A lot has been said in the last few weeks about which Democratic candidate is or isn’t “qualified” to be president. But in assessing the qualifications for the nation’s highest and most demanding office, one has to look at physical qualifications as well as professional ones.

I’m sorry if this post isn’t Politically Correct or offends someone’s delicate sensibilities, but watching Sen. Bernie Sanders in last night’s Democratic debate, I couldn’t help but feel he looks too elderly and frail to take on the likes of Putin or Assad. We know what happened to FDR and Woodrow Wilson under the stress of the job, and they were much younger men than Sanders is now. And as pleasant and articulate as Jane Sanders is, I’m not sure she’s ready to run the country in her husband’s place.

I think the optimum age for a president is 50-64…old enough to be wise, but young enough to have the stamina the job requires. My preferred candidate this year, Hillary Clinton, is 68…a bit outside my parameters. If elected, then 69-year-old Clinton would become the second oldest president. Yes, that concerns me.

But at 75, Bernie Sanders would far eclipse both Hillary and Ronald Reagan, who was just shy of 70 the day he took office.

Why the country would consider putting a 75-year-old man in the one of the world’s most stressful jobs is beyond me. It’s simply too physically and mentally demanding a job for a person of that age, no matter how wonderful you think his ideas are. When we looked at Fidel Castro in his final years in power or Ayatollah Khomeini, we all thought how ridiculous it was for an old man to be running a country. Even Ronald Reagan was too old in his second term, and everyone (including his own staff and closest supporters) knew it.