Rudy won't get past the primaries based on his pro-choice position.  McCain has a long history of angering Republicans - and even more so with his comments regarding what one candidate should do with his varmint gun to solve the illegal alien crises.  Then there is Romney - perhaps the only Conservative amongst the bunch.  People say his mormonism is a problem - I don't agree.  It think his problem is that he doesn't appeal strongly to most Republicans.

Now enter "As Seen on TV" Fred Thompson.  They must be just giddy right now.  I'm going to make a prediction - he runs and wins the primary.  I've been wrong on these things, but the cards seem to be falling into place for him.  First, he left the Senate in 2002 before Republicans really started making fools of themselves.  I'm not versed on his voting record, but he certainly managed to escape some imbarrasing votes on the Iraq war.  Plus, he can see where this immigration vote goes and if the public dislikes it, claim that he would have voted in another direction.  Lucky him.

In short, if Thompson wins he will be a tough candidate for Democrats to beat.  I would go for the logical choice if the goal is to win.  John Edwards left the Senate in 2004.  Although he has the Iraq war vote (that he has since apologized for) he too has managed to skip out on some highly toxic bills.  Democrats best hopes of beating a Thompson would be John Edwards.

Unless....

Enter Al Gore.  Since that is just speculation I won't go there.  It is hard to ignore such a well timed book deal, however. 

Pick your issue:

http://www.ontheissu...

"It has been said that politics is the second oldest profession. I have learned that it bears a striking resemblance to the first."

I agree with Reagan on that one.  To many politicians are whoring themselves out to corporate interests.  When will we have REAL ethics reform? 

If I hold the Democrats accountable for any one thing it will be the promise to reform ethics laws.  If Democrats don't do this, they will be very sorry.  Hopefully Democrats don't forget why we voted against Republicans in such large numbers.  If so, they will be reminded.

Once the Iraq war and immigration debates are done, they had devote some serious attention to ethics violations.

I think he's got a legitimate chance to win the GOP nomination.  But this is as much a statement about the GOP base these days as it is about the field of candidates, and Thompson himself.

What exactly is it that makes Thompson an attractive candidate?

He's been a Washington lobbyist for close to two decades.  He was an ineffective one term Senator.  And he has had a successful career as a made for TV thespian.

If America needs another wanker who can roll of one-liners, but who is f-cking clueless about matters of policy here's your man. 

I think the yokels get suckered by the act--as they always do.  At the national level I see Thompson having some real liabilities. 

Even if we're just talking about regional prejudices, a Republican from the southeast post George W. Bush is going to have about as much of a chance winning nationally as a Democrat from New England post Dukakis. 

is a really intriguing candidate.  The guy has no chance, but I think his treatment by today's GOP is telling.  This guy is a true CONSERVATIVE in the Goldwater sense--e.g. small "g" government, a champion of individual liberties (and the individual), opponent of the GOP nanny state.  And, of course, the Republican party wants absolutely nothing to do with him, because the defense, oil, and foreign policy lobbies want nothing to do with him.  Unlike Thompson, Paul won't be giving out any handouts to any special interest lobby. 

Unlike Thompson here is a guy who has actually had a life among the people.  As a doctor Paul has worked with real people, and has some appreciation for ordinary struggles of working folks.  Guys like Thompson can play the "regular guy" part and fool a big audience, but Thompson hasn't had to deal with the type of everyday struggles that normal folks deal with for about 30 years.  He is a true Washington INSIDER with a southern fried patina. 

Paul has been in Washington, but he is not OF Washington.  He remains an outsider to this day. 

Even if Paul fails though, I suspect his candidacy may be a fertile seed which will reinvigorate the GOP in the years to come--especially among activists, and ordinary folks who make political life an avocation, but not a career.  Maybe the dividends won't pay out until 2010 or 2012, but American democracy is going to be stronger because of his candidacy.  I see many parallels between the Paul candidacy and those of Dean and Clark in 2004 (e.g. anti-establishment, people-powered candidacies).  The Ron Paul run is going to lay the foundation for GOP candidates who are not compromised in the same way that members of the national party are.  Even though I identify myself more with the Democratic party today, I can appreciate the significance of having candidates in the GOP who are not creatures of a political machine, but ordinary citizens who have paid their dues, and who are rewarded (or punished, depending on your perspective) by voters for having made real positive commitments to the community.

between a hall full of bitter angry merchants of hate, aka today's GOP, or get a tooth pulled without Novocaine.

I choose the one that would cause the least amount of pain. Goodbye tooth!

The bottom line on Thompson.  He's spent more time being a lobbist and an actor than anything else. 

when it is discovered whom he was a lobbyist for.  I'm not as confident as I was this morning that he will be the choice.

I am not that impressed with the Republican line-up.  Hillary Clinton, Gravel, and Kucinich aside Democrats have some good candidates to choose from.  Richardson deserves more attention, IMHO.

You mean his own party in Virginia has not hoisted him on their pedestal?  I bet he just loves this newcomer, not- even-declared-his-exploratory-committee person riding into town on the Republican horse to save the day.

Maybe Fred Thompson should speak to Linda Smyth. 

Smyth calls a green roof open space.

Smyth sends out a flashy flyer and calls herself saving trees.  The front cover had one tree.  Well that is probably all she saved....just ask the Wedderburn and Goat Farm Folks.

Smyth says she is an environmentalist but sends tons of trash to the landfill because she is sending out a mailer every other day.

Smyth says she listens to her consitutents but the real truth she listens to Gerry Connolly who has never seen a high density project that he does not like.  $$$$$$$

Smyth says she is an environmentalists but slams professional scientist and goes along with a  picture to declare a stream intermittent....thus approving more density for more houses.  $$$$$$$  Remember Gerry said that he needs Smyth.

So Fred Thompson could have Smyth  be his PR and media expert...remember Smyth did vote Republican so there would be no conflict there.  What do you say folks? 

*"All the waste in a year from a nuclear power plant can be stored under a desk."

This comment is both misleading and not far off the mark.  Nuclear Power plants don't handle waste on a year to year basis.  The core is filled with waste at the end of life, but there's a lot of it that can still be used in other ways, generally in a new core.  It just needs to be reprocessed.  Not everybody does that, because it can be expensive, and lots of safety precautions have to be taken to prevent leakage of the highly radioactive waste.

Most Nuclear Cores are built to last a very long time.  So a year's worth of waste from a single core could fit under a desk.  Not that you'd want to store it that way, because you want a lot of lead between you and the waste!

I just thought that quote was interesting enough to meit some background. ;-)

Matusleo
Ut Prosim

Why not put it on a rocket and dispose of it in the Sun.  That's already a radio-active mass...

The real risk is launch, I would say.  If launch failed, then we would have a problem.  I'm not sure what the failure rate for rockets are these days...