5 5

Ok... I'm 70 years . And I think this is a problem. While "Elder" advisors are good to have around, the LEADER needs to be physically vigorous, mentally SHARP, and possess the charismatic qualities of the "Warrior/Scholar".
If you can't stand up to the opposing, and allies' leaders, you're unfit to rule. And ruling, regardless, of the mechanism, is what the leader is supposed to do.

BigPawBullets 5 Aug 17
You must be a member of this group before commenting. Join Group

Post a comment Author doesn't reply Reply Author doesn't reply Add Photo

Be part of the movement!

Welcome to the community for those who value free speech, evidence and civil discourse.

Create your free account


Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.


Echoing other responders, I'd like to see a clear limit on government service. Something like this, maybe:

"No one may serve in government in any capacity, elected, appointed, or employed, for more than twenty years of their life, and no more than ten years out of any twenty consecutive years. No person shall hold more than one employed, appointed, or elected office at one time, or run for an elected office other than one currently held."

Make government service a capstone on a lifetime of other work and accomplishment, not an end to itself. I'd go even further: no lawyers should ever be allowed to be in elected or appointed positions. It's a fundamental conflict of interest to have your vocation to be law, and then go into government to make law.



"Age" is NOT the problem.

The problem is the character and virtue (and the lack thereof) of not only the political leadership but of the general population itself.

"...things fall apart the center cannot hold..."

It is no coincidence that as our culture has moved further away from spiritual belief and devotion and into an almost purely secularist state, our institutions are failing at a rapidly increasing rate.

Age is NOT the problem - our "wounds" are self inflicted - we get the "leadership" we ask for.

iThink Level 8 Aug 17, 2020

The problem is not age but the disconnect that comes from not being in touch with the average persons of America. Career politicians have been Isolated from the working middle class and can no longer understand the problems faced by these peoples. The economic gap is the problem that is causing the disconnect between the people and their supposed representatives.

KeVince Level 7 Aug 17, 2020

well stated.


The problem isn't age in government, it's length of time in government. When you have elected officials staying within government for 30 to 40 years, this is the problem. The officials that are in their 70s have been there forever and lack accountability. They stay because they have name recognition and power, so they never go away.

I don't care if they are 70 years old as long as they are sharp and have good ideas. I'd rather take an experienced older man than a young unexperienced ideologue...and if we are honest, most younger politicians are ideologues. Very few of them are realists unless they experienced harsh realities. For example, Dan Crenshaw was involved in war and has a greater view of the world than someone like Mayor Pete who just wants power and has utopian ideas.

You're comment is astute. Thank you for replying.

Good points all.

@BigPawBullets thank you


I too am 70 yrs old. yours is an interesting point and I have thought about this over the years. The conclusion I have arrived at is as follows: Too old and lacking in fortitude and strength to follow through or too young and lacking in enough experience to make the best decisions for all of us. A true conundrum for a free and open, democratic, republic. ALAS!

I think the supreme court ought to have a age limit. Call it 80, and I'd be happy.

Write Comment