Ageism
If you want my body and you think I'm sexy Come on, sugar, let me know
--Do You Think I'm Sexy, Rod Stewart
Don't move that limbo bar
You'll be a limbo star
How low can you go?
--Limbo Rock, Chubby Checker
________________
Y'know, I don't know if it's just me, but the digs at McCain's age are rather pathetic.
Today's WaPo offered this inane non-news item: "Paris Hilton Issues Tart Rebuttal to McCain Ad." Really? Guaranteed that bit of wit didn't issue forth from Ms. Hilton herself. Should this be taking up a speck of respectable newspaper space, in the "Political" section? This mediocre "celebrity" otherwise consigned to People Magazine on her best day says:
Today's WaPo offered this inane non-news item: "Paris Hilton Issues Tart Rebuttal to McCain Ad." Really? Guaranteed that bit of wit didn't issue forth from Ms. Hilton herself. Should this be taking up a speck of respectable newspaper space, in the "Political" section? This mediocre "celebrity" otherwise consigned to People Magazine on her best day says:
This is amusing? This is virulent ageism. Does the reverse fly? The contrapositive of "old white guy" is Obama as "young black buck" for his 48 years. How does that sound to you? Does it matter? We don't consult actuarial tables to determine who is the mostly likely to die when we consider our choice for president, do we?
"But then that wrinkly, white-haired guy used me in his campaign ad, which I guess means I'm running for president. So thanks for the endorsement white-haired dude."
"An announcer calls him 'the oldest celebrity in the world, like super-old, old enough to remember when dancing was a sin and beer was served in a bucket,' and asks, 'but is he ready to lead?' Hilton's spoof also intersperses images of McCain and Yoda from Star Wars and the cast of television's 'The Golden Girls.'
Some tedious academic in gender and race studies will offer one day that this was a brilliant challenge to the Mandingo fantasy, earning a publication credit and another year on staff in the process. Really, it just sucks.
The liberal sites are running riot with shtick about "things older than McCain," as though this were respectable or relevant. It is mean and ugly and marginalizing, not witty and not winning. Do any of the people writing this and presumably getting a big har-har out of it realize they too are old white men and women?
Would this "old white guy" line fly any better coming out of a young black guy's mouth? How about an older black guy? How about a middle-aged Muslim? Do you see how irrelevant, and perhaps even self-loathing, the line is?
As if issues do not matter. I guess since little seems to separate these two candidates, style has to suffice in the stead of issues.
If liberals can't offer better than this, I am embarrassed to be in their camp.
Labels: ageism, mccain attacked for age, obama and paris, paris hilton as newsworthy
posted by Lisa at 4:41 PM
34 Comments:
The deal is that skin color doesn't affect intelligence, but age definitely does. The older you get, the worse your memory gets, the slower your thinking gets, the more sluggish your neurons fire. There are people who are still bright as a button at age 90, but those are generally people who were super bright at age 25, and there is no indication that John McCain was ever anything other than near the bottom of his class intelligence-wise. Asking the question "is John McCain's age affecting his thinking?" is not "ageism", it is a reflection of the reality of aging.
Furthermore, old people die. They die at a rate much faster than that of younger people. People's immune systems start going downhill at age 50, and practically collapse after age 70. And an old person dying in office could cause serious disruption in the U.S. government due to the various tests for incapacitation in the Constitution being vague and unclear. When, exactly, does the Vice President take over for a dying President? What if the President is in the ICU, not expected to make it because he has untreatable bone cancer, but is still cogent enough to respond to aides bringing him requests for action? How do we decide? Who decides? Once again, John McCain's age and health disabilities are an issue that directly affects his ability to govern, and thus it isn't "ageism" to consider them, it's simple reality.
