So, he should retire now? He is 63, you can start getting Social Security then. yeah, I know he said “US Govt” but since he think HE should decide who the Citizens get to vote for, he is putting himself forward.
Look, in a Democracy, the VOTERS pick who they want, not some entertainment figure. If the voters want to pick a 70yo- that is their right and how Democracy works.
I will bet you a nickel Steward doesnt retire- after all, rules are for the little people, not celebrities. 
Let me clarify since I said this poorly: At 63, they don’t force you to take retirement. Can you reframe this around when the US govt forces you to take retirement - start taking money out of your retirement?
Hint: Jon Stewart (not Steward) is not that old.
That wasn’t what I was getting to. See above. Jon StewarT is not being forced to retire in any sense here.
I would also say, Jon Steward is not directing airstrikes at Iran. I’m not talking about “little people” here…AT ALL.
I hope Gov. Shapiro doesn’t disappear.
Fetterman and McCormick are welcome to go on an unplanned long vacation.
And they have a right to. U.S. Senators have a low salary considering their responsibilities ($174K, compared to my governor’s $254K) but in return get unlimited leave.
McConnell is a poor senator, but the guy likely to replace him (Andy Barr) is worse.
Nor does it bind a canny reporter who managed to obtain the information by one method or another.
The medical professional would be in deep shit.
IANAD so I have to wonder if it is possible to fall down and be knocked unconscious by the fall, and not end up with a concussion?
Then a elected official has an obligation to not hide important information about themselves from those voters.
This is a really stupid “No, you” counter-argument. Who cares when Stewart or any entertainer retires? Their job is not remotely comparable to a US Senator or Representative. (Never mind that he’s only 63).
I don’t necessarily agree with Stewart’s position, but (paraphrasing) Hur hur then he should retire, too is not an effective argument to refute it.
And the rest of us can complain about a 70-year-old who won’t voluntarily step down and urge voters to reject them. Including Jon Stewart.
I truly don’t understand the mentality of 75-85 year olds who want to hold their seat. I know the job is not too demanding, but don’t they have any other interests? I’m 64 and ready to step away from the stress of working. Travel, grandchildren, and sitting around watching the world go by all sound better than working. I guess I lack the “ambition” these politicians have.
Jon Stewart (born Jonathan Stuart Leibowitz, November 28, 1962) is an American comedian, writer, producer, director, progressive political commentator, actor, and television host.
November 28, 1962
Why not? You quoted him as saying
And so Jon Stewart is now telling us who we can vote for. Fuck that shit.
What does that have to do with Jon Stewart telling us HE will decide who we can vote for?
I do. If he says people in politics have to retire at 63 or whatever, then, since he is telling us who we can vote for- he thus is in politics, thus, he needs to retire.
I thought so, Wikipedia says so and so do other cites, but-
That isnt what Jon Stewart said,
They are doing a great job for their constituents, who want them to stay on. So, we cant vote for who we want for now?
We already have age restrictions on these elected positions. Why is age restriction good on one end, but not the other?
Yeah, I’m old (not that old, admittedly) and still working. But I’m one of several interchangeable employees, all my work is reviewed by others, and none of it is life-or-death. None of it will leave anyone in poverty, even. My job is about allocating costs appropriately, and avoiding unfairly calling on taxpayers to make up a corporation’s mistakes. Not one of those conditions is true for a senator. If he can’t make it to the floor to vote, no one can take his place. His work is only “reviewed” if he chooses that. And a lot of his work does involve decisions that can be life-or-death.
I’m about that age and recently returned to work, and not for financial reasons. I totally understand it. It must be hugely satisfying and affirming to be a senator.
Nothing. The Jon Stewart thing is just some off-topic tangent you’ve wandered off into.
My post was about Mitch McConnell and his health, which is the topic of this thread.
There is nothing wrong with people working into old age if they choose to.
There is something deeply wrong with people clinging to a job they can no longer do.
The arguments above are really disingenuous, though: pretending that the elected individuals are the choice of the people ignores the incumbent advantage, particularly in Congress (both in terms of running and in terms of wanting your representative to have seniority); it ignores the role of the party system and of money in politics. It ignores the issue of power and the number of people who don’t bother to vote in the first place.
An age limit of 74 for men and 79 for women at the start of their term seems perfectly reasonable. (I don’t like to gender things normally, but in terms of functionality in old age, there is pretty clearly a difference.) For the senate, that takes people to 80 and 85.
Along with this, though, you’d want staff positions without age limits. I don’t see an elder statesperson shouldn’t have a paying job and contribute as long as they can; I just don’t think they should be the point person.
Nonsense. Are you seriously trying to argue that someone outside of politics who gives an opinion about a political issue is “in politics”? C’mon, man.
With regard to Mitch McConnell specifically, it has been clear for years that he has been declining mentally, including mental breaks live on camera. While I am not hugely in favor of age limits, there should be some kind of legitimate, fair, enforcable mechanism for removal of Senators and Congresspeople who are clearly enfeebled. (cf. Strom Thurmond). What that might be, I don’t know.
I would endorse that. I’d also endorse flat limits of 74 at start of term, to avoid the gender disparity. Yes, it would eliminate a few totally competent politicians. There are plenty more where they came from, and if someone has been serving in the Senate prior to that age, I’m pretty sure they can afford to retire. And as you suggest, a particularly respected elder could serve as a staff position, or just be an elder stateswoman that their state looked up to, who might opine either publicly or privately on important matters.
I think a fair starting point, just to have a place to start, would be spontaneous, unexplained catatonia.
I dunno… Some people have taken the arguments for age caps for office and applied them to voting as well.
Things are getting strange, I’m starting to worry. This could be a case for Mulder and Scully.
The truth is out there.
“Trust No [Republican]”
Until we get a legit video, I’m assuming he’s a vegetable.