I do have a little difficulty picturing Rudy accepting the #2 slot. If Fred decisively clinches the nomination,and Giuliani declined a VP offer, who would make the best running mate? Think like a Party-man here… winning in November versus one’s own personal concept of ideological purity.

My problem, as so many other conservatives have, is that there isn’t really a well-known TRUE conservative in the race. These are the impressions I have:

McCain – Poster boy for the term RINO. When the liberal press calls a conservative a “maverick”, they mean that sometimes he does what they approve of. McCain-Feingold comes to mind here for some odd reason.

Guiliani – Wanted to like him and I do, but… face it folks, while he cleaned up NY with his toughness, he’s at heart a social liberal (abortion, illegal immigration and some other issues too, I think). While some point to his straightening out of fiscal matters while in NY, it occurred to me that this wouldn’t be his job as POTUS. You might as well say he makes a mean Reuben sandwich. That’s nice, but not terribly relevant to being president.

Romney- Is known for his great fiscal responsibilities in Mass. Same thing as Guiliani. So what? If they need to replace the chairman of the federal reserve, then fine, he and Guiliani can battle it out for the post. Mitt seems to have a problem deciding what he believes about social policy. Isn’t this the guy who had 2 changes of heart on abortion? I hear the sound of flip-flops already.

Gingrich – Lot’s of people hoping Newt enters the race. Conservatives will like him, but he’s got too much baggage. His name doesn’t bring up good images with people other than conservatives. Right or wrong, regular people who don’t follow politics a whole lot will probably remember the Contract with America and the government strike. Since the lib media decided that the CwA was a lie and the strike was Newt’s fault, I don’t see a lot of good memories for those folks we call swing voters.

Brownback, Tancredo, etc.- These guys can’t break out of the pack. They have zero shot at catching up to Romney and Guiliani. They can’t seem to get buzz with a six-pack and a bottle of tequila. Romney seems to have the same problem, but I don’t know why.

Back to Fred… The more I read about what he believes, the more I like him. I didn’t know he represented Tenn. and the fact that I didn’t know means (to me, anyway) that he did his damn job. Oh, that we had more of THOSE in Congress.
He has all the conservative views you could want. I hear the point about his illegal immigration views being ‘vague’, but that’s because he has said that he doesn’t have the complete answer. HOWEVER, he did say that we need the borders secured first (hallelujah!), then we can deal with the other problems. His view wasn’t terribly explicit, but it certainly isn’t vague.

Now I find myself hoping he runs. While he may not be the perfect candidate, he sure looks that way compared to the rest of the current field.
We needed a Reagan when the Soviets were the threat. We need someone like Reagan now that we have the threat of Islam. I think Fred is as close as we can hope to get.

I’ll just wait for him to firm up those views, since for 2008, those are the only views I care passionately about. If the GOP standard-bearer doesn’t adamantly and credibly oppose all illegal immigration, and also seek to limit legal immigration, I’ll vote for a third-party candidate who does.