Anything that affects a person's ability to govern should be on the table as an issue in this election. Obama's skin color doesn't affect his ability to perform the duties of President. His age, maybe -- but remember, John McCain has already brought up the issue of Obama's age ("inexperienced" is short-hand for "he's young"). But his skin color, no. No more than John McCain's skin color has any effect on his ability to govern. But John McCain's age does have an effect on his ability to govern, because it affects his mental acuity and his ability to physically survive long enough to perform his Presidential duties for the full term of his office. John McCain would be the oldest President *ever* elected to a first term as President if elected, and Ronald Reagan was only a year older when elected to his *second* term. What if McCain gets Alzheimer's the way Reagan did? How do we judge when a President with Alzheimer's is no longer capable of performing the duties of President?
Those are worthwhile questions, and we should not refuse to ask them simply because of misguided "political correctness". Anything that affects a potential President's ability to perform the duties of the Presidency -- anything -- should be fair game for questioning. And Obama and McCain's age is definitely one of those things.
- Badtux the Politically Incorrect Penguin
BT,
You can ask anything. The digs I'm referring to are not legitimate considerations of the issues you suggest. And McCain is not 90.
Far as being a sharp pencil, I don't recall anyone asking George Bush to undergo testing for mental fitness, or emotional fitness.
Not all presidents will be Rhodes scholars like Clinton, or have 180 I.Q.'s like Carter.
Mental acuity in the average elderly person decreases very little, though response time may lengthen slightly (2% per year past 62-65). I am not referring to Alzheimers patients, which as we all know is a disease which may strike at any time from middle age on, and we don't have too many adolescent presidents (chronologically speaking).
I'm with Badtux here, Lisa. And I really enjoyed the Paris Hilton video. Based on news reports I've seen, the Hilton family—long time Republicans—is pissed about the "celebrity" commercial, and I thought Paris gave far more than she got.
Badtux has already made the points I intended to make. McCain's age and mental acuity are absolutely legitimate areas of concern. We've already seen some reports of decline, so you bet I'm concerned. I was working for and around the government during Reagan's second term, and he did in fact begin manifesting signs of Alzheimers, something people really only understood later, when he totally fell off the cliff.
You're equating "ageism" with racism and sexism. Which may be OK when you're talking about the still-productive 50 or 60-year old who's denied a job. But we're talking about a whole different job here. "Leader of the free world," etc., call it what you want, but the fact is the person who occupies that job is the most important person in the world. Literally millions of lives can hang on what he does or doesn't do.
As Badtux points out, Obama is smarter than McCain now; although McCain certainly was and may still be in the top quartile in intelligence, Obama is smarter. Smarts are important. I want a smart person as president. I also want a smart person at the top of his game, not someone on the downhill, which is where McCain is.
I think of myself, still much younger than McCain, but I know some of it's gone. I'm not as quick, I am more forgetful and my golf game has deteriorated. The latter is intended to demonstrate that we lose certain things, both mental and physical, as we age. I personally think McCain is too old to be president.
So, given the course we're on, what's next? Smartism? Are we going to penalize people because they're too smart? Too quick? Too aware? Oops! We already do, especially in politics. How else would George Bush have ever been elected? Are we going to do it again with McCain and Obama? ISTM your "ageism" post kind of favors continuation of that.
My advice is to let McCain worry about himself. Let him worry about defending himself. He doesn't deserve a free ride because "you know, we have to understand he's an old guy, and he needs our help."
Publius,
I don't argue for anyone. I argue against irrelevant low-blows.
We don't elect eggheads in America, b/c that is not how Americans see themselves. What we can hope for is that the electorate votes for the candidate who offers the most functional platform for the nation.
The president doesn't need to be brilliant. He needs to have compassion and clarity, two qualities which do not necessarily equate to I.Q.
I'm sorry your golf game is deteriorating somewhat, but that speaks to reduction in your reaction time, and not your intelligence. I believe the president will not be called upon to make a decision in minutes, and he or she will have time to consult and deliberate.
We can scrap the red-button, Strangelovian scenarios.
BT,
Sorry--but what does this mean? --
"Furthermore, old people die. They die at a rate much faster than that of younger people. People's immune systems start going downhill at age 50, and practically collapse after age 70. And an old person dying in office could cause serious disruption in the U.S. government due to the various tests for incapacitation in the Constitution being vague and unclear."
