• With: Neil Cavuto

    Finally, today what's worse than a possible presidential candidate telling people to shut up?

    How about another one all but saying Hillary Clinton is all but washed up?

    That she's too old and tired to run?

    Give Rand a hand he just out-Chris-Christied, for shooting himself in the foot!

    When Rand Paul told Politico's Mike Allen this:

    Quoting here, "I think all the polls show if she does run, she'll win the Democrat nomination. But I don't think it's for certain. It's a very taxing undertaking to go through. It's a rigorous physical ordeal, I think, to be able to campaign for the presidency."

    What are you saying, senator, that Hillary Clinton is too old because she would be 69 on Inauguration Day?

    Maybe I missed it, but did you say the same about Ronald Reagan when he was running, and was also 69 on Inauguration Day?

    He seemed to turn out okay.

    So too Winston Churchill. He was 66 when he became prime minister of the United Kingdom and helped lead Britain through its darkest hour.

    Despite his age. Despite his looks, despite his cigars, and despite the particular fondness for the drink.

    Old Winston still helped save the world.

    So what in the world are you getting at, senator?

    And why does it seem you're only getting at it with Hillary Clinton?

    I mean, by your math, your dad Ron Paul was practically Popeye a couple of years back when he was running for president at 77! I've met few sharper at 27!

    So are you going after Hillary because she's a Democrat?

    Or a woman?

    Or both?

    Either way, you've done more damage with that condescending swipe than Chris Christie could do shaking a thousand ice cream cones in critics' faces.

    By all means, go after Hillary Clinton on the issues that matter not the silly ones that don't. You'd hate it if it were done to you. So don't pull this nonsense with her.

    Because she's no more Methuselah than you are Mensa material.

    Say whatever you will about her days of Secretary of State -- and plenty do and should -- but I think it's fair to say Hillary Clinton was up to the physical rigors of the job.

    As the same Politico that talked to you noted, "If diplomatic achievement were measured by the number of countries visited, Hillary Rodham Clinton would be the most accomplished Secretary of State in history."

    That doesn't make her tops in the job, but still in her 60s at the time, more than up to logging record miles for any secretary of state on the job.

    Get her on what she did for all those miles not whether her face is showing any miles.

    It just seems odd for a Republican who talks about expanding the base, you could say something so base and so cheap.

    Again, debate Hillary Clinton on the distinct differences in issues that define you.

    Not the over the top cheap shots that only demean you.

    After all, you're 52 a little older than Franklin Roosevelt was when he became president.

    No one doubted he was up to the task, polio and all.

    Suffice it to say, with comments like these, no one's going to be making that presidential comparison -- certainly not yet.