 When Donald Trump picked J.D. Vance as his running mate a lot of people were left scratching their heads. Anyone watching last week’s vice-presidential debate between J.D. Vance and Tim Walz now has a better understanding of Vance’s strengths. Vance was poised, polished, smart and an articulate defender of Donald Trump and his policies. He was clearly the best debater on stage that night, but more importantly he presented himself, and by extension Donald Trump, as reasoned, rational and well within the mainstream. He clearly did his job of “sanewashing” the Trump ticket, and that is what troubles me.  The term “sanewashing” has been around for a few years, but it entered the political lexicon this year in the craziness of the 2024 presidential election. It has come to mean the act of packaging or massaging radical and outrageous statements in a way that makes them sound normal. News outlines covering Trump have been accused of this. In some cases it is a purposeful attempt to present Trump in a more favorable light, and in other cases it is simply to help the intended audience make sense of his ramblings. In either case it creates a misleading picture of Trump to the public and sanitizes what can only be categorized as unhinged, delusional and the utterances of an unwell man.  In the hands of J.D. Vance, the concept of sanewashing has been taken to a new level. He has the ability to spin, distort, and deflect in such a way that overcomes any criticism of Trump, casting a favorable light on any of his discredited policies. The vice-presidential debate highlighted the dangers of an articulate Trump enabler like J.D. Vance. Vance’s performance attempted to rewrite the history of the first Trump administration and normalize a deeply flawed candidate who doesn’t have a coherent plan to lead the country forward in a dangerous world.  J.D. Vance may have won the debate on delivery, but he lost it on substance. Most of what he said sounded good, but it doesn’t hold up to close examination. If you are interested in a fact-check of the debate, I refer you to the CBS News’ analysis. I’m not claiming that everything that Walz said was 100% accurate. But the difference is that Walz’s inaccuracies pertained mostly to his own personal history, while those of Vance were misleading or false statements about Donald Trump and his policies.  Here are the most important inaccuracies uttered by Vance that all voters should consider: Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act: Also know as the Affordable Care Act (ACA) or Obamacare, it was signed into law in 2010 and was the crowning achievement of the Obama Administration. This law represented the most significant overhaul and expansion of the U.S. health system since 1965, providing affordable healthcare coverage to tens of millions of Americans. It was opposed by all Congressional Republicans, who have vowed to repeal and replace it every year since its inception. In the debate Vance claimed that Trump had “salvaged” the ACA, saying that “۰۰۰when Obamacare was crushing under the weight of its own regulatory burden and healthcare costs, Donald Trump could have destroyed the program. Instead, he worked in a bipartisan way to ensure that Americans had access to affordable care.” This statement was blatantly false. Trump was no champion of the ACA; in fact, he was just the opposite. He did everything in his power to dismantle the program which millions of Americans depend on for affordable health care. During his 2016 presidential campaign Trump vowed to repeal and replace the ACA. On his first day in office, he signed an executive order which proclaimed: “It is the policy of my Administration to seek the prompt repeal of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.” Throughout his term Trump pushed Congress to repeal the ACA, with little success. To undermine the law, Trump cut funding for advertising and outreach programs for the ACA and reduced subsidies to insurance companies for low-income enrollees. Trump still doesn’t have a healthcare plan that would replace the ACA and admitted as much in his September debate with Kamala Harris.  Peaceful Transfer of Power: The biggest takeaway from the debate for me was that Vance refused to acknowledge that Trump had lost the 2020 election. This came after Vance claimed that Trump had peacefully handed over the reins of presidential power to Joe Biden. Here is what Vance said, “It’s really rich for Democratic leaders to say that Donald Trump is a unique threat to democracy when he peacefully gave over power on January 20th.” This is a dangerous revision of what actually happened in the aftermath of the 2020 presidential election.  The transfer of power from the Trump Administration to the Biden Administration took place in a city under siege. Thousands of troops lined the streets and miles of fences restricted access to the grounds of the Capitol. This all took place in the aftermath of Trump’s failed attempt to overturn the results of a free and fair election. It was not the peaceful transfer of power that Vance claimed.  After losing the 2020 presidential election, Trump convinced millions of his supporters that the election had been stolen. This led to hundreds of election workers and state officials being threatened with violence. The life of Vice President Mike Pence was threatened for refusing to assist Trump in overturning the results of the election. The Capitol riot on January 6, 2021, resulted in over 150 Capitol police officers being injured and the lives of at least seven people were lost. No Mr. Vance, the transfer of presidential power was not peaceful!  Vance did a great job during the debate of sanitizing Donald Trump’s record and sanewashing his often incoherent ramblings. But he doesn’t believe any of it, and neither should you. It was very self-serving. Vance is looking to his own political future and Trump is the most expedient way to move it forward. If you enjoy reading this type of commentary, please subscribe to my blog and tell a friend. You will receive an email notification when new blogs are posted. The email will come from the site’s email: armchairamerican1776@gmail.com.
