All the talking heads on TV are currently postulating about who is or isn’t too old to run for President of the United States. As someone whose last birthday put her a year closer to 80 than 70, it frustrates me that so often chronological age is the only factor mentioned. What we should be concerned about is not age, but mental acuity and physical stamina.
My friend Lois who resides in the assisted living community where I volunteer has written five books in the last few years and is expecting delivery of the most recent one any day now. She’s 88. I’m sure she’s bright enough to run for president of anything if only her darn hip was better. And yes, there are people in care facilities all over the country, many younger than I, who aren’t doing as well. But it’s simply wrong to paint all 88-year-olds with the same brush.
Research shows that people who stay engaged, have passion about something, and are open to learning new things often make a difference in society far longer than many assume. Those with a strong faith thrive even longer.
We don’t have to look far for notable examples. Warren Buffet, at 93, still serves as Chairman and CEO of Berkshire Hathaway and is often consulted for his investment advice by people decades younger. Newt Gingrich, former Speaker of the House, is 80. He’s frequently interviewed for his political perspectives and seems to be able to recall every important date in American history back to the American Revolution.
And what of celebrities we’ve known and loved who are still going strong into what some consider old age? Willie Nelson recently celebrated his 90th birthday “on the road again!” His voice may not be as strong as it once was but there’s no questioning his talent—and he has no problem remembering the lyrics to his songs.
Dolly Parton is performing and recording at 78. Martha Stewart, 82, is still sought out for her business acumen as well as her cooking and homemaking skills. Cher released a new album last year at 77. (Well, most of her parts are that old!)
Would I want the demanding schedule of campaigning for a national office at my age? Not really. But I wouldn’t have wanted to do that at 40 either. I’m grateful to have the energy to write, volunteer, keep up with grandkids, and make it to Zumba class a few times a week. But those who maintain the mental acuity and stamina to follow their political passion should go for it. It’s been said, “It’s not the years in your life that count, but the life in your years.” Let’s not label everyone who is chronologically gifted “too old” too soon!
Jimmie says
Great thoughts!! I have been bothered by the emphasis on 80 and not on Biden’s policies. When you get here you will be bothered too!!
Jimmie
Nancy says
I completely agree, Jimmie. And you make the eighties look great!
Lea Ann says
As always, much wisdom coming from your way!!!
Nancy says
Thanks, Lea Ann. One of the advantages of being old I guess! (But not decrepit!)
Jan Buck says
I wish age was my concern with our potential presidential candidates.
Nancy says
I hear you, Jan. Unfortunately it seems the media is locked in on the age issue–almost exclusively!
Dana Laurraine Murphree says
Love it!
Nancy says
Thanks, Dana. You young thing you!
Beth Lueders says
Well done, Nancy! I appreciate all your examples of well-known folks who are still contributing mightily past age of 60.
When you are eternal, what’s another year on the calendar?
Beth
Nancy says
Love that kingdom perspective, Beth! Glad we always celebrate each year together!
alice scott-ferguson says
Very persuasive assessment of the “chronologically-advantaged,” Nancy!!
Nancy says
Thanks, Alice. I could have added you as a prime example as well!