual, but seldom to a person that the speaker knows well.
I’ve lived in Texas almost 47 years now, and I don’t believe I’ve ever once heard a native speaker use it as a singular pronoun.
Once, however, I called a colleague in my company in a smallish office in upstate New York, an office where I knew pretty much everyone well. The guy I was calling wasn’t in, and I got the office secretary. I wanted to ask how everyone up there is doing, and what I said was “How are y’all?” She replied “I’m great, thank you.” I realized then that she thought I was using it as a singular pronoun.
Maybe people get the impression that it’s sometimes a singular pronoun from similar misinterpretations?
There are plenty of people in the South who use “y’all” to refer to a singular person. I suspect, without making a study of it, that this is likely to be a regional thing to some extent. But I’ve had numerous acquaintances over the years who did it, and trust me, I’m not used to hanging out with really uneducated people.
I don’t know about Texas, but my relatives from Georgia and S.C. have used it as a singular to and around me all of my life…
Unless I have a multiple personality syndrome I am not aware of.
Quayle wasn’t saying anything about bringing back “promise and optimism”. He was saying he has as much congressional experience as John Kennedy. As Bentsen said, Quayle was the one who made the comparison. So saying he failed to live up to his own standard was a legitimate shot. If Quayle actually had possessed more Kennedyesque qualities, Bentsen’s response would have failed.
This link includes video of the “potatoe” incident.
So, is the reputation for idiocy well deserved? Or, at the least, an inability to speak intelligently in public? If so, I’m still struggling to understand why he wasn’t vetted better by the Bush people. Surely, an insider like GHWB had lots of people he could call on for a running mate, who also had appropriately conservative credentials or fundraising capabilities, but who were not such a potential embarrasment.
I guess I still don’t know why you would choose a running mate who was a liability over someone who could have been an asset.
Then again, Bush did win in 1988, so maybe an ineffectual VP wasn’t really a liability, after all.
No, it wasn’t - to the degree that any of this kind of snark is illegitimate.
Quayle didn’t claim to be better than Kennedy. He claimed to have more experience. Bentsen responded to something Quayle didn’t say.
What Quayle might have said originally was that he had more legislative experience before running for Vice-President than Bentsen did when Bentsen ran for President. Also true, and something for which Bentsen probably didn’t have a prepared response.
Not that it isn’t water under the bridge. It was a cheap shot, but hell - it was a campaign. And Bentsen lost anyway.
If you’re old enough to remember the 1988 election, you’ll recall that Bush already had the problem of being overshadowed by Reagan. The last thing he wanted was a powerful Vice-President who would also be compared to him. So Bush intentionally chose a relative lightweight for his running mate.
It was not a cheap shot at all. Quayle said he was qualified to be President* because he had as much time in Congress as John Kennedy had had. Bentsen said that Quayle was no Kennedy.
If Michael Dukakis had been foolish enough to say that he was as qualified as Reagan to be President because he’d also been a governor, then Bush would have been justified in telling Dukakis he was no Ronald Reagan. And it would have been just as effective a comeback as Bentsen’s was.
If you’re going to compare yourself to another person, you had better make sure you can stand up to the comparison. Quayle set himself up for the fall.
*For those who don’t recall, Brokaw was alluding to a recent occasion when Quayle had been asked if he was ready to be President if it happened. Quayle basically muffed the question and said he was only running for Vice-President. This was jumped upon and many people were saying that anybody who wasn’t ready to be President shouldn’t be running for Vice-President either.
Since I was hearing it in Texas a number of decades before anyone had even heard of Dan Quayle, I seriously doubt that. And many of the ones saying it, to this day even, could hardly be accused of having upper-class aspirations.
Thanks for that link. If you watch those videos, and particular the ones where he’s talking about the millions of people who died because of Hitlerism in this nation’s history, or the part about him explaining that Hawaii is an island in the Pacific that is here, I don’t see how anyone could doubt that that was one stupid, stupid person. Really. Just pure rank idiocy.
I guess this is one of those “you say potato, I say pot-tah-toe” things. You’re from West Texas, right? Central Texas here, and not only did I never hear it used in the singular, I (and everybody I know) would have regarded such usage as moronic. Like some transplanted northerner trying to fit in and overcompensating by wearing pointy-toe cowboy boots and a bolo tie every day. “Wall HOW-dee, yee-AHHLLL!!!” Bleahchch.
ETA: to make this a bit more relevant to the OP, the latter image pretty much sums up how we regarded George HW Bush when he played up his Texan credentials.
