It’s none to early to speculate about 2008’s presidential election. Despite being two years out it is worthy of analysis, for it is destined to be a dramatic election. The controversial incumbent has used up his term limit; therefore both parties will be starting from scratch with new blood, new vision, and new bombast. It will be a new race unto itself and one that must reflect the changing times.

Many people have already put considerable thought into 2008 and have anointed Hillary Clinton as the Democrat of choice. Many experts and some partisan souls on both sides tend to disagree with this common assumption. For as much as the voters want a change of pace and relish the novelty of a woman candidate, reality requires someone vastly different.

During many periods of America’s past the United States could get by with a president who was in the mold of Hillary Clinton, someone who was a politician by name and a politician by nature. Such a president could focus on the economy, education and health care because global issues of the day were either so stable or of no interest to us that the commander-in-chief responsibilities were not exerted or if they were exerted they were done so in a very minimal fashion. This is the sort of presidency (save the extended Persian Gulf situation of the early 90’s) we had grown accustomed to since the days of the Carter administration.

Those days are long gone - tragically ending on September 11, 2001 - and are not set to return anytime soon. Much like a roller coaster, our nation’s history has featured a series of defensive ups and downs. The downside of the cycle is now in play. We are in a period of war and defense and this will be the case for the long haul.

Accordingly, America will need in the coming years a warrior as our president, someone who will be a true commander-in-chief. Our citizens and our forces desperately need someone with a strong military background who can lead the assault upon - and create the barriers against - the enemies who are many. Simply put, our presidents of the near future need to be men of action, not words, people who understand the value of America’s safety and the fact that Big Stick diplomacy and the exertion of military might are necessary in this day and age.

Our military-based leadership needs are numerous. For starters, we need someone who is ready to deal with our policing action in Iraq. He also needs to be someone ready to utilize hardcore sternness in dealing with the deranged individuals in charge of Iran and North Korea, both of which are nations desirous of nuclear weaponry. The president-to-be should also be someone who understands the defensive tactics necessary to close off our border to the Mexican transients.

Above all, in the regards to the safety of each and every America, we need someone who understands that political correctness, tip-toeing, passiveness and inaction will only destroy America from the outside and from within when facing the maniacal Islamic extremists who do not value any one of our lives.

It’s a war out there. We must be led by someone who understands that simple, basic fact of life.

Hillary Clinton does not fit that bill. Neither do most of the potential candidates whose names are now being thrown around, individuals like Joe Biden, Russ Feingold, and Rudy Giuliani.

But, both parties do posses warriors within their ranks who are great Americans and would be great presidents. Real life war heroes like republican John McCain and democrat Wesley Clark should become the candidates of choice.

Hopefully the leadership of both parties understand that presidential speculation by the press and voters is just that…speculation, nothing more and nothing less. It should not be the driving factor behind the choice for candidates. The stark reality of the violent and threatening times should define who is fit to lead our country. Giving us someone who is true commander-in-chief material would prove to be the best thing for America if not the world.