Ok - admittedly, that's a loaded question. There is plenty wrong with Fred Thompson from my perspective.
Follow me into the wild and wooly extended for a bit more on good ole Freddie T.
I have an abiding fear of Fred Thompson as a Republican candidate. Outside of any issue-orientation, I worry that YET AGAIN the Republicans will put up a comfortable, familiar regular-guy actor type and Americans, defying all logic, will totally miss the fact that he's an absolute nightmare as a politician.
I did a little digging to find out what, exactly, Freddie stand for (via OnTheIssues.org):
On Abortion
- Roe v. Wade was bad law and bad science. (Jun 2007)
- Appoint strict constructionist judges. (Jun 2007)
- Has never been pro-choice despite 1994 news reports. (Jun 2007)
- Voted YES on maintaining ban on Military Base Abortions. (Jun 2000)
- Voted YES on banning partial birth abortions. (Oct 1999)
- Voted YES on banning human cloning. (Feb 1998)
On the Budget & Economy
- Voted YES on prioritizing national debt reduction below tax cuts. (Apr 2000)
- Voted NO on 1998 GOP budget. (May 1997)
- Voted YES on Balanced-budget constitutional amendment. (Mar 1997)
On Civil Rights
- Voted NO on adding sexual orientation to definition of hate crimes. (Jun 2002)
- Voted NO on loosening restrictions on cell phone wiretapping. (Oct 2001)
- Voted NO on expanding hate crimes to include sexual orientation. (Jun 2000)
- Voted NO on setting aside 10% of highway funds for minorities & women. (Mar 1998)
- Voted NO on ending special funding for minority & women-owned business. (Oct 1997)
- Voted YES on prohibiting same-sex marriage. (Sep 1996)
- Voted NO on prohibiting job discrimination by sexual orientation. (Sep 1996)
- Voted YES on Amendment to prohibit flag burning. (Dec 1995)
- Voted NO on banning affirmative action hiring with federal funds. (Jul 1995)
On Energy & Oil
- Solar system is warming, not earth. (Apr 2007)
- Voted YES on drilling ANWR on national security grounds. (Apr 2002)
- Voted YES on terminating CAFE standards within 15 months. (Mar 2002)
- Voted YES on preserving budget for ANWR oil drilling. (Apr 2000)
- Voted NO on ending discussion of CAFE fuel efficiency standards. (Sep 1999)
- Voted YES on defunding renewable and solar energy. (Jun 1999)
- Voted YES on approving a nuclear waste repository. (Apr 1997)
On Health Care
- Voted NO on allowing reimportation of Rx drugs from Canada. (Jul 2002)
- Voted NO on allowing patients to sue HMOs & collect punitive damages. (Jun 2001)
- Voted YES on funding GOP version of Medicare prescription drug benefit. (Apr 2001)
- Voted NO on including prescription drugs under Medicare. (Jun 2000)
- Voted YES on limiting self-employment health deduction. (Jul 1999)
- Voted NO on increasing tobacco restrictions. (Jun 1998)
- Voted YES on Medicare means-testing. (Jun 1997)
- Voted NO on medical savings acounts. (Apr 1996)
My emphasis added. There's much, more more at the link provided - I merely picked out some representative items.
So. In reviewing all of this, I've learned that Fred will absolutely seek to overturn Roe v. Wade, returning women and their rights to near dark-age status. I've learned that in some weird universe where economics exists in an Escher-like state of confusion, he desires tax cuts over reduction of the national debt BUT he's for a balanced budget (pardon me while my head explodes). He definitely doesn't think that a person's sexual orientation should protect them from violent abuse, and while he gives lip-service to protecting the rights of women and minorities, he either actively works against that (see 'abortion') and/or he talks it up and then doesn't back it up with requisite funding. I've learned, remarkably, that it's the solar system and NOT Earth that is warming, thereby absolving me of any personal responsibility to protect the environment and the climate (anyone want to buy a hybrid?). I've learned that he believes HMOs and health insurance companies and their executives are salt-of-the-earth types and thereby beyond reproach. Oh - and he's totally for smoking.
So this has been instructive. He's worse than the other ReFundLicans (you can parse that as either "fundie" or more literally, as "refund" depending on what floats your boat) in that he is automatically more palatable than, say, Huckabee or Brownback if for no other reason than he comes into Joe America's living room on a regular basis and makes them feel all warm and fuzzy.
BUT - I've got the Fred Thompson MAGIC BULLET. If, defying all reason or sense of history and consequences, Americans are still so unblievably shallow that they will simply blindly vote for someone basic on his regular-guyness or his familiarity or his LOOKS, I proffer THIS as a rebuttal to the alleged candidacy of Fred Thompson for President, 2008:
He looks AWFUL. I know this is trite - there's plenty of meat in the issues where Freddie is concerned. But he looks old and sick and that, above anything else, will spell his political demise. I hope.
BIG NOTE: I watched CNN yesterday and was immediately struck by how sick and bad Thompson looks. I was out on the internets today looking for a picture I could use and found that Crooks and Liars were of a like mind with their post Fred Thompson...He looks terrible..Oh, and he may get in when he gets in.... They had the picture I sought, so I wrote John Amato and he graciously allowed me to use the picture above to ensure I was within fair use guidelines.
If you follow the article link, C&L has video of the entire disgusting interview on CNN from yesterday's Situation Room. They also have a lot of other great Fred Thompson content at the following link. Thanks John!