--Everyone dies; immune systems don't "collapse" after age 70; and the Constitution has clear rules of succession.
Your worries are unfounded.
The CDC doesn't agree with you about illness and aging. There's a *reason* why the CDC recommends flu shots for everybody over age 50 -- the immune system starts going downhill. Someone who is 72 years old becomes physically ill much easier than someone who is 48 years old, and recovers from his illness much more slowly.
The Constitution's rules of succession are *not* clear about when a President is incapacitated. If a President is dying of a degenerative disease such as Alzheimer's, when does he become incapacitated? If a President is dying a long and painful death from cancer, at what point does he become incapacitated? Is it at the point he is diagnosed? Is it at the point where he starts needing a Depends because he can no longer reliably make it to the potty when he has to go? Is it at the point where he is in the hospital ICU with only hours to live? Obviously it's somewhere inbetween there, but where? The Constitution is silent on that, meaning it would be a major Constitutional crisis if the situation arose.
Furthermore, you should look at the mortality charts before you whine that "my fears are overblown". Yes, everybody dies. But most people who die are age 70 and above. At around age 50, the mortality rate bumps up slightly from what it was earlier. It bumps up another notch as you head to age 60, and above age 70 it starts going up rapidly. At age 80 the curve becomes very steep, mortality rates shoot up, until by age 90 a majority of people have died, and by age 100 pretty much everybody is dead. My point is that a President dying in office is a disruptive event and the possibility of such disruption certainly should be factored in to anybody's decision.
Regarding mental alertness: My grandmother was quite mentally alert at age 72. She was active in her church and with her quilting club, and loved to work in her garden. By age 76 she was starting to be forgetful and mumble a lot and I had to help her with a lot of her affairs. John McCain will be 76 years old at the end of his first term of office if elected President. Onset of a serious deterioration of mental alertness differs from person to person, but approximately 10% of people over age 70 have symptoms of dementia according to the American Journal of Neuroradiology, and the rate goes up as you age until, if you reach age 90, you have an 80% chance of having at least moderate symptoms of cognitive impairment. John McCain is 72 years old. The question is whether his current stumbles and mis-speakings indicate someone who is part of that 10% or will shortly be part of that 10%. In four years, John McCain will be 76 years old. By that age, according to the Leipzig Longitudinal Study of the Aged, on average 18% of people have at least mild cognitive impairment.
If this were any job other than President, I would say it wasn't a big deal. If your office worker suddenly can't remember names, you can re-assign him to tasks or positions where he doesn't have to remember names, and so forth. If he gets ill and no longer can come in to the office to work, you just put him on long-term disability leave and hire another office worker to take his place. But you can't reassign a President to tasks other than being President. Indeed, as Preznit Dubya points out repeatedly, once you done been electorated you don't have to give a hoot at all about what your employers (the people of the United States) think about your performance. Ronald Reagan was suffering the early symptoms of Alzheimer's Disease during the last few years of his second term in office, and we ended up with the nation being run by Nancy Reagan and his top advisors -- not by anybody that we elected. And remember, Reagan was only one year older when re-elected in 1984 than John McCain is now...
-Badtux the Aging Penguin
BT,
A weakening immune system is different from one that "shuts down."
"My point is that a President dying in office is a disruptive event and the possibility of such disruption certainly should be factored in to anybody's decision"
--No doubt disruptive, but our Republic has weathered 8 such events; a little less than one of 5 presidents dies in office. (4 assassinations; 4 natural causes.)
I think this consideration should be low on the list of concerns, and certainly not be considered at the butt end of a joke line.
O.K., Lisa, enough. We're talking past each other. I'm just along for the ride here, with Badtux making some incredibly important points, esp. the one concerning succession. The Constitution is imperfect and this is a splendid example. The medical points aren't bad, either. He's done his homework; I wish you'd do a little more research into the topic.
Your mind is made up; so is mine. I won't vote for McCain because he is just too old for this most demanding job. Of course, that's by no means the ONLY reason why I won't vote for him.
Guess I'm just an ageist.
