Hillary Clinton, who'll turn 67 next month, shouldn't run for president because she is too old to serve in the White House, James C. Moore argues in a commentary published on CNN.com.
"Clinton would be 69 when she raised her right hand for the oath of office," Moore writes. "She would be the second-oldest person to become president - younger than Ronald Reagan by several months."
Clinton would be 77 at the end of a second term if she were elected in 2016 and reelected in 2020. Ronald Reagan was almost 78 when he finished his presidency, and some people - Moore included - believe that his Alzheimer's disease was already exacting a toll on him.
"This is not ageism," Moore writes. "An accumulation of years defines our range of capabilities, physically and intellectually, and the Clintons as well as the nation need to confront the question of whether a person in their mid-70s is the best to serve as president. The obvious answer is no."
The answer may not be as obvious as Moore thinks, as Sen. John McCain of Arizona was 72 when he ran for president as the GOP's nominee (against Barack Obama) in 2008.
Moore, who will turn 62 in October, argues that "[b]aby boomers need to release their arthritic fingers from the torch of leadership and pass it off to another generation."
Surely he's not thinking that applies to TV commentators, too.
Photo: Frank Plitt via Wikipedia
Also of Interest
- Want a Head Start on Getting New Health Insurance?
- Would the States' New Healthcare Ads Convince You to Enroll?
- Questions about the Affordable Care Act? Get your answers here.
- Join AARP: Savings, resources and news for your well-being
See the AARP home page for deals, savings tips, trivia and more