This is probably a stupid idea, but I'm actually going to try to defend some decent guys from complete burn and flame-age.
The reason behind McCain saying that Obama is more of a celebrity than a leader is because the guy has very little experience compared to most candidates. People forget that it was Regan (the old grandpa), not Kennedy (the young celebrity), that did most of the work to end the cold war.
Besides, for a bunch of people who seem to hate mudslinging, you seem to be doing a lot of it yourselves.
"Senile old Grandpa" (If being old is the only thing against him, he's already better off than Obama.)
"Too old for this" (See above)
"Bush is a terrible leader... advising him have their own terrible agendas..." (I do understand what you're trying to say, but he's really not all that bad. People just give him a really bad rap.)
Saying someone is a bad leader is not mudslinging if it can be qualitatively proven, which clearly can occur in Bush's case. The economy is in the dumps, he has nearly doubled the national debt although Clinton actually eliminated the deficit, our military is spread way too thin, some of our soldiers are on their fourth tours (which is insane), and the international community at large hates us b/c of our failed diplomatic methods.
But on another note, political inexperience is not a valid argument against presidency. Bush was only a governor for ten years before he ran. Clinton was in politics only for twelve I think. Obama has been around for eight years, either in state or national congress. Plus, McCain represents a historical ideology of the United States that the rest of the world is moving away from. We do not want an obsolete ideology leading our nation. The world is changing, and so must our politics.