The Passion of the Fred (Good article)

Former Sen. Fred Thompson, R-Tenn, accused some of my colleagues of "journalistic malpractice" just now on Fox News Sunday.

He's referring to coverage implying that Thompson said he's "not particularly interested in running for president," like this story.

As our awesome ABC News off-air reporter with the Thompson campaign advised us last night, and as Jim Geraghty at National Review points out that may not be the fairest characterization of Thompson's complete remarks.

The larger point Thompson seems to have been trying to make is that he's not interested in the process of running for president, but he wants to be president and thinks he'd be a good one.

He also said -- and this isn't new -- that those who have had fire-in-the-belly for the job for the job aren't necessarily the people who should be entrusted with the job.

"I am not consumed by personal ambition," Thompson said. "I will not be devastated if I don't do it. I want the people to have the best president they can have…"

"I approach it from the standpoint of a deal," he said to a voter who wondered why he should caucus for Thompson, "of kind of a marriage. You know, if one side of the marriage has to be really talked into the marriage, you know, it's probably not going to be a very good deal for either one of them.

"But if you mutually think that this is a good thing — in this case, if you think this is a good thing for the country, the you have the opportunity to do some wonderful things together. I'm offering myself up. I'm saying that if I have the background, the capability and the concern to do this and I'm doing this for the right reasons.

"But I'm not particularly interested in running for president, but I think I'd make a good president. Nowadays, the process has become much more important than I think it used to be."

He went on to say, "if what people really want in their president is a super type A personality, someone who has gotten up every morning and gone to bed every night and been thinking about, for years how they can be president of the United States... someone who can look you straight in the eye and say they've enjoyed every minute of campaigning, I ain't that guy."

He concluded: "I've gone out of my way to be myself, because I don't want anybody to think they're getting something they're not getting. I'm not consumed by this process, I'm not consumed with the notion of being president. I'm simply saying I'm willing to do what's necessary to achieve it if I'm in sync with the people. And if the people want me, or somebody like me, I will do what I've always done with everything else in my life. I will take it on and do a good job."

That's Fred. Fred is Fred. He has disdain for the process. And I think probably most of us can understand why.

For me, your premise is wrong. I disagree with your negative description of Thompson’s campaign, and I think your metaphor is flawed. For example, if you think Thompson was late getting in, it would be a better metaphor to say that four candidate resumes had come in in response to an ad...but then another resume came in later from an employee referral. But that’s neither here nor there. More substantively, I disagree with this: “Four out of the five have comparable qualifications, each with their own strengths, and weaknesses in individual areas.”

Yes, each has his strengths and weaknesses. But for me, their qualifications specifically for the job of president are in no way comparable. Inmy view neither Romney, Giuliani nor Huckabee has any relevant foreign policy experience — and that’s an absolute must in wartime.

In addition, I see Romney, Giuliani and Huckabee and in many cases McCain as big-government interventionists who think that if there’s a problem, the government should probably step in and solve it. My patience with “we’re from the government, and we’re here to help” has been utterly exhausted — I will no longer vote for candidates of that sort.

These are the perceptions I’ve developed after many months of research — I’m not interested in arguing about whether, say, Romney’s time in Paris as a missionary counts as foreign policy experience. For me, Thompson’s qualifications far outshine the other candidates’, and that’s by far the most important.

Beyond that, I appreciate a candidate who isn’t desperate for the job — in my experience hiring and being hired, desperate candidates who talk too loudly and fast in the interview (and maybe fudge their resumes a bit) are not at all appealing.

JMO.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.