Skip to main content

View Diary: Thank You, But I'll Take the Woman 'Past her sell-by date' (189 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Considering what happened with Reagan, (10+ / 0-)

    I think it's fair to consider her age and health. But, you're absolutely right that there's no excuse for sexist language like that.

    Of course, this means Republicans can't raise the age issue against Clinton without bashing their hero. They'll do it anyway, but they'll look like hypocrites, as usual.

    •  reagan was never all there (15+ / 0-)

      even when he was all there.

      The cold passion for truth hunts in no pack. -Robinson Jeffers

      by Laurence Lewis on Tue Sep 24, 2013 at 03:57:58 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  look at wikipedia (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Wee Mama

        https://en.wikipedia.org/...

        sort by age, is it a good idea to have 65+ year old Presidents?

        •  it wasn't about age (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          voicemail, eleaba, Sharoney

          were any of them any better in their youth?

          The cold passion for truth hunts in no pack. -Robinson Jeffers

          by Laurence Lewis on Tue Sep 24, 2013 at 06:15:13 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  HW Bush was a heck of a guy in his salad days (0+ / 0-)

            youngest pilot in the US Navy in WW2,
            UN Ambassador, CIA director,
            Star in the Simpsons.

            As he got older he fell apart,

            •  hardly (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Lost Left Coaster

              his tenure at the cia hardly does him credit. he also was a vietnam hawk. essentially, he was always a good company man.

              The cold passion for truth hunts in no pack. -Robinson Jeffers

              by Laurence Lewis on Tue Sep 24, 2013 at 08:50:03 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Exactly (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Laurence Lewis

                Older Bush only looks good in comparison to younger Bush.

                "As the madmen play on words, and make us all dance to their song / to the tune of starving millions, to make a better kind of gun..." -- Iron Maiden

                by Lost Left Coaster on Tue Sep 24, 2013 at 09:25:44 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

              •  he was very competent and capable (0+ / 0-)

                when he was 50 something,  when he made it
                into the presidency he was already teetering.

                Dislike his resume, but he did a lot of stuff.

                Rumsfeld and Cheney were that way too.

                Dislike their policies but they had been vigorous
                achievers in their 50's  Sec Defs, White House CoS,
                congressmen, CEO's But when they came around again
                in the Bush-Jr presidency they were cranky old men.

                Rumsfeld screwed up DoD in an era when it desperately
                needed reform. Cheney screwed up everything.

                Bush was too stupid and cowardly to care.

                •  vigorous achievers? (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  gustynpip

                  they were corrupt and amoral and a lot of the stuff they did killed people.

                  The cold passion for truth hunts in no pack. -Robinson Jeffers

                  by Laurence Lewis on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 01:15:54 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  But they were YOUNG. And that seems to be (0+ / 0-)

                    all that matters to patbahn.  Don't think I've ever seen anyone so engrossed in attempts to prove older people are incompetent and useless.

                    •  never said someone over 70 is incompetent (0+ / 0-)

                      or useless

                      but that the data indicates that men over 65 don't
                      perform well as president  and if you look at global
                      leaders you don't see that in men or women.

                      the only female global leader i could find who came to power
                      above the age of 70 was Golda Meir.

                      Lots of people have contributions to make in their 70's but President is a game for people who can stand a tremendous amount of punishment and still absorb information
                      at a tremendous rate, deal with complex new situations
                      and deal with crises nights, weekends and holidays.

                      The US Military as standing rules retires Flag officers
                      at between 62 and 67,  and has benefited from that.
                      The only two flags i remember staying past that age were Grace Hopper and Hyman Rickover, both of whom needed to transition to other roles.

                      Look Supreme Court judge, you can still be very productive long past 70, people like Stevens and Brennan and
                      Douglas were writing as they were going blind and deaf.

                      But President? You have got to be Head of State, Head of Party, Chief Executive and CinC. It's 4 very tough jobs
                      and you end up working very long, very ardous hours.

                      The GOP got themselves into a bind with their aging old men at the Top job, wether it was Ike,Reagan or Bush-1.

                      Do you think the Dems should do the same?

        •  You'll have a hard time (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          eleaba, gustynpip

          making the same arguments about the 5 next most oldest Presidents, as that list includes Ike and Harry.  This effort to toss everyone in any given demographic class into the same bucket is just wrong and beneath discussion.

          I'm from the Elizabeth Warren wing of the Democratic Party

          by voicemail on Tue Sep 24, 2013 at 06:41:33 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  do them by buckets (0+ / 0-)

            65-70  Mostly the mediocre to awful.
            60-65 some good some bad

            and refusing to discuss a rational subject
            is an emotional and unproductive matter.

            Maybe HRC is from long lived people and lives well
            and is productive up to 90,  but, even if it's true,

            The question should be "In a nation of 400 million people we can't find one qualified person not named bush or clinton?"

            •  So argue that you don't like her because (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              voicemail

              she's married to Bill Clinton.  But give up kicking the 69 is ancient bucket.  It's gotten more than boring.  It's even gotten beyond irritating.

              You do realize that your opinion is not given more weight because you post 169 comments making the same point, do you not?  Or maybe you're past 69 and can't understand that kind of complex reasoning anymore.

            •  buckets (0+ / 0-)

              to have even marginally reasonable sample sizes, try
              61-70: some good some bad
              51-60: some good some bad
              41-50: some good some bad

              See a pattern here?

              And, outside of this echo chamber, you'll find some disagreement on Ronnie, right?

              I'm from the Elizabeth Warren wing of the Democratic Party

              by voicemail on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 06:31:05 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (142)
  • Community (70)
  • Civil Rights (26)
  • Memorial Day (26)
  • Elections (26)
  • Environment (26)
  • Culture (25)
  • Media (25)
  • Law (24)
  • Science (23)
  • Trans-Pacific Partnership (22)
  • Labor (21)
  • Josh Duggar (20)
  • Economy (20)
  • Rescued (19)
  • Marriage Equality (18)
  • Education (17)
  • Republicans (17)
  • Ireland (17)
  • Climate Change (17)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site