Publius,
By no means am I arguing for McCain; Just a civil and reasoned contemplation of the candidates. We keep a non-affiliated stance here, and shill for no one.
BT is certainly well-informed, and does the very thing I would hope for from all Americans.
And now for sad truths
http://sendables.jibjab.com/sendables/1191/time_for_some_campaignin#/teaser/1191
jo6pac
Regarding low blows, I'll just point out that John McCain's surrogates brought age into it first, when they blasted Obama as "inexperienced" (i.e., young). McCain's commercial basically called Obama a young bimbo airhead. Paris Hilton responded in kind. A not-serious comparison (like comparing Obama with Britney Spears) that misappropriates the image of someone like Paris Hilton deserves exactly the response it got -- a similar low blow in return from the person whose image was misappropriated.
My concerns about McCain's age have nothing to do with low blows, and everything to do with concerns about whether his age affects his ability to perform the duties of the Presidency. What you perceive as "low blows" are people expressing those concerns in politically incorrect manner, but the concerns are real, and should be considered by any voter going to the polls this falls.
- Badtux the Aging Penguin
I don't give a shit how old someone is; what I care about is if they still function. McCain makes so many stupid assed comments as to make me think he is following his leader St. Ronnie's path into the self-slipper-slapping years. As for Paris Hilton not writing her own stuff...you surely don't think McCain writes his either, do you?
yeah i think duh?
Another angle to this is that the Republicans play hardball and will stoop to just about anything to win elections while the democrats stand by dithering and thinking they are making points by staying "above it." Look what happened to John Kerry. A decorated combat veteran who fought the enemy face-to-face ended up being viewed as an effete elitist snob, while Georgie Boy loomed as a powerful warrior god.
Time to take the gloves off. Too much is at stake.
rick98,
The swift-boating of Kerry was an abomination; the willingness of Americans to fall for it was an abomination.
Hardball, yes, but there is something nauseating about this particular exchange, AND the resultant liberal feeding frenzy.
McCain's campaign suggests Obama is a celebrity, and of course, he is. (Even the WaPo policed their own pages the other day, and discovered something like a 20-80 disparity in the images of Obama vs. McCain.)
I don't think it can be denied that the same thing occurred with Hillary Clinton. So to me, this image disparity can not be explained by racial or gender bias, but age bias. (Hillary was also dismissed as a frumpy older middle-aged woman.)
We live in a cult of youth, and every vanity-based product attests to this fact. In poetry or the arts, one can understand. But in the sphere of work or any other platform where parity is desired, ageism is corrosive.
The logical opposite of McCain's commercial is that McCain is not being feted as a celebrity because he is old and white. That happens to be true, and it is not funny.
I have read people jest about McCain's not being able to lift his hands above his head. This disability is the result of his abuse during his POW days. It is like making fun of Bob Dole for being wooden, who also could not move his arm as a result of war wounds. This is unacceptable.
It is this culture of youth dismissing the old man which I find so unpalatable. I am not "with the republicans" nor "anti-democrat." I am expressing my disgust with a cultural phenomenon.
to everyone, i agree with publius that most talk goes past b/c EVERYBODY has made up their minds and fit the facts to support their decision. just like the intel in the rush to war.
the exception never proves the rule but personally i think Carter is still functioning way above bush. Clintons iq is irrelevant imho b/c he lacks good sense in personal decisions. this over flows to professional ones also.
As for Obama and Mc Cain i see them BOTH as the problem and not the solution. I write to oppose the war and collateral associated stupidity _ and both enable the war in various ways.Neither are realistic in addressing the real issues facing America.None of the isms discussed are death dealers to us but the economy and war are. Both of these candidates are not reflective of whats best in America.
Let's not forget the real issues and why we are here. jim
Of course it doesn't matter. The point I think you're missing is that this is NOT from the Dems! It's from Paris Hilton for McCain using her image the way he did. And I think she did great to do it. Don't take it so seriously. By the way don't forget that the Hiltons are long time Republican supporters so if you have to look at this politically then it's the Republicans attacking each other.
terrible,
Like I say, it is not the commercial per se that troubles me, but rather the fanatical, cruel and unthinking bandwagon mentality of the liberals out there who just devour what should be a tit-for-tat and make of it something ghoulish in their depth of rancor.
