The Volokh Conspiracy

"McCain 2 Old":

On I-77 just south of Cleveland there is a billboard with a drawing of Senator McCain, his name, and "2 Old" in big block letters. The billboard says it is sponsored by a "Neo Neo Inc." in New York. I tried to find out more about the ad and its sponsor online, but have not yet turned up much of anything.

UPDATE: Here's a photo.

Daniel Chapman (mail):
It's an issue ad. We need more funding for public education.
10.10.2008 11:10am
erics (mail):
The "John McCain for Grandpa" bumper stickers are pretty funny too.
10.10.2008 11:11am
Archon (mail):
Maybe they had to pay by the letter and decided to save a few bucks.
10.10.2008 11:39am
A. Zarkov (mail):
He's not too old, just too stupid.
10.10.2008 12:02pm
one of many:
Checked with the FEC? Within 60 days of a federal election, so it should have been registered with them.
10.10.2008 12:23pm
photo:
this blog has a photo.
10.10.2008 12:35pm
SMatthewStolte (mail):
I thought this was referring to when McCain was asked how many years it takes before one can be considered "old," just as when he was asked at what income a person becomes "rich."

The notion that 2 is old is absurd and reflects very poorly on the Senator's judgment. I admit that it was something of a gotcha question, but come on. You have to be able to deal with those.
10.10.2008 1:00pm
NatSecLawGuy:
Billboard is getting good coverage given how backed up I-77 has been the past couple of days. As one of my friend's always reminds me "Dick Cheney highway in Central Baghdad is a better road than anywhere in Cleveland."
10.10.2008 1:08pm
Hoosier:
A. Zarkov
He's not too old, just too stupid.


Hey, Zark, that was clever!

Wait.

Not clever.

What's the other thing?


Oh, yeah, "tedious."
10.10.2008 1:55pm
Lance Cahill (mail):
The work of Roger Stone?
10.10.2008 2:27pm
Steve2:
I agree with the sentiments, that McCain's too old. I'm not quite saying I advocate implementing a Last Day system, but... McCain's older than my grandfather. That really puts him in a damning context to me.
10.10.2008 3:54pm
Pat C (mail):
To me it was irritating that the fellow who posted the picture on that web site said, "Apparently, this is what the left considers relevant political discourse".

If the Democrats had nominated someone as old or older than McCain as their candidate (and selected someone the right REALLY disliked as the VP nominee), I would think the right would consider his/her age to be relevant. And if they wanted to make that argument on a billboard on a freeway, they might well make the message very concise.
10.10.2008 6:29pm
Elliot123 (mail):
"McCain's older than my grandfather. That really puts him in a damning context to me."

How old is Grandpa? That should give us an upper limit for presidential candidates. Anything else about grandpa we need to know to set our standards?
10.11.2008 5:38pm
Steve2:
Elliot, my grandfather was born in September '42, so he's just over 66. Now, using my grandfather (other things to know about him? Well, he's a Confederate apologist who goes to one of those Latin-mass Catholic churches that still opposes Vatican II, and he wants a return to the gold standard) as a cut-off isn't really something that I should necessarily do, but that's only if the answer to the question "Is my grandfather typical of people in their 60s and older?" is "no".

Actually, I think the upper limit on all Federal officeholders should be the same as the Normal Retirement Age (currently shifting from 65 to 67). I would support a constitutional amendment disqualifying anyone from running for office who's over that age and ending the term of all incumbents on the day they reach that age.
10.11.2008 10:47pm

Post as: [Register] [Log In]

Account:
Password:
Remember info?

[Important Note to Helpful Readers: If we have confusing typos and especially ugly formatting errors, such as an unclosed underline or bold tag, we'd love to hear from you about them -- but please e-mail the author about this, rather than leaving a comment. We often won't read the comments for a while after the post, and if there's a glaring formatting error, we'd see it quickly when we revisit the post, even without the comment; and in any event the comment likely isn't going to be that helpful to your fellow comment readers. So please e-mail us directly about glitches like this. Thanks!]

Comment Policy: We'd like the posts to be civil, of course (no profanity, personal insults, and the like), but we're also hoping that people try to be as calm, reasoned, and substantive as possible. So please, also avoid rants, invective, substantial and repeated exaggeration, and radical departures from the topic of the thread. Sticking with substance -- and staying on-topic -- will make the comments more helpful to other readers, and more pleasant.

As editors, we reserve the right to delete posts, and even to kick out posters, though we hope that both of these will be exceptional events. (We also reserve the right to be busy with other things, and therefore (1) not remove all the posts that might merit removal, and (2) ignore demands such as "You should remove A's posts, because they're just as bad as B's!")

Here's a tip: Reread your post, and think of what people would think if you said this over dinner. If you think people would view you as a crank, a blowhard, or as someone who vastly overdoes it on the hyperbole, rewrite your post before hitting enter.

And if you think this is the other people's fault -- you're one of the few who sees the world clearly, but fools wrongly view you as a crank, a blowhard, or as someone who overdoes it on the hyperbole -- then you should still rewrite your post before hitting enter. After all, if you're one of the few who sees the world clearly, then surely it's especially important that you frame your arguments in a way that is persuasive and as unalienating as possible, even to fools.

Our goal is to provide an interesting and pleasant environment that can help inform readers. To do that, we'll occasionally have to exercise our editorial discretion. Think of this as an in-person discussion group, where having different voices is critical to a great conversation -- but where sometimes the leader has to deal with cranks who sour the conversation more than they enliven it.

Naturally, there's always a risk that this discretion will be used erroneously, no matter how well-intentioned the editor. But discussion groups (especially on the Internet, but also off it) generally need an editor who'll occasionally make such judgments.

And, remember, it's a big Internet. If you think we were mistaken in removing your post (or, in extreme cases, in removing you) -- or if you prefer a more free-for-all approach -- there are surely plenty of ways you can still get your views out.