Age should noty be a consideration in any way. When you open that box you open the door for all the ageists to start in. Like the comment above which says that 70+ year olds should not be working at all.
If you say age should be on the table, then you allow ignoramuses like that to do what they will.
Progressives should be above all that. We are supposed to be better than that, more intelligent, more sensitive, more caring, more inclusive.
If you can't fight on the issues, then pack it up and go home because you havne't got much to fight on. If you resort to calling calling people out because you contend they are too old, then you've got nothing.
And who is to say what's too old? Look at McCain's mother who is in her nineties -- she's quite bright and active.
Everybody's different at every age -- Murtha maybe can't cut it, but others older than he can.
If we go down the road of ctiticizing someone for age then we certainly can bring anything else into the fray that we like.
If the Democratic Party takes this route, then it's not the Democratic Party I grew up loving.
age should not be a consideration at all?? never? if the GOP put up a 75 yr old, a 77 yr old, or an 80 yr old, that should not be an issue?
That's correct. Age should not be an issue.
I don't understand this preoccupation with age in politics -- if a person is willing and able to do a job, they should be permitted to do so. After all, running for office isn't easy and if a person can do it and come through to the point of being nominated, then what's the problem?
Ageism is as ugly as sexism, homophobia, racism, or any other thing.
If you have a problem with a person's age, then vote against them.
But the issues are what you should vote on -- or do you have a different standard for older people than you do for AAs or women or any other group?
