Every day I see emails or blogs discussing the reform, revitalization or energizing of the Republican party.  While it's great that so many people are interested in getting people out to vote, I have some serious reservations with what is being discussed.

 

Let me clarify. . .I am in favor of improving the overall energy and vitality of the party and its members as well as recruiting new members and motivating them to be active.  Now that we have that out of the way, let's look at the concerns.

The following story is a perfect example of why Fred Thompson is not only my choice for Presidential candidate but is the best choice for America. You may ask why. . .the answer is simple -- Thompson is our best protection against what could happen in this story.

I don't know if anyone else ever reads British articles, but I've found a couple interesting of late.

The first was in The Economist. It commented that since Texas Governor Rick Perry has thrown his support behind Giuliani that it will help Rudy with conservative support. Let me just say that I don't know any conservative in Texas that feels an endorsement by Perry is grounds to support Giuliani. As a conservative living in Texas, I can definitely say it doesn't grab me by the warm and fuzzies.

Another is an article on The Telegraph. Basically, it interprets commentary and actions by Fred as pessimistic and lazy.

It just makes you wonder if the Brits understand American (and especially conservative) politics.

Thank you for remembering, Fred.

Fred Remembering 9/11

Are you as excited as I am? I hope so. The wait is over. Now that Fred has officially thrown his hat in the ring, hope springs eternal. The reason -- I know that if Fred is elected then I will be rewarded with a good President who shares (at least some) of my views on major issues.

Join me in a great big "Yee Haw" (or whatever welcome you wish to extend) to Fred!

I've heard a lot of buzz over the last few weeks about Fred not officially being a candidate. Mostly, it's been negative buzz. Imagine that! A lot of critics (and mostly crazies from what I can see) are going on and on about how he's lazy and isn't a viable candidate.

I was recently talking about this with a mature gentleman of 75 years with whom I am conducting some business. He had some interesting insight on this. He was telling me that he didn't think that it was bad Fred is waiting. So, I asked the obvious question -- why?

His answer was so simplistic yet meaningful. He said, "Well, I think Fred is smart for not entering the race yet. Why should he campaign for 5 years and waste all that money?"

This has kept me thinking. Why do the potential candidates feel they have to officially throw their hats in the ring so quickly? What's the real advantage? That we are all so sick and tired of hearing from them that we no longer care and just take what we get? Pick from the lesser of two evils depending on which side of the fence you sit?

Patience may be an invaluable asset in this race. I know I don't want impatience to saddle me with a bad President.

So, I was at a luncheon today listening to the Honorable Edith H. Jones, Chief Judge of the Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit. If you have never heard her speak, then you are truly missing out.

She was speaking today on the federal judiciary. I won't go into her speech, but will just say that she has some excellent points about how our Supreme Court is making decisions and its tether to stare decisis.

The questions she received were thought provoking as well. One in particular was most interesting. She was basically being asked if there is any hope that the 9th and 10th Amendments could be resurrected. Her answer was a resounding "no."

She later made a comment that made me think of the upcoming Presidential election. It was that the federal judiciary is reliant upon politics.

This made me think about who would best be positioned to have a positive impact on the federal judiciary. I include the entire federal judiciary since it is unknown at this time if a vacancy on the Supreme Court will arise during the next President's term.

I'd like to hear what your thoughts are on the potential impact of the current Presidential possibilities on federal judicial appointments. You probably know where I will go with this, but I'm reserving my comments for the time being and will follow this post up later.

The following is a bit of tax humor, but only really in the beginning will you laugh. By the end you may realize that there are some problems with the tax system and our economic structure (and that whoever put this together may have gone a tad to the extreme).

The reason I'm including it here is to bring home the point that we need less politicians and more representative government. . .and that Fred may be a step in the right direction on this front.

(This is not meant to offend anyone. Please do not take it as a personal insult. It is only used for illustration purposes.)

Thompson has some interesting comments in his blog on immigration and Cuba. It's worth a read. . .though I think his blog is generally worth a read. Immigration Blog by Fred

There is a general consensus developing that seems to say that the least offensive option is the best option.

Do you remember Hillary's healthcare reform initiative in the early 1990's? Personally, I have never forgotten that particular part of our political history.

Now, do you want to hear the good news? It's really good. . .or at least could be. Hillary says she bears scars from her former healthcare reform initiatives. Hillary and Her Scars Article

My greatest hope is that those scars, along with all the others she has accumulated over the years, will keep her from gaining her party's nomination for 2008. Because if she finds a good plastic surgeon, we could be in trouble.

Taking a look at what the defining issues might be for the 2008 Presidential election.

I'm about to go off on a rant. So, be forewarned.

If you haven't read or heard Fred on Harry Reid yet, go to Fred's Blog to see or hear it. He has some good points.

I was trolling the internet yet again and ran across an article in the LA Times regarding polling issues for the 2008 election. To a great extent, Thompson was left out since he had not officially joined the race. What I found interesting was the idea that Giuliani could possibly beat Clinton and the commentary about why Dems don't want Clinton. LA Times Article and Polls

I'm interested to know what you think are the pros and cons of your favorite candidates. . .whichever party you support.