Thanks, Armchair American
0 Comments
 Like most Americans I didn’t know much about Minnesota Governor Tim Walz until Kamala Harris picked him as her running mate last week. From what I have read he is a decent man with a long and proud record of public service. He has strong mid-western roots and seems to be a regular guy who can appeal to both urban and rural voters. This has got the Trump campaign worried, and it didn’t take long for it to go on the attack. Swiftboating: This term was coined in 2004 to describe an unfair or untrue political attack and was first used during the 2004 presidential race against the Democrat nominee John Kerry. Kerry was an officer in the U.S. Navy, served a tour of duty in Vietnam in charge of a Swift boat, and received several combat medals for that service. A partisan group called the “Swift Boat Veterans for Truth” attacked Kerry’s war record during the 2004 campaign, claiming that Kerry had embellished it. The claims were later discredited and proved to be politically motivated, but the damage to Kerry’s campaign was significant. The architect of the “Swift Boat” campaign against John Kerry was political operative Chris LaCivita who happens to be a co-manager of the Trump campaign. Is Tim Walz the victim of swiftboating? Let’s take a look.  J.D. Vance Levels Accusations Against Tim Walz’s Military Record: Within days of Walz being picked to be Kamala Harris’ running mate, the Trump campaign rolled out its vice presidential nominee to go on the attack. Vance served for four years in the Marine Corps, so he was tasked with attacking Walz’s 24 years of service in the Army National Guard. Vance accused Walz of abandoning his unit right before they went to Iraq. Tim Walz filed papers to run for Congress on February 10, 2005, and retired from the National Guard that May. In August of 2005, the Department of the Army issued a mobilization order for Walz’s unit in preparation of deployment to Iraq. The timing might look suspect to some, but there is no proof that Tim Walz timed his retirement to avoid being deployed to Iraq. He did nothing improper in how and when he retired. J.D. Vance also accused Tim Walz of “Stolen Valor” for claims he made in 2018 while speaking to a group about gun control. In support of common-sense gun control laws Walz said that “we can make sure that those weapons of war that I carried in war is the only place where those weapons are at.” Tim Walz never served in a combat zone, so according to J.D. Vance it was a mortal sin for Walz to claim that he had carried a weapon in war. It is true that Walz never served in combat, and therefore did not carry a weapon into battle. But Walz certainly trained with weapons of war in preparation of going into a combat zone during a time of war. The argument is purely semantics, and the Harris campaign was quick to scrub any of its campaign materials referencing Walz’s “weapons of war” comments. The final allegation against Tim Walz’s military record is that he claims to have retired at the rank of Command Sergeant Major. The truth of the matter is Walz did serve as a Command Sergeant Major, but he did not complete the requirements to retire with that rank. He retired at the lower rank of Master Sergeant. The Harris campaign’s website has been updated to reflect that Tim Walz did not retire as Command Sergeant Major, but only served as one. Tim Walz has held political office for nearly two decades. Like any politician running for office he may have embellished his record to cast himself in a more favorable light. In a vacuum that doesn’t look good. In the context of the current political race, it is insignificant and downright laughable when you consider who is leveling the charges. Donald Trump as head of the Republican ticket has no standing in the military community and has an aversion to telling the truth.  What has Trump to Say on the Matter: Donald Trump has been silent on the matter, and for good reason. He has no credibility when it comes to military service, and that’s why J.D. Vance was tasked with the attacks on Tim Walz’s military record. Trump avoided military service during the Vietnam War through dubious means. He received a deferment helped by a medical examination by a private foot doctor who diagnosed bone spurs in his heal. A New York Times investigation in 2018 revealed that the doctor who performed the medical evaluation was a tenant in a building owned by Trump’s father, and that the deferment recommendation was done as a favor to the family. In addition to not serving in the military Trump has often disparaged those who have served. He belittled John McCain’s military career because he was a prisoner of war in Vietnam. When Trump visited a French cemetery for Americans killed during World War I he said it was filled with losers and suckers. Trump lacks any understanding of the service and sacrifice that our veterans have made in defense of our country. Comparing the Public Service Records of the Candidates: Kamala Harris and Tim Walz have spent nearly their entire careers in public service, not so for Donald Trump and J.D. Vance. Let’s compare the public service records of each candidate and you decide which record is more deserving of your vote.  Donald Trump: Trump was never in the military and never held a public sector job. The only elected position he held was a four-year term as President of the United States. J.D. Vance: Vance served in the US Marine Corps for four years. He was a combat correspondent in a non-combative role, including a six-month deployment in Iraq with the Public Affairs Department. He has served as a U.S. Senator from Ohio since 2023.  Kamala Harris: From the time of her graduation from law school in 1989 to the present-day, Harris has worked in the public sector. From 1990 to 2003 she worked as a prosecutor, first as a Deputy District Attorney for Alameda County, then as an Assistant District Attorney for San Francisco, and finally as a special prosecutor with the San Francisco City Attorney’s office. In 2003 she was elected to the office of District Attorney of San Francisco and served in that role from 2004- 2011. In 2010 and again in 2014 she was elected to serve as the Attorney General of California. She successfully campaigned for the U.S. Senate in 2016 and served in that capacity from 2017-2021. She became Joe Biden’s vice president in January of 2021 and serves in that role to this day. Tim Walz: Walz started his career in public service when he enlisted in the Army National Guard at the age of 17. During his 24 years of service, he acquired a college degree and went on to teach and coach in public high schools for approximately 15 years. Waltz left teaching to run for Congress where he served for 12 years. In Congress he sat on the Agriculture, Armed Services, and Veteran’s Affairs committees. Tim Walz is now in his second term as governor of Minnesota.  Let’s hope that the American people can see through this blatant attempt by the Trump campaign to discredit Walz’s honorable military career by spreading falsehoods and casting aspersions. Donald Trump is not even in the same league as Tim Walz when it comes to honesty, integrity, and dedication to public service. Disparaging Tim Waltz’s military career is a losing hand for the Trump campaign and is the height of hypocrisy.  If you enjoy reading this type of commentary, please subscribe to my blog and tell a friend. You will receive an email notification when new blogs are posted. The email will come from the site’s email: armchairamerican1776@gmail.com.
Thanks, Armchair American |
AuthorThe Armchair American. 
Archives
November 2024
Categories
All
|
RSS Feed