I don't want an ordinary president with no drive, no ambition. Our society is not on the brink of collapse, despite what some fearmongers would have us believe, and Fred Thompson is no Cincinnatus.

Cincinnatus was no ordinary man. He was an extraordinary leader who saved his people when no one else could. That is the type of man who should lead a country. On the other hand, I don't buy that America is on the verge of destruction. Since the end of the Civil War, the United States has only grown stronger. We are not in imminent danger of being destroyed.

And if we were, I still would not want an ordinary man leading this country. I was fifteen when I decided that politics was too complicated and too strenuous a lifestyle to take into my hands. Fred Thompson, apparently, is just like me, because he has made the same decision over and over in his life: when he chose to not enter politics after graduating from college; when he made the same choice in the seventies after his star rose in the wake of the Nixon administration's downfall; when he made it once more after leaving the Senate to return to acting. I will not vote for someone like myself, someone for whom the running of this country comes second to personal ambition.

I certainly will not vote for an ordinary man for the least ordinary job in the history of the world. This job requires an extraordinary leader, one for whom leadership is the primary ambition. We need a president who has demonstrated true leadership skills time and again, in many different areas: the economy, healthcare, bipartisan cooperation, deal-brokering, sailing through storms of scandal, and handling delicate situations such as war with enemies that can hardly be found,

I agree with Mr. Madden that it's difficult to find Democrats qualified to work in the White House who didn't work in the Clinton Administration. I don't believe, however, that Obama has much cause for concern from the left if he continues to appoint them. It's not as if he's likely to face a serious primary challenge next election season, as long as he does a good job. And as long as he keeps appointing centrists, Republicans can't keep claiming that he's an extremist.

On the other hand, his statement that he'd appoint a "team of rivals" in the style of Lincoln so far holds no water. Nearly every appointee had endorsed him in the primaries, the most notable exception being Hillary Clinton. The names of Republicans who are being floated for positions is also dominated by those few who endorsed him this last season. Where are his so-called rivals?