I have seen t-shirts that read “Presbyterians do it decently and in good order.” Seems to about cover it, I think.

If you do more fingerpainting and the scab gets into it, voila! Instant multi-media. You’ll be rich.

Am I the only one who finds the subtext of this ad a little offensive? To me, the ad shows a toddler having a tantrum - something 90% or more of parents must endure at some point - and then uses that example as a platform for birth control. As if, avoid this situation by never having children? I know it’s meant to be humorous, but the bottom line that they’re selling is “Use condoms,” not “Use condoms - just kidding.” Sheez.

I hope that the issue isn’t so much ageism, but concern over health. And a candidate’s health status is absolutely relevant to the voting public and should be disclosed. But let’s face it - of the three issues discussed (gender, race, and age/health), the third is the only one that might viably result in the succession of the office of Presidency by the Vice President. Therefore, while a candidate’s age and/or health status should certainly not be the sole determiner of whether one will or will not vote for him, I believe it is a valid factor for consideration combined with the ultimate naming of a running mate. Consider the following scenario: McCain/Cheney (not that it will ever happen, God willing…) - would you still not think twice about your vote, considering what would happen if McCain would die in office? Frankly, the same goes for any of the candidates - the naming of the running mate on the Democratic ticket will be important to me for the very same reason, because as earlier commenters have stated, anyone can become incapacitated or die at any time.

Absolutely, political spouses are not off-limits for comments and actions they make. That being said, however, I feel like media scrutiny on private family issues are out of line. I remember when I lived in Cleveland, Ohio, the female mayor’s middle-aged school children were hounded by the press over some non-relevant incident, and I felt like the mayor justifiably took the press to task by noting her children were off-limits. Similarly, Chelsea Clinton had every right to tell that reporter that it was none of his business what her reaction was to her father’s infidelity back in his presidency. So there does need to be a balance - if there is a piece of background relevant to a campaign or a person’s political views, then it should be open to scrutiny, the press should exercise restraint on patently private family matters.