I've read liberals say that want McCain to die already; he's on death's door, and other such things. This is disgusting behavior and in no way addresses the man's fitness or lack thereof.
It is nothing I want to be a part of, it is loathsome, yet most of my liberal fellows in this blog space carry on the blood attack. It is as bad as any Swift-boating.
And I would add, what hypocrisy for liberals to be engaging in such morbid ill-wishes when they themselves cried early on how foul it would be if anyone assassinated their hoped-for savor, Obama.
Can the liberals see that they are hypocrites, too? You cannot wish the death of one and call it game, while crying foul any attack on your own candidate.
The liberals who dance with glee over the "old white guy" image are no better than an Ann Coulter. The goal is not to be as disgusting as your opponent, but to rise above him, at least among yourselves.
Terrible.
And i reckon the Swift Boat attacks didn't come from the bush campaign.IMHO it's all orchestrated with in the respective campaigns- we call it plausible denial jim
My final words on this one. And I'm not going to address the "ageism," other than peripherally.
First, I suspect Paris Hilton was just plain pissed off. She's got the resources and access to do something about it, and she did. I'm not so sure there is a deeper meaning in what she did.
Now, for those who take glee in this particular line of attack. I think a lot of them would say, "we're tired of being punching bags for what's turned out to be a bunch of gangsters. Getting these people out of power is far more important than is observing the niceties that we all wish were the norm."
ISTM that a lot of liberals view this election as a critical time in American history; they are therefore prepared to do whatever it takes to defeat McCain. I'd also note that this is merely taking a page from the Republican Party's book, which has not to my knowledge denied any tactic, no matter how scurrilous and vile. The Republic Party epitomizes the famous Al Davis quote, "Just win, baby," and many Democrats are tired of being "nice," especially with the stakes so high this cycle.
I was and still am pissed about the Swiftboat deal. And I'm still upset with Kerry for the way he handled it. What did Kerry's "refusal to dignify" the attacks gain him? More importantly, what did it gain the nation? Four more years of criminal activity, that's what Kerry's above-the-fray stance gained all of us. And I don't agree that politicians in the pay of the United States weren't involved in the swiftboating.
IMO, this is why many otherwise fair-minded and cool individuals aren't overly indignant about what some may view as unfair attacks based on age. This is doubly true because I think there's a compelling body of evidence to support concern about age.
Let's also note that it's not the Obama campaign that came up with the Hilton video. Conversely, it IS the McCain campaign that associated Obama with airheaded starlets. It IS the McCain campaign that's made a commercial that some think likens Obama to the Antichrist. And it IS the McCain campaign that's peddling every lie it can think of about Obama.
I don't think McCain has a lot to complain about. OTOH, I think he's got a great deal to be ashamed about.
Umm, on the subject of the P. hilton advert:Its funny that you dont see the sexist element in McCains original advert, Lisa. He put mr. Obama in a category with two "dumb blondes", Britney and Paris. Not exactly Susan Sarandon or George Clooney imagewise. Well, one of them had the balls and the brains to hit him back for using her name as a symbol for stupidity. The passage where she lays out her energy plan is brilliant, I think. I would have thought you would find it cool for a sister to kick back at classic patriarchic belittling of females into objects..?
And concerning age, a guy who doesnt know how to use a computer for more than e-mail.. Well, in todays informationage that is a serious handicap. (But its nice that he wants to defend Chekoslovakia, I guess they will really appreciate it in Bratislava and Prague..;-))
fnord,
No doubt McCain's ad was sexist. He was suggesting Obama is as frivolous as the tabloid celebrities.
Ms. Hilton is a poster child for Obama campaign, guarantee it.
Note there's been no official renouncing of Paris's message from the Obama campaign, as there was with Ludacris's.
I would find it cool for a righteous sister to kick back at patriarchy's "belittling of females into objects," but Paris grovels at that door every day of her life, so I don't consider her a sister.
