It's Agism now?

As momentum grows to have Hillary Clinton run for president this next time around, it seems the GOP is panicking.

Back in 2008 when Hillary declared her intention to run, I supported her up until after the Primaries.

Personally, I think that the GOP was somewhat relieved that she lost the Primary to Obama as they considered Obama unelectable. Just as in the election of 2012 when the GOP and the conservative media had convinced themselves that Romney was a shoe in, the thought back in 2008 was that America was not as ready for a Black president as it was for a female one, and there was enough residual “racism’ to keep the black man out of the White House. This would probably best explain all the conspiracy theories, like the Birther Thing, that began immediately after the election and all the obstructionism that took place based on the elections of 2010 that were in turn based on the horror of a Black man as president, and blaming the Bush mistakes on him.

Only someone blind to reality, or naïve, would ignore the racism that was involved in the 2010 elections. Worse, Obama was re-elected in 2012, which sent his opponents totally over the edge.

The only relief was to continue to blame the president for past administration errors, making sure facts were either ignored or made cloudy, like who actually was responsible for the rise in the deficit while ignoring that the deficit under Obama was actually going down; keep blocking any programs that might work for the American people and blaming the subsequent failures on Obama, and the idea that, if done effectively, the country would flee from the idea of another Democrat as president; and outright attacking the president with anything that could be presented as a scandal provided facts could be withheld from the American people.

Representative Darryl Issa had pledged to have as many investigations of the president as he could come up with, and set out to do just that.

Then Hillary was mentioned as a good candidate for 2016. She needed to be destroyed in a pre-emptive strike.

Ignoring the history of attacks on American embassies under republican administrations, and certainly glossing over the Republicans' having cut the budget for embassy security, the attack on Benghazi looked like a good gamble for a scandal that would prevent a Hillary candidacy. All it would take would be misrepresenting facts and repeating the charge as if proven that Hillary Clinton had failed at her job and was responsible for what had happened because of her incompetence.

It all seemed do-able.

Then we found out that the emails that had been released by Representative Issa so as to prove his charges, rile up the public, and confuse the issues had been selectively released and edited to support the weak charges. Issa even went so far as to prove his own accusations weak and dangerous when he foolishly revealed there had been a CIA installation nearby, a fact that was previously unknown to the public, and potentially the foreign country in which it was, and one that would explain the apparent low key security at a place that did not want to elicit too many questions about very tight security or draw too much attention to what was there and could possibly draw too much suspicion.

Time lines and emails began to show that, in spite of heroic, Hollywood action movie solutions to the attack, those solutions were unrealistic in the real world. The case began to crumble to the point that it has quietly died.

But Hillary. What to do about Hillary?

The Republicans have found what they think could be her undoing. Her age.

At the time of her inauguration, Hillary will be 69 years old, and this, to republicans, will make her too old to be a president.

I would imagine this strategy will not be all that acceptable to the baby boomers who are turning 65 at a rate of 10,000 a day, and do not see 69 as that old.

Oddly, at the time of his inauguration, Saint Ronald Reagan was 69 years old.

In 1996 when he ran for president, Bob Dole was 73, and McCain was 72 when he ran in 2008.

Newt Gingrich hoped to be the nominee in 2012 at 69.

So it would appear that when it comes to men, the GOP has no problem with age. It is only when it is a woman, and we know how the republicans think of women.

They may want to rethink representing Hillary’s age as an encumbrance to her being president in light of their track record, or this strategy may implode as their Benghazi strategy did. welcomes thoughtful comments and the varied opinions of our readers. We are in no way obligated to post or allow comments that our moderators deem inappropriate. We reserve the right to delete comments we perceive as profane, vulgar, threatening, offensive, racially-biased, homophobic, slanderous, hateful or just plain rude. Commenters may not attack or insult other commenters, readers or writers. Commenters who persist in posting inappropriate comments will be banned from commenting on