Fred Thompson may well lack the insane lust for power - is this a bad thing?

A commentor had this to say about Fred Thompson:

I'm just not seeing the fire in Fred that Rudy is
blasting. And that's important to me.

How many times have you heard about how the Founders thought we should have citizen legislators? You know the people would turn to one of their own who had earned the respect and admiration of his fellow citizens by his success and the overall exemplary conduct of his life and ask him to serve as governor, congressman, senator or president.

The person chosen would protest that he couldn't afford the pay cut and that the headaches associated with the office were too great but the people would insist, telling their choice that the country had been good to him and now was the time for him to give something back.

The reluctant candidate would reluctantly agree to serve, only because it was his duty, but only for a couple of terms and then would insist on getting back to his real life.

It seems to me that the Thompson phenomena is the first example of that vision of the citizen politician playing out in my lifetime. Hell, in my great grandfather's lifetime. He hasn't been plotting on how he will capture the White House for years like everyone else in the race. He was perfectly content to live out his life as an actor and sometime political commentator until he was corralled by a party that saw no one in the race that they felt they could trust.

We begged him to run and he reluctantly agreed.

Here's the question. Were the Founders wrong?

Personally I don't think so. I tend to think that the greed for power - the lust to rule over your fellow human beings is a form of sickness of the soul. We say that the job of president is so powerful that person who wants it the most is the last person who should be trusted with it.

Are we serious or are we just blowing smoke?