Ok so he’d be 66 in ‘08 and he has shown no interest in being President BUT… Fred Thompson is the only person put forward so far (short of Tom Coburn, or Pat Toomey) who I would be absolutely enthusiastic about running for President.

Exhibit 1: (h/t Unconventional Wisdom)

From yesterday’s Meet the Press:

TIM RUSSERT: The interesting thing in all this is that when you have John Roberts arguing on behalf of his client, he’s saying it should be overturned; then in seeking to be on the Court of Appeals, he said, “Well, it’s settled law, it’s precedent.” But once you’re on the Supreme Court, anything can be unsettled. Brown vs. Board of Education was settled law, separate but equal.

FRED THOMPSON: Plessy vs. Ferguson.

Ummmm… awesome…. not much more can do that statement justice.

Exhibit 2:

(H/t Acid logic for the awesome pic)

Exhibit 3:
He was in the Hunt for Red October, and said one of my favorite lines from any movie ever

This business will get out of control. It will get out of control and we’ll be lucky to live through it.
-Admiral Painter (played by Thompson)

Exhibit 4:
Fred Thompson on the issues, a bit outdated but very encouraging.

UPDATE: More Thompson loving

Many in the centre-right movement today like to throw around the term “libertarian” to show how chic and cool they are. It seems that the popularity of this philosophy on campuses has infused itself somehow in the College Republicans and even to some extent the Republican party. Now don’t get me wrong, I greatly admire Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) who is a former Libertarian Party candidate for President and though I disagree with him on some issues I respect greatly for his views on the constitution and the federal government. (Any guy with the name Dr. No has to be cool.) I think though that the merits, stands, and positions of libertarianism and more importantly its far more dangerous ally, objectivism, must be examined.

Too often have I heard good folks talk almost glowingly about this political ideology of basically fiscal conservatism (good) combined with radically liberal views on social issues. This seems to be the “more consistent” view or atleast this is what we are told by the libertarians and more often the objectivists out there. We need to embrace the market on social issues, getting the government out of everything. Glen Reynolds over at InstaPundit being an obvious example of someone who follows along these lines, always blaimg the social conservatives for the Republican Party’s electoral problems and declaring the “silent libertarian majority” will soon leave the GOP. (This being a blatant falsehood as libertarianism is restricted largely to the intellectual elites, but I digress…)

Yet, why throughout history has conservatism come in the package of classical liberalism on economics combined with responsible social stances? Why haven’t there been huge parties of liberatrians, if that is the natural, logical end to the small government nature of the American people, as Glen Reynolds and others claim? The reason is that expierence and time has shown that the logical, natural position of the centre-right is conservative on economic and social issues. In fact, liberalism in one area leads to liberalism in another.

Take the gay marriage debate which Reynolds and others have said show where the current centre-right alliance is wrong. They uphold a belief which is, sadly, becoming more common place, that the exchange of goods or services between two people which affects no one else must not be regulated. I would agree with them if I could ever find an act between people that touches no one else. The problem for the libertarians is that they ignore culture entirely, thinking instead it can be seen as a market place of goods and services between people. Marriage to a true objectivist (the more radical libertoids) means a contractual agreement between two (or concievably more) individuals to provide goods and services such as health care, mental care, and sexual exchanges. Romantic ain’t it.

I am going to write more about this in the next few days as it is something that really is of interest to me, but I would encourage Save The GOP readers to leave a note or two on their thoughts on libertarianism and radical objectivism.

A Tory MP, Edward Leigh has written a fantastic pamphlet on how to restore the Conservative Party to power in England by becoming a true conservative alternative to the orthodox liberalism that reigns in the UK. As a total anglophile, I was interested in the article as I hate seeing the UK head down the wrong path into total political oblivion. Surely Edmund Burke is rolling in his grave. Leigh’s article is a call back to the Burke style conservatism that Thatcher rode to power.

Faith, Tradition, Enterprise, Nation, and Family make up the core five point bedrock of Leigh’s remarks as he points out how the Tories can really advocate true conservatism that will remake England the way it should be (and arguably once was). This is a must read even for us Americans, as a lot of his words could really be taken to heart over here too.

Check it Out!

My disdain for this woman is beyond any form of communication in which I can express. For those who care to read about the freak show coming to a town near you here is the link.

This great article in The Hill makes some great points about why they just can not get it right.

Allies of Rep. Katherine Harris (R-Fla.) and Detroit pastor Keith Butler (R) have complained that Republicans at the White House and the NRSC are focused on beating Democrats and not aware of what Republican voters are thinking or talking about back home. They add that Republicans in Washington are absorbed by how much money candidates have and what polls show, and they fear that the once-democratic sifting through of candidates and positions is being orchestrated by media consultants, pollsters and other “professionals” quick to jettison principle to win.

“What people think in the Beltway and what goes on back home are two different things, and there’s a disconnect there,” a Republican consultant said. “I think the NRSC does a really good job after the primary, but the lay of the land is just different down there. You’ve got polling stuff, but there are always undercurrents that people in the Beltway just miss.”

Butler, who has struggled to gain support as Republicans have waited to see if Domino’s Pizza CEO David Brandon would enter the Michigan Senate race, said simply: “The Republican Party did not recruit me.”

Republican officials insist they are sensitive to these perceptions in Washington state and elsewhere.

“Throughout the candidate-recruitment process, in relation to Washington state, there have been incredible amounts of coordination between Washington, D.C., and Washington state at every level,” NRSC spokesman Brian Nick said.

A Republican aide said the NRSC and Washington state Republicans had no choice but to recruit a backup candidate to take Rossi’s place should Rossi opt not to run.

“We needed to have a contingency plan so we’re not scrambling if he says no,” the aide said of Rossi, who spent months in court fighting unsuccessfully to overturn his gubernatorial loss. “The first potential problem is we don’t have anyone who’s really interested. The other potential problem is sometimes we do find somebody who would be great but it takes weeks to find him, or even months, and now we have several people in the primary, and that’s not going to work against Maria Cantwell.”