[reasonisfaith]

The “executive experience” argument is a myth. There are no scenarios that can be described in which a president Thompson would be unable to lead because of this silly argument.

Leadership is the thing, I agree. Thompson showed he is the leader among the candidates during the Iowa debate. And Romney clearly looked up to Fred and followed his lead.

Want the link?

[WFTR]

I disagree completely about executive experience being a myth. The office of the presidency is an executive office. Someone who has shown an ability to succeed in this kind of role is a better candidate than someone who has not shown that experience.

The most telling scenario that suggests Fred Thompson's weakness in this area is the "Chinagate" hearings. John Glenn kept Fred Thompson from doing a real and thorough investigation into improper Chinese influence in the 1996 election. Eventually, Fred Thompson allowed the hearings to be diverted into a discussion of campaign finance reform. John Glenn's behavior shows that he's not a statesman or a patriot, but Fred Thompson's performance casts some doubts on whether he'd be effective as anything more than a legislator.

The hearings are just one situation, but the difference is that Mitt Romney has been in many situations showing that he can be effective as an executive. Fred Thompson may still end up being an effective president, but there's no evidence for that hope.

Bill