To me, there is something sinister and not on par between calling someone a celebrity who gains more newspaper print, and calling one a dottering old man who is not.
The first is frivolous but to my mind accurate. A read through the European press shows they suspect Obama is a celebrity, as well.
Calling McCain a foolish white-haired old men sets you all up for defeat, anyone over a certain magical age. It is not something to revel in, and the liberal's have been having a feeding frenzy over it. It is vicious, and therefore, fails as satire and may backfire as it leaves a bad taste in the mouth.
Errr,
I think something is missing in this discussion. Paris Hilton's mom Kathy and dad Richard each donated the $2300 max to the McCain campaign, only to have her daughter dissed nationally. They should accept this on bended knee Why, exactly?
I think the Revenge add came from Paris' parents for Kathy had talked to the press denouncing the McCain add. McCain married into money, so "Old money" might not be too respectful of his type. McCain pisses off a lot of famous legacy repubs: Nancy Reagan positively loathes the ground he walks on for his having shitcanned his first wife in the cavalier fashion that he did. The Reagans befriended the McCains upon his return from the Hanoi Hilton...there's hilton again....that's why he did it. The Goldwater family do not think too highly of him either, as he has exposed his true self to Arizonans for many years.
On the ageism factor - from a Wash Post ABC poll last spring:
"More than a quarter of those polled said they are less inclined to support McCain because he would be the oldest person ever to become president. The percentage discouraged by McCain's age is more than double that of people who would be less enthusiastic about supporting Obama because he is African American or Clinton because she is a woman."
If a lot of potential voters think it is a factor in a presidential pick, I say attack the weakness with everything you've got.
fasteddiez,
$2,300 is a crumb from the Hilton's table. Rather than revenge, I'd say Paris's ad was a well-calculated effort to exquisitely poise her exceedingly minimal talents before the public eye. This was Paris's 15 minutes.
"Nancy Reagan positively loathes the ground [McCain] walks on for his having shitcanned his first wife in the cavalier fashion that he did"
Odd coming from Nancy, considering Mr. Reagan gave the big heave-ho to her predecessor, Jane Wyman.
Looking at McCain's history, one sees the marriage was rocky before the first wife's accident, and that McCain did provide for her needs in perpetuity. His first wife has no complaints against him, and rather than looking for conspiracy theory, maybe she just has no complaints against him.
One needn't say he is a saint to say he is no devil. We need to get away from such simplistic Manichaean thinking in the U.S.
My only point is, gleefully and viciously attacking age (in the liberal community) seems on a different level than McCain's comparison of Obama to superstar (which he is, or at least he has been.)
To say someone is an empty suit, a celebrity, allows for a retort to prove the allegation is wrong.
To accuse someone of being old and therefore superannuated allows for no vindication. You are your age, and no matter how many nip and tucks you undergo, you cannot counter that.
If people take the candidate's total fitness into consideration, that is all fine and well. But to see fellow liberal thinkers jumping on Paris's self-promotion like hyenas, calling for McCain's dismissal on the basis of his age, is unsavory at best.
We have enough -isms in this country; we don't need to add to them. Especially those that do grievous harm to average individuals trying to hold onto their jobs and retirements.
My God, Lisa. You're a McCain fan! Why else would you beat this horse to death? Who woulda thunk it?
The man shows the effects of too much booze and too many years every time he opens his mouth. If nothing else, we should consider the impact on the nation of a major stroke, which given his age and constricted blood vessels, along with his famous temper, is not at all unlikely.
Of course, his age and health are issues. What do you want, a reprise of Woodrow Wilson, with Edith and the shadowy Col House running the nation?
Oh, you're a meanie, Publius! I know about you military men and chain-yanking!
But think of it: instead of Edith, Cindy -- a beer heiress running the country. And certainly the loveliest First lady since Jackie K. Not too shabby, eh?
