OK, it’s David, not Rush, but the reasoning is sound and David carries a lot of weight among some conservatives in his own right.

But as I’ve stated before, I believe Fred Thompson is a reliable, consistent conservative. There are others in the field I could support, but not without some reservations. The more I learn about Fred and observe him in action, the more convinced I become that he’s the right choice.

I was among those who urged Fred to step up and prove to the people he wanted the job. Regardless of whether Fred actually had “fire in his belly,” the unmistakable perception out there was that he did not, so I encouraged him to add a little spring to his step.

But I’ve also appreciated Fred’s unwillingness to be somebody he is not. He will not respond like a puppet when a debate moderator tells him to raise his hand to signify a childishly simplistic approval or disapproval of a certain policy. He will not be goaded by interviewers into saying things he doesn’t feel comfortable saying. He won’t divide us with class envy or pretend we can be friends with rogue regimes or terrorists. He does not promise a chicken in every pot or pander to liberals on global warming.

He will not otherwise tailor his positions to suit the demands of particular constituencies. For example, he has the courage to preach that Social Security is in trouble, but unlike most others, he doesn’t surrender to the oppressive populist seduction to urge government fixes for it or for health care. Instead, he courageously tells us — if we’ll listen — that the answers lie in greater market forces. (Listen up, conservatives.)

These are among the things I like about Senator Thompson as well. How refreshing it is to listen to a candidate who doesn’t pander for votes, but instead asks for them honestly without having to stick is finger in the air to check wind direction.

David also makes a good point regarding electability.

We tell ourselves a candidate is not inspiring, then pretty soon we’re convinced he’s unelectable, and, voila, he almost becomes so. Yet, at that very moment, he’s proving to us that he is quite presidential, quite electable and quite motivated for the job — if we can only shed our predispositions against his “electability.” Since electability is often a matter of collective perception, it can turn on a dime, as with the reversal of the respective fortunes of screaming Howard Dean and somniferous John Kerry in 2004.

This primary season, relatively speaking, has just begun. But Fred is now up against the wall. How can we expect him to have done much better than he has to date with everyone prattling on about the overwhelming odds against him? The “experts” continue to be wrong at almost every turn, so why can’t they be wrong about Fred, too? It’s time to quit empowering them by following their dictatorial doom-prophecies.

Quite right.

One Limbaugh down, one to go?