I participated in an OffTopic subthread about Al Gore's new book, "The Assault on Reason", and my impression that Big Al's already running for President, but on his own terms, as outlined in the book: Competing in a marketplace of ideas rather than a battlefield of media consultants. To me, one of the interesting questions was who on Right would be a good match for Gore in that arena.

So I was talking on the phone to Atilla the Republican today (me dear old Dad, ya might remember), when out of the blue he remarks "Al Gore's going to be the Democratic candidate".

"Uh, well,..."

"Eight years as Vice President, however many years in the Senate. He's got the experience."

[My head's beginning to reel--a take-no-prisoners Republican saying Gore should run because he's qualified???] "Uh, yeah, true..."

Could hardly get a word in edgewise. Paraphrasing a bit here, but basically Dad went on to say that Gore has the substance that all other declared Democrats lack. He went through the Republican field and dismissed them as hopeless or lightweights. Before I could start to have false hope he added "Mind you, I still hate Gore and despise his every idea and belief" (to paraphrase a fairly mild rant). But still, Dad was saying the he thought Gore should be the Democratic candidate not because he'd be easier to beat, but because he was genuinely a stronger candidate.

I regained enough equilibrium to say "Funny thing, but I've been thinking about that myself and ..." and we talked about the book and the corrupting influence on TV and Gore's advocacy of the idyllically conservative idea that we should return to an earlier style of American political discourse. We talked about my impression that Gore's running a stealth campaign for President, which agreed with Dad's judgment that Gore would step in late in the race.

Which finally brought us to the question: "Who would you like to see go up against Gore?" Answer: Newt Gingrich.

And I thought that was way cool, because up until this conversation, I'd have expected "Atilla"'s position to be that the worst possible Republican would still make a better President than the best possible Democrat. Period, end of discussion, what's all this nonsense about debating Gore? But he picked perhaps the most serious opponent who could take on Gore on the only proper arena, the arena of intellect. The usually bitterly partisan Atilla the Republican got it, that it's about picking the strongest leader from among the strongest candidates, party be damned (or at least not the primary concern); and that the proper process for picking our leaders is in a genuine battle of wits and not a televised work of fiction contrived by media consultants.

Where we left the subject is agreeing that we'd keep our fingers crossed for a Gore-vs-Gingrich bout in 2008. That would be something to see, wouldn't it?

People are talking about 2008 being the best shot for a third party. But a lot of it is in the special context that the Republicans are wounded, and that a conservative third party might have a shot at replacing the GOP; this is an internal matter on the Right, more than a national affair, in other words.

Well, that's fine, and I'm sure a lot of <st>Republicans</st> Conservatives would agree. But I also think that the Parties have become a major corrupting influence in American politics (and that came up in the phone call, and Atilla tends to agree), so the replacement of the GOP is only half the battle. That doesn't solve the problem of the Democratic Party.

But here's an idea I want to run up the flagpole and see if it floats: What if, in 2008, we reject both parties, by lining up behind a Gore-versus-Gingrich independent contest, or something like it...some set of potentially good leaders not chosen for us by party machines, and yet still ideologically balanced. We eliminate the fear that the third party will damage our own side and help the other, and, assuming that you value the idea of choosing our leaders through open intellectual debate rather than marketing, we might all get to root for candidates we can actually respect.

Do the math: One independent or "third" party in a race is a spoiler. But when two independents are in a race, from opposite sides of the fence, it's a genuine horse race. It's anybody's ball game.

Anybody wanna salute that?