Poor Fred

Mr. Right was back from a vacation and some time spent following one of the local teams on a road trip. In his latest political column, he took a break from his usual practice of condemning alleged liberal hypocrisy to list the faults of leading Republican presidential candidates. This led to a tepid endorsement of Fred Thompson -- tepid because he lamented the former Senator's failure to campaign passionately, and predicted failure should Thompson not fire himself up.

He was explaining his endorsement and his pessimism to another sports staffer as I passed through. I suggested that Thompson's dispassionate manner might simply reflect that conservatism of character that Mr. Right admired. Might it not be an authentically conservative attitude to disclaim ambition, as Thompson has? Back in the day, all candidates shared Thompson's now-singular affectation, protesting that they were dragged reluctantly from productive business or rural retirement in patriotic obedience to the summons of their fellow-citizens. It was so much bull back then, for the most part, but maybe the old actor and corporate lawyer liked the way they played the role in those days.

Mr. Right may have agreed, but he remained convinced that Thompson needed to get out of his shell to sell himself. I thought I saw a problem in the ex-Senator's approach from a quote that Mr. Right had included in his column. In the excerpt, Thompson expressed a desire to lead the whole country, including the Democratic party, away from the influence of the "Left." I could see how this appealed to Mr. Right, but I also saw why this wasn't helping Thompson much.

"You may not like it," I advised my colleague, "But Thompson needs to spend less time attacking the Left and more time going after his immediate rivals."

Mr. Right seemed to agree. He felt in particular that Mike Huckabee had snatched away much of Thompson's natural constituency because of the latter's apparent apathy, but was certain that Thompson could win them back if he would make his case with some passion. After all, he asserted, Fred Thompson was the best Republican on the issue of limited government.

Wait a minute! Hadn't he forgotten someone?

"You know, when you say limited government, the first Republican I think of is Ron Paul," I told him.

"Ron Paul is not a real Republican," Mr. Right protested.

"Don't you think he's a conservative? Granted, there's a difference between limiting government and eliminating it, but Paul is probably more conservative than the typical libertarian if that's what you mean."

"On some issues, sure. Most libertarians take some conservative positions, but Ron Paul simply is not a real Republican."

He didn't get to explain his point any further because he was needed elsewhere in the department. By our standards, it was a cordial chat. I hope he appreciated that I had an objective interest in the Republican struggle. He actually confirmed somewhat my impression that much of the opposition to Huckabee on the part of "establishment" conservatives is based on a sense that he stole Thompson's moment. Even as Mr. Right acknowledges that Thompson really fumbled the moment, or held his hands sullenly in his pockets as it dropped, still Huckabee seemed blameworthy to him for an act of usurpation. To his credit, Mr. Right didn't show the hysteria that other conservatives (Rush Limbaugh, George Will) have displayed toward the Arkansan, but it was clear from his manner that he, too, believed that Huckabee was somewhere he didn't rightly belong. All the more reason to wish Huckabee continued success in the weeks to come.