Think of the initiatives she might establish: biergartens in every town square, concomitant Oktoberfests and oompah bands. It could be very good for Ger.-American relations after all George Bush's grabby hands with the uber-rigid Ms. Merkel.
umm, Lisa, are we allowed to point out that MC Cains batshit crazy preacher is way more crazy than Obamas? Or is that religious persecution? ;-) I mean, Hagee thinks invading Iran is written in the book of Esther...
http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?articleId=11541
Maybe I am an ageist, but I am not so pleased at having an apocalyptic christian with five to ten left of his life in charge of the US Air Force (wich is already infiltrated enough by those loonies already)... Facing the grim reaper in the mirror every day can lead to morbidity and irrational impulses vis a vis The Lord...
fnord,
How do you calibrate levels of "craziness" when it comes to religion?! It's all crazy and divisive and apocalyptic. Remember, they are all based on their particular messiah having arrived on the 5:10.
"Facing the grim reaper in the mirror every day can lead to morbidity and irrational impulses. . ."
Is this understanding the thing to which you ascribe George Bush's morbid and irrational behavior? In truth, we're all facing the grim reaper from the time we're born. To paraphrase The Boss, we're born to die.
I s'pose it could be argued just as convincingly that a person who faces his own mortality would treat life as a more precious commodity. To my mind, it is younger and less self-aware people who behave in a more profligate and reckless manner.
Lisa: Normally I would agree with you. Age brings a certain sense of wisdom.Its the combo of apocalyptic christianity and old age I am not so happy about. See the candidates position on georgia, McCain is all for conflict with russia and wants to kick Europes #1 energy provider out of the G8, wich is completely unrealistic. He is campaigning on neocon ideas wich are no longer doable after the last 8 years.The man is not solidly planted in this world. The passing of the US as the only superpower has passed him by, he still thinks like a bulldog. And a christian apocalyptic bulldog at that.
But lady, this question is easy to answer: "How do you calibrate levels of "craziness" when it comes to religion?!" When youre ready to kill in the name of your religion, then youre over the line. Theres a huge difference between bin Laden and the Sufi masters, wouldnt you say? So with Obama and Mc Cain.
Go with Zoroaster!
fnord,
Two things:
[1] Comments have really gone stray from the purpose of my post, which was not to critique either McCain's nor Parez's (Obama's) ad, but merely to observe the rabid reaction in the liberal community to the Paris ad.
It was this rabid reaction which I was opposing. Regardless of whether one finds the ads to be appropriate tit-for-tat, whether one believes the Democratic party is behind Paris's ad, or whether one thinks age is a valid concern -- those were not my concerns.
My point was simply that the vicious liberal blood lust behind attacking McCain as "an old white guy" and "is there anything older than McCain," etc., just struck me as gross. It was a frightening dingo dog attack, much worse than the conservatives' comparison of Obama to celebrities. The anger and hatred in the liberal attacks just totally shocked and alienated me. I cannot get on board with any of that.
I shouldn't say "shock," since I know liberals can be every bit as unthinking and herd mentality as the conservatives. There is nothing that makes a liberal thinker per se a clear or independent thinker.
[2] You say, "When you're ready to kill in the name of your religion, then you're over the line."
Christians do that, so both candidates fail that test.
Sufism, Zoroastrianism and Bahá’í may be gentle faiths, but they all bow to a messiah. To me, therein lies the danger of religion -- that construction of having chosen rightly, and needing someone to show you the way.
If you have a spiritual leader, then those who do not subscribe are lost at best; heathens at worst, and subject to pity or persecution.
I just read this, which is what I was getting at:
"Maybe Obama is a celebrity, but so what? Arnold Schwarzenegger, Jesse Venture, Bill Bradley and Ronald Reagan were all celebrities. (For a longer list of celebrities turned politicians, see here.)"
from http://www.elvinlim.com/
In other words, McCain's ad just isn't that big of a slam. However, the liberal goose-steppers did come on with some vicious attacks which were out of all proportion, and I found them embarrassing.
First time I ever heard of Paris Hilton called a "liberal goose-stepper" :-).
- Badtux the Snarky Penguin
No, no, NO, Badtux -- she's not smart enough even to find the end of the line. Her pretty little mind and body is being expropriated by the geese.
Post a Comment
<< Home