The most uninteresting part of any magazine is the editorial section. Most editors spend their 500 words pleading with the subscriber to visit page so-and-so and not forget to check out the special section of the month. It’s as though they believe their readers only purchase the magazine just to hang it on the wall.

For most magazines I skip the regurgitation that stop this close of plagiarism of the rest of the magazine; but not Forbes Magazine and their Editor-In-Chief, Steve Forbes. Unlike most editors who share half of their page with a Cialis ad, Forbes gets two full pages to comment on things that happen outside the magazine.

In the April 23rd issue, he comes out guns blazing for none other than Rudy Giuliani. Of course in the months leading to the campaign he may profile other Presidential candidates, but after starting his article with, “Rudy Giuliani would make a superb President,” it makes it difficult to stump for anyone else.

After a token remark of the elephant in the room, Giuliani’s appalling lack of social conservatism, Forbes proceeds to list his economic and governmental successes. And there are many: he cut the welfare rolls in New York City by 60%, he reduced the crime rate by two-thirds, he cut 23 taxes, and reduced government spending to nearly half the growth of the city economy.

There are many reasons to vote for Giuliani. His practical, no-nonsense approach to government has rightly given him comparisons to Ronald Reagan. Yet when you put Giuliani up to every Conservative’s gold standard, something is lacking. I guess here is where I am supposed to explain in laborious detail what that thing is.

But I have no idea.

All I can say is if it comes to where I must vote for Rudy, it will be out of necessity and not desire.

The next big player in the field is Senator John McCain. But before I decide who John McCain is, he must figure out for himself and cease the incessant waffling. Besides, I cannot abide to vote for the author of the socialistic McCain-Feingold bill.

Whatever the successes and failures of the two front-runners are, neither can carry their Bibles convincingly enough on Sunday for the Religious Right’s satisfaction.

In desperation, the evangelicals have tentatively turned to Governor Mitt Romney. I did not know whom Mitt Romney was when I first heard of him in an NPR interview several months ago. Unfortunately, I still don’t know who he is.

After experiencing his stump speech, all I can say is it resembled a frozen pizza. Enjoy it but don’t examine the nutritional content too closely.

Like McCain and Giuliani, Romney shares the fault of not being all things to all men. Americans want their candidates to be Religious, but not to excess; knowledgeable, but not brainiacs; willing to defend our borders, but not to Dr. Strangelove proportions. Enough vice to be human, enough morality to be trusted, enough strong leadership to follow, and enough pathos to fill our gullible preconceived notion of the perfect candidate.

That leaves us with one more person: Fred Thompson. As Reason Magazine put it, “Thompson’s C.V. reads like the resumes of two or three different people mashed together in a filing accident.”

After years as assistant U.S. attorney, serving in the Senate, and finally acting in Law and Order, Thompson has been there and done that — and then some.

It’s too early to tell who Thompson really is and if he is the candidate the Country needs. Conservatives are already agog at the idea that an actor could be president once again as if being an actor was the magic element that made Reagan great.

Whatever and whoever Thompson is, his current profession should not play any role in the voter’s decision of his ability to lead. Those wishing for Reagan the Second should look for someone who carries Reagan’s beliefs and not necessarily his vocation.

But it is too early to tell for Thompson. He may be merely enjoying the grandeur of it all. There’s no sense in killing free and mostly positive publicity prematurely.

If he is truly running, I imagine he will declare as late as possible. When Conservatives are about as sick as they can be of Rudy’s pathetic social stance and McCain’s pandering, Thompson will ride in much like the Sheriff in High Noon and stand between the noodle spines (McCain) and the bad guys in black (Giuliani).

In the movie, Gregory Peck ended up getting the corpses of the gunslingers, the adulation of the town, and the girl — all by about 12:20.

It worked out for Peck, maybe it will work